Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Empty or not, it's not something anyone who wants to be accepted should do. Same problem as with internet trans* activists. As was seen over at Michael Nugent's, I'm ready to indulge one's requests for special pronouns and such, just as long as they're not acting like an asshole. Once they do act like an asshole, I reserve the right to withdraw my previous considerations (whether Ardent Skeptic likes it or not :p)
I think that this is the main point of contention.
People are willing to acknowledge a personal identity but they're not willing to be bossed around and ordered to never ever question this identity, or to be called bigots if they slip up, or never even to discuss the issues of gender identity, not even as an abstract case.
The problem here isn't gender identity
per se, it's the dogmatism of activists. It is the idea that someone who "deliberately misgenders" someone else should be
fined. Not asked to be less of dick, not told to stop, but
fined.
It's the idea that transgender people can demand others to acknowledge their identity even if they don't signal it in any way.
Or the idea that if you're a hetero man or a lesbian and you don't want to have sex with a trans woman then you're a bigot (instead of, you know, just
having a sexual preference).
It's the idea that you cannot in any way, shape or form refer to trans women as having or having had some signals of a male identity.
It's the idea that you MUST think that people are "socially assigned genders at birth" and that there's no meaningful biological difference between two sexes but instead a "gender spectrum".
This is all dogmatic authoritarianism, and people understandably don't want to simply submit to it. Especially people who left religion behind because it's full of dogmas, not just because they didn't like those dogmas and preferred others.