Regarding the person who does not deny being biologically an adult human female, but just doesn't feel like the English word "woman" applies to them - I have the question of "why should that matter?"
To be more specific, what makes people think that the purpose and function of descriptive labels is to be pleasing the person or object bein…
Regarding the person who does not deny being biologically an adult human female, but just doesn't feel like the English word "woman" applies to them - I have the question of "why should that matter?"
To be more specific, what makes people think that the purpose and function of descriptive labels is to be pleasing the person or object being described?
If somebody doesn't "feel like" a mammal, should society consider that they are not a mammal? If somebody doesn't feel like a "convicted felon", does that mean they should not go to prison? Does an elm tree need to enjoy being labeled "elm"?
Basically, I'm saying that descriptive labels (for everything) have always been determined by society, around the world and throughout history and prehistory, in all societies since the invention of language, rather than the rather odd concept that they should be idiosyncratically determined, Humpty Dumpty style.
It's fine for that person to say "I personally have a vague and indescribable negative emotional reaction to being labeled as a woman", but that should be preceded "I am a woman as society uses that word, but ...". Both they can be true: the word applies, and the person has a subjective feeling. There is no sense in making each individual's subjective feelings override the societal definition.
(Individual names are different. If someone wants to be called Lee instead of Terry, no problem - so long as it's not being done for deceitful purposes, like avoiding accountability for a crime, or stealing somebody else's identity.)
Regarding the person who does not deny being biologically an adult human female, but just doesn't feel like the English word "woman" applies to them - I have the question of "why should that matter?"
To be more specific, what makes people think that the purpose and function of descriptive labels is to be pleasing the person or object being described?
If somebody doesn't "feel like" a mammal, should society consider that they are not a mammal? If somebody doesn't feel like a "convicted felon", does that mean they should not go to prison? Does an elm tree need to enjoy being labeled "elm"?
Basically, I'm saying that descriptive labels (for everything) have always been determined by society, around the world and throughout history and prehistory, in all societies since the invention of language, rather than the rather odd concept that they should be idiosyncratically determined, Humpty Dumpty style.
It's fine for that person to say "I personally have a vague and indescribable negative emotional reaction to being labeled as a woman", but that should be preceded "I am a woman as society uses that word, but ...". Both they can be true: the word applies, and the person has a subjective feeling. There is no sense in making each individual's subjective feelings override the societal definition.
(Individual names are different. If someone wants to be called Lee instead of Terry, no problem - so long as it's not being done for deceitful purposes, like avoiding accountability for a crime, or stealing somebody else's identity.)
Fighting new battles in a war won long ago. Kinder Küche Kirche is dead.
This is a new war, Chris. An existential one for women. The old war over traditional gender roles is superficial by comparison.
Love this.