5 Comments
User's avatar
тна Return to thread
Peaceful Dave's avatar

Is a word still true if it has no modifier?

* A black woman: is a woman.

* A homosexual woman: is a woman.

* A trans woman: is not a woman, the modifier is required.

* A trans person: is a person.

At this point in time, perhaps personhood is what should be acknowledged for trans persons, rather than a false claim of a sex behind the thin veil of the now meaningless word gender.

Expand full comment
Steve QJ's avatar

"A trans person: is a person."

Yeah, this is just linguistic sleight of hand. Once upon a time, trans women were called transwomen (no space) to avoid exactly this kind of confusion. But the ideologues actively *want* confusion. So they declared that omitting the space was bigotry and hate and blah blah...

The "trans" in trans woman serves exactly the same purpose as "fake" or "wannabe." It doesn't denote a type of woman but the absence of womanhood. As others have noted, a more accurate term would be trans identified male or maybe some other word altogether that differentiated them from men.

"Trans woman" is a polite fiction. A kindness used to respect a desire we know isn't quite true. We do this kind of thing in lots of areas of life and I'm fine with it. Again, the issue is just enshrining it in law.

Expand full comment
Passion guided by reason's avatar

> Again, the issue is just enshrining it in law.

And perhaps coercive organizational policies and regulations, even if they are not strictly laws.

Expand full comment
Chris Fox's avatar

Manipulation of language is insidious. I think we should pointedly refer to them as "trans-identifying" men and women, using that noun of actual biological sex.

Though my own preference is "men impersonating women," and vice versa.

Expand full comment
Passion guided by reason's avatar

My mischievous side wants to show up at a demonstration with a sign:

Fool's Gold IS Gold!!

Justice for Iron Pyrite!

Expand full comment