Although I don't agree even remotely with the idea that a person can become trans-racial via self-attestation, Daniel's stance is an interesting endpoint for folks - like me - who believe "race" is itself a racist construct. (As opposed to ethnicity and culture.) I assume that Daniel strongly supports Sheena Mason's Theory of Racelessness.
Although I don't agree even remotely with the idea that a person can become trans-racial via self-attestation, Daniel's stance is an interesting endpoint for folks - like me - who believe "race" is itself a racist construct. (As opposed to ethnicity and culture.) I assume that Daniel strongly supports Sheena Mason's Theory of Racelessness.
"Daniel's stance is an interesting endpoint for folks - like me - who believe "race" is itself a racist construct."
Yeah, while Daniel was almost entirely incoherent in his thinking, this conversation with him did really evolve my thinking on race. I realised I'd kind of uncritically absorbed the idea that "black," "white," "Asian," etc. were discrete, meaningful groupings and that was pretty far from true.
Daniel was hamstrung by his ideological need to see the categories as completely meaningless. Otherwise, as he alluded to, the "trans women are literally women" argument falls apart too. But he did show me they were less meaningful than I thoughtlessly assumed they were.
Although I don't agree even remotely with the idea that a person can become trans-racial via self-attestation, Daniel's stance is an interesting endpoint for folks - like me - who believe "race" is itself a racist construct. (As opposed to ethnicity and culture.) I assume that Daniel strongly supports Sheena Mason's Theory of Racelessness.
"Daniel's stance is an interesting endpoint for folks - like me - who believe "race" is itself a racist construct."
Yeah, while Daniel was almost entirely incoherent in his thinking, this conversation with him did really evolve my thinking on race. I realised I'd kind of uncritically absorbed the idea that "black," "white," "Asian," etc. were discrete, meaningful groupings and that was pretty far from true.
Daniel was hamstrung by his ideological need to see the categories as completely meaningless. Otherwise, as he alluded to, the "trans women are literally women" argument falls apart too. But he did show me they were less meaningful than I thoughtlessly assumed they were.