What Are Your Thoughts on Intersectional Veganism?

[Dream Sphere]

I'm apparently a bisexual transwoman who doesn't know much about how gender works.

Forget this, I am not going to debate a 15 year old with a Warrior Cats icon who uses the term "LGBTQPA+". If I wanted to bang my head against a brick wall I'd debate a creationist.

As EquALLity said; "Well you don't seem to know much about LGBTQPA+ issues." I can see how you would feel that to be dismissive, and without much substance (although EquALLity did put more effort into engaging your arguments earlier in their post.) But, when you attack EquALLity's character like you have, now without providing substantial reasoning, then that likewise comes across as dismissive and counterproductive.

I think that I can somewhat understand how this topic may be a tough one to discuss without feeling personally attacked by people who disagree with you. But, I generally think that most people here don't mean to harm or personally attack anyone, but are rather curious and interested in discussing different stuff, and if they disagree with someone, then they will put their arguments forth from where they're coming from onto the topic. It takes time for people to concede stances of their position or learn to better understand someone else's arguments, so maybe if you keep your conversation going then you both may be better off at the end, rather than dismissing stuff without much reasoning. (Though I know I'm certainly not perfect either with that sort of stuff, I'm confident that it's more worthwhile when trying to really engage each others reasoning better when in a debate.)


I may edit in my stance (or we could create a new thread) for this gender debate topic at a later point, if others are interested in discussing this further.

[Red]

Forget this, I am not going to debate a 15 year old

How are you so sure of her age?

with a Warrior Cats icon who uses the term "LGBTQPA+".

How does preference in entertainment (even though I'm sure that's not what it is) and word choosing impact her negatively?

If I wanted to bang my head against a brick wall I'd debate a creationist.

Why not just bang your head against a brick wall then?

[ThatNerdyScienceGirl]

^

Well, okie-dokie, have a nice life then.
Unless that's too PC for you.

It's not politically correct to be right, but you'll find that out when you're older and know what you're talking about.

[Red]

It's not politically correct to be right,

Whatever that means.

but you'll find that out when you're older

Ageist. Or Ad hominem.

and know what you're talking about.

Just because someone outsmarts you does not grant you the right to claim the specific individual has no understanding of the subject at hand.

[EquALLity]

It's not politically correct to be right, but you'll find that out when you're older and know what you're talking about.

Condescending know-it-alls one, rationalists zero!

[brimstoneSalad]

I'm apparently a bisexual transwoman who doesn't know much about how gender works.

Forget this, I am not going to debate a 15 year old with a Warrior Cats icon who uses the term "LGBTQPA+". If I wanted to bang my head against a brick wall I'd debate a creationist.

EquALLity frequently changes her mind when presented with a good argument.

I'm sure she could link you to two or three posts where that happened pretty easily.

Ad hominem like this is not fair. You just need to address the arguments as well as you can. If you feel like there's a miscommunication or don't know how to explain it differently, that's another matter.


Gender roles are social constructs, derived partially from tradition and partially from biological or hormonal differences (which range a spectrum), meant to shoehorn people into easily understood social categories for pragmatic reasons. I don't even know what you two are arguing about.

[EquALLity]

EquALLity frequently changes her mind when presented with a good argument.

I'm sure she could link you to two or three posts where that happened pretty easily.

I changed my position regarding raising the minimum wage here: https://theveganatheist.com/forum/viewt ... age#p10423

I changed my opinion on businesses and discrimination here: https://theveganatheist.com/forum/viewt ... f=17&t=799

That doesn't seem to matter though, because I'm apparently a fifteen year-old who has a 'Warrior Cat' avatar, and I used a certain term, so therefore my arguments are invalid.

Gender roles are social constructs, derived partially from tradition and partially from biological or hormonal differences (which range a spectrum), meant to shoehorn people into easily understood social categories for pragmatic reasons. I don't even know what you two are arguing about.

It's about whether or not gender is a spectrum, basically. ThatNerdyScienceGirl seems to think that you can only identify completely as a woman or a man, and that bigender/agender/third-gender people are just freaks and attention seekers who make transwomen look bad.

And to me, there are only 2 genders, Male and Female. Even societies that have "third genders" only truly have two, especially when "third gender" means a man who feels like a woman. I have not seen a single society ever that had more than Male or Female as genders until 21st century America came to be, now Mayonnaise is a gender and the use of more than 2 genders only hurts people like me. You can't be a gender that doesn't exist anymore than you can have the spirit of an animal residing in you that doesn't exist.

"Agender's", "Bigenders," "Third Genders" and "Otherkin" hurt my credibility and make my life harder as someone who just wants to be a regular woman. I don't even like Identifying as trans, as I am not trans, I am female. I am a woman. And I personally believe that if you identify as "trans" instead of simply as "male" or "female" than you are just an attention-seeking loser who needs to stop. The more people identify as "trans-woman" or "third gender" the more nobody takes me seriously, the more people view me as a freak. The more it harms me.

THAT is my views on people wanting to identify under a non-existent pronoun to feel like a f-cking snowflake.

[garrethdsouza]

On intersectionality in veganism, this is a bit different from what I was referring to:
http://blog.bravebirds.org/archives/1553

Wage gap related:
http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/07/what-78-cents-wage-gap-means/
http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/10/wage-gap-high-paying-jobs/

[brimstoneSalad]

On intersectionality in veganism, this is a bit different from what I was referring to:
http://blog.bravebirds.org/archives/1553

This is NOT an evidence based approach. Somebody had a hypothesis, and just ran with it, making these faith based assertions. This is tantamount to dogma, not activism.

Asserting dogma is just going to start fights until you can put up some real evidence. If you could prove that this was actually more effective, that would be an entirely different thing.

Until then, I do not appreciate being told I'm doing activism wrong, or I'm not vegan, because I'm not intersectional and that I'm not a feminist/etc.
From a philosophical perspective, I can prove that these things do not inherently overlap. The central premise behind intersectionalism is a shared interest in "justice" which is something I DO NOT HAVE. I don't care about arbitrarily notions of justice, it's a nonsense deontological idea with no relation to rational morality. I care about better outcomes in terms of net violation of will.

AGAIN, as you conveniently ignored, the three fundamental things you have failed to understand:

1. Adversarial nature
There is no true equality in asymmetrical issues. Matters like reproductive rights are inherently asymmetrical, and obtaining something that seems fair is about compromise; that means an adversarial negotiation. That doesn't mean people have to be unfriendly, but that they're advancing different and inherently opposing interests in negotiating that compromise.

2. FAIR doesn't mean GOOD
This is something many people misunderstand, because intuitively fair feels good, and unfair feels wrong. This is deontological nonsense, and you need to understand that in order to substantiate the wrongness of something you have to provide some evidence for the ultimate and global consequences being harmful.

3. Parsimony
This is as important in charity and activism as it is in science. If asking people to "go vegan" makes people less likely to actually go vegan, we should avoid it and do something more effective. If looking like morons by being obsessively politically correct makes our outreach less effective to the majority with only minor gains from minorities, we shouldn't do it. Cost and benefit analysis is essential to any situation where we have limited resources, and both human effort and compassion are in very limited supply.

[ThatNerdyScienceGirl]

Gender roles are social constructs, derived partially from tradition and partially from biological or hormonal differences (which range a spectrum), meant to shoehorn people into easily understood social categories for pragmatic reasons. I don't even know what you two are arguing about.

It's about whether or not gender is a spectrum, basically. ThatNerdyScienceGirl seems to think that you can only identify completely as a woman or a man, and that bigender/agender/third-gender people are just freaks and attention seekers who make transwomen look bad.

And to me, there are only 2 genders, Male and Female. Even societies that have "third genders" only truly have two, especially when "third gender" means a man who feels like a woman. I have not seen a single society ever that had more than Male or Female as genders until 21st century America came to be, now Mayonnaise is a gender and the use of more than 2 genders only hurts people like me. You can't be a gender that doesn't exist anymore than you can have the spirit of an animal residing in you that doesn't exist.

"Agender's", "Bigenders," "Third Genders" and "Otherkin" hurt my credibility and make my life harder as someone who just wants to be a regular woman. I don't even like Identifying as trans, as I am not trans, I am female. I am a woman. And I personally believe that if you identify as "trans" instead of simply as "male" or "female" than you are just an attention-seeking loser who needs to stop. The more people identify as "trans-woman" or "third gender" the more nobody takes me seriously, the more people view me as a freak. The more it harms me.

THAT is my views on people wanting to identify under a non-existent pronoun to feel like a f-cking snowflake.

Apparently I am a bigot now. I am a bisexual transwoman who is a bigot because people who identify as a tree are real people? I think you can identify as a dragon, as a dog, as a plant, as Elvis Presley, that doesn't make a third gender nor does that make you agendered.

And yes, Otherkin and Transpeople, both identifying as something they are biologically not, are interrelated in the logical sense. You know, logic? Why is a guy who dresses like a woman but identify's as "third gender" any different than a guy who feels phantom sensations in this non-existent dragon wings and identify's whole heartedly as a dragon? There is no difference. But then again, that isn't a PC thing to say, but it's right.

According to you, masculine women and feminine men, are a gender all on their own, such as the Native American's we were talking about earlier. They are men, who dress and act like women, and that is not a new gender. You can identify as a new gender all you want, and you can get society to view you as a third gender, but that is not a new gender, that is a man with a woman's gender.

Someone who doesn't like societies preferences for pink for women or blue for men is suddenly a new gender, or not gendered? I grew up loving gender neutral clothing, was I agender and suddenly became gendered over time? I am a feminine woman with many masculine traits, does THAT make me a third gender? Or... am I only third gender when I don't want to associate with the two perfectly fine genders we already have? Forgetting that Gender is a spectrum and even the middle of it is either male, or female. Dressing in both men's and women's clothing and acting both male and female doesn't make a new gender, it makes someone who likes the apparel for both genders, or dislike common gender roles. Mind you, Gender Expression is not Gender Identity.

Then again, I have been transgender for 6 years and Bisexual for longer than your tiny ass has been born, so what do I know about the logical side of the LGBT?

I wasn't going to respond, but you know what? I like to drag people across the sidewalk with my arguments.

I got a wikipedia article I was given by you that tells me that Masculine women are a gender, and that one article which I already known to be bullshiite.

Now you're an atheist, right? If so, you should have the rationality to know that Agenders and Bigenders and the like make no sense on a psychology standpoint (something I have a few years of study in) or a biology standpoint.

Then again, you are more concerned with being Politically Correct than you are of being actually Correct. So please, grow a few years, actually research psychology, biology, the LGBT on a logical level, and then come back to me and tell me I am a bigot for being 100% factual.

Have a nice day, kid