https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1641524828191465486
Dualism seems to be at the heart of pretty much all terf thought. I don't see how communists can claim to be following marxism when making these arguments, terf beliefs are created by dualism rather than dialectical materialism.
They aren't MLs anymore. Am I wrong? Is there anything I'm missing that they can use to dance around this point?
Materialism is when something is made of matter :soypoint-1:
Matterialism is when you think Mr. Yglesias has hotter takes than Nate Silver.
Materialism is when I pretend that things literally happening in a material brain are not based in material reality.
if British Magacommunism becomes a thing I will turn into a twisted, feral beast and rend Big Ben asunder with my terrible claws
it's been a thing for awhile. Caleb Maupin interviewed one of the British communist terfs several years ago
Good dark souls boss origin story.
Hypercube, Martyr of the Broken Discourse
Still maintain that a UK PatSoc will eventually claim that the British Empire nationalising the East India Company in 1858 means it was AES
Yeah, let's just ignore that gender 'ideology' is an actual science with emperical, material research to back it up. Modern advanced biology recognizes that expressed gender is a spectrum seperate from sex.
These slimy terf grifters really are the lowest of low.
Is gender a spectrum? Even if we are just considering contemporary western society where there is no established 'third gender'?
I feel like that paradigm makes sense if we assume there is an axis for this spectrum, say 'masculinity' <--> 'femininity' and that one can be placed at a certain point between/at the two.
I'm admitted naïve on the topic of gender but I don't think it makes sense to limit it to an axis, or axes. It feels like a coping mechanism for working within a society which is questioning their historical gender binary, just like the political compass is a coping mechanism for the left-right binary which *kind of * made sense back when it was invented. It makes more sense, it's a slightly better model, but it's still built on an obsolete system and ultimately hinders understanding when dealing with anything beyond most common examples.
Consider that masculine and feminine aren't set points. They're constantly changing and aren't consistent from one culture to another. They're not even totally consistent from one person to the next. For instance blue was/is the feminine color, and pink the masculine one. Gender is a spectrum partially by virtue of its lack of fixed positions.
There's more or less a masculine and feminine dichotomy, but that's by no means permanent, nor has every society on Earth had those two.
it's a social phenomenon that we can choose to understand as a spectrum, which is often useful but necessarily limited
Spectrum might be a oversimplified way to put it, basically, the understanding is that it isn't set into rigid binary at the very least. @axont decribed it better then I can.
In a mausoleum in Moscow a trembling is felt, beneath the glass Lenin begins to stir.
:lenin-crush-capitalism: "Kautsky!!!!"
Everyone knows materialism is when you buy iPhone on Black Friday. What are these people on about?
Ah yes, Suzanne Moore, the writer who left the Guardian because it wasn't transphobic enough claiming that her transphobia was always edited out and that she wasn't ever really welcome at the paper because of it despite writing some of the most inane weekly columns imaginable for 20 years or so.
She may have been a Marxist once, but she's no fucking materialist. This is a columnist who when presented with Corbyn & Johnson as electoral choices whined about how they're both awful and how she wished she lived in Scotland so she could vote for Nicola Sturgeon. Total lib brain.
This would make sense if trans people didn't exist, but they pretty obviously do.
Isn't denying the existence of a population usually considered a precursor to genocide?
