"Deeply confusing and confused. Like objective and subjective really are the central tenants of conversations about gender….really?"
Haha, yeah, I did wonder if this one got a little too philosophical. I enjoy getting deep into topics like this from time to time. Especially when the person seems sincere, as Jane did.
"Deeply confusing and confused. Like objective and subjective really are the central tenants of conversations about gender….really?"
Haha, yeah, I did wonder if this one got a little too philosophical. I enjoy getting deep into topics like this from time to time. Especially when the person seems sincere, as Jane did.
The central point is that we don't enshrine unverifiable feelings into law. You can feel any way about yourself that you want to. Your freedom to do that is important. But you have no right to make me pretend that *I* feel the same way. You can't claim new rights based on those unverifiable feelings. And you certainly can't undermine ~50% of the population's rights to privacy and dignity and safety based on those feelings.
If you want to even have a conversation about any of the above, you need some kind of objective standard. And you need evidence that you meet it.
Yes, that cuts to the chase very nicely. I fully support you acting on your feelings in whatever way you wish - unless and until you demand I believe it too, and that you use the power of government to enforce my compliance. Hell to the no.
"Deeply confusing and confused. Like objective and subjective really are the central tenants of conversations about gender….really?"
Haha, yeah, I did wonder if this one got a little too philosophical. I enjoy getting deep into topics like this from time to time. Especially when the person seems sincere, as Jane did.
The central point is that we don't enshrine unverifiable feelings into law. You can feel any way about yourself that you want to. Your freedom to do that is important. But you have no right to make me pretend that *I* feel the same way. You can't claim new rights based on those unverifiable feelings. And you certainly can't undermine ~50% of the population's rights to privacy and dignity and safety based on those feelings.
If you want to even have a conversation about any of the above, you need some kind of objective standard. And you need evidence that you meet it.
Yes, that cuts to the chase very nicely. I fully support you acting on your feelings in whatever way you wish - unless and until you demand I believe it too, and that you use the power of government to enforce my compliance. Hell to the no.