zlacker

[parent] [thread] 4 comments
1. blasor+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-01-14 20:51:09
The backlash arose for many reasons, but this article explains the most principled one:

https://thecritic.co.uk/dylan-mulvaney-did-not-share-our-gir...

It's not priggish to take a stand against misogyny, is it?

replies(2): >>azerni+Lj >>Bryant+wq1
2. azerni+Lj[view] [source] 2025-01-14 22:35:08
>>blasor+(OP)
The "misogyny" that article purports is just... being publicly trans.
replies(1): >>blasor+Ml
◧◩
3. blasor+Ml[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-01-14 22:49:05
>>azerni+Lj
Exactly. It's fundamentally misogynistic for these men to appropriate a "woman" identity, and Mulvaney is a very typical example of this.

Think about it. If you remove the female body from the definition of woman, what else remains besides sexist stereotypes?

replies(1): >>azerni+Pm1
◧◩◪
4. azerni+Pm1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-01-15 09:10:57
>>blasor+Ml
No
5. Bryant+wq1[view] [source] 2025-01-15 09:52:01
>>blasor+(OP)
So if you, in good faith, believe a behavior is oppressive, it's not priggish to take a stand against it? That would also demolish PG's entire argument.
[go to top]