Gender appropriation vs cultural appropriation

[BusterBluth]

In the woke world of today, with people in uproar about JKR and determining loudly that TWAW - it's interesting to see the difference between the thumbs-up for sexual/gender appropriation and examples such as those below, of people who identify and present as black, but are in fact white.

These people have been criticised for taking opportunities reserved for BAME people - and faced a backlash that argued you can't just 'identify' and appropriate another race.

They were criticised, with arguments including the disregard for lived experience, oppression and - crucially - the difference in DNA.
So even if the woke had clapped and cheered and said "YES! WHITE WOMEN ARE BLACK WOMEN!" - we'd all know that, deep down, they aren't.

So my question is, if self-ID reformists insist that anyone can identify as a woman, should we not also extend this to anyone identifying as the race they choose? Why reject one and not the other?

I fear the answer is simply: 'because women'.

Rachel Dolezal (aka Nkechi Amare Diallo)
Who, when challenged, claimed that 'race is a lie' (sound familiar?)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Dolezal

Anthony David Lennon (aka Soweto Alkebulan Ekundayo)
www.independent.co.uk/voices/anthony-ekundayo-lennon-black-theatre-arts-council-england-theatre-rachel-dolezal-transracial-a8616851.html

I actually think sexual/gender appropriation is much worse.
There's more of an argument to say that race is a social construct, that the inequalities are down to perception rather than anything physical. Of course there are issues like sickle cell anemia which affect people of different races to different extents, but there's nothing, in my opinion, so pervasive as what comes with having female biology. These are real physical differences.
And race isn't binary either in the way sex is.

What kind of person compares prejudice and discrimination to see which is worse, this isn’t a fucking game of top trumps here.

Whilst we’re at it why don’t we chuck in the disabled, they get a pretty raw deal as well BUT is it as bad as women or BAME people, hmm tough call.

What a joke.

I’ve been saying this for years OP.

Completely agree. It is worse.

What I wanted to highlight (preaching to the wrong choir here but trying to formulate arguments that my woke-friends will understand) is that one is frowned upon as appropriating/taking resources meant for an oppressed group (and peddling an outright lie), yet somehow the other is a free-for-all giveaway of women's rights without so much as the courtesy of debate.

Why aren't we shouting white women are black women, if it's all about feelings?

Whilst we’re at it why don’t we chuck in the disabled,

Nobody worry, there is a trans movement for non-disabled people too!

daily.jstor.org/the-complicated-issue-of-transableism/

@PinkyU

What kind of person compares prejudice and discrimination to see which is worse, this isn’t a fucking game of top trumps here.

Whilst we’re at it why don’t we chuck in the disabled, they get a pretty raw deal as well BUT is it as bad as women or BAME people, hmm tough call.

What a joke.

But it is a game of top trumps, isn't it? That we didn't start... but it's the game we're in, apparently.

Transwomen saying they are women trumps women saying they are not.

• kind of person compares prejudice and discrimination to see which is worse, this isn’t a fucking game of top trumps here.

Whilst we’re at it why don’t we chuck in the disabled, they get a pretty raw deal as well BUT is it as bad as women or BAME people, hmm tough call.

What a joke.*

I think you are missing the point. It isn’t a comparison of prejudice, but highlighting the illogical inconsistencies in saying that a man can identify as a woman but a white person cannot identify as black.

The rachel case turns on its facts a bit as she could pass as black without doing anything. If a white person put on black make up and said they felt black, this would be derided as offensive. A man can don womanface and it’s fine though. Shrug.

What kind of person compares prejudice and discrimination to see which is worse, this isn’t a fucking game of top trumps here.
This is missing the point. It's not about comparing to see who has it worse, it's about comparing to highlight the parallels between the situations and differences in what is deemed acceptable in each case. It exposes inconsistencies and speaks to the underlying motives of those setting the agenda.

Anthony lennon's story is really interesting. It's not particularly clear cut at all. However sexual appropriation is clear cut. Don't do it.

I am all for anyone expressing themselves the way they want - but do it in a way that respects women's rights and boundaries. Don't try to become what you are not by railroading science and facts.

On another note... why the hatred of the word transwoman? Is it similar to when people didn't want to admit they were gay, because it was seen as 'bad'? So they pretended they weren't. It doesn't have that stigma now. Transpeople should be celebrated for what they are, not gaslighted into believing (and have us believe) they're something else.

Don't get me started on lesbians with penises...

''Cultural genocide involves the eradication and destruction of cultural artifacts, such as books, artworks, and structures, and the suppression of cultural activities that do not conform to the destroyer's notion of what is appropriate''
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_genocide

There are certainly white people who have identified as black. Whether they’ve asked or not, I couldn’t say. The example of Anthony Lennon is clear in that he was ‘never asked’ if he was black, people just assumed. So black by default. He did however, have access to and benefitted from funding that had been ringfenced for BAME people.

Are they suicidal or depressed? Couldn’t say.
Say they were... does that mean they should be allowed to take opportunities intended for their desired race? Just because it makes them sad that they aren’t what they wish they were?

Do feelings override everything else?

In my opinion, the focus should be on supporting people to embrace reality. You aren’t ‘in’ a body. You ARE your body.

Thanks for the question @Enormouscroc. It made me think. Ultimately, I hold the same views as I did before.

I have also wondered about this.

I could learn to speak fluent French, eat French food, wear clothes that are from France, go and live there and tell people I am French and even become a French citizen, but I can't change my birth certificate to say I was born in France and have always been French.

Now, if I want to say that I was actually born a man I can get my birth certificate altered to say so despite the actual, y'know, physical and biological facts

I don't think we're allowed to talk about this nor the fact that it only works one way ..... otherwise we are bigots, transphobes, racists etc.

@MakeMineWithRhubarbJam

I have also wondered about this.

I could learn to speak fluent French, eat French food, wear clothes that are from France, go and live there and tell people I am French and even become a French citizen, but I can't change my birth certificate to say I was born in France and have always been French.

Now, if I want to say that I was actually born a man I can get my birth certificate altered to say so despite the actual, y'know, physical and biological facts

I suppose changing (rewriting) one's nationality isn't 'a thing' because the argument would be 'why would you want to?' Other than for your own entertainment/francophile gratification!

By that I mean you wouldn't gain anything by being French (broad brush strokes that French rights etc aren't too different from British).

It would also mean a statement on your birth certificate that isn't true, not matter how much you wanted it to be.

But changing sex would benefit you. If it's MtF then you gain women's rights.

@ginghamstarfish

I don't think we're allowed to talk about this nor the fact that it only works one way ..... otherwise we are bigots, transphobes, racists etc.

You forgot TERFS

Nobody is "in the wrong body". If someone feels like they are then the issue lies in the brain.

Post Brexit there would be huge practical consequence of British identifying as French meaning they legally become French and the French people are not allowed to object or else bigot.

I’ve been wondering exactly this and I hate the fact that I can’t articulate this in public without being vilified.

@TorkTorkBam

Post Brexit there would be huge practical consequence of British identifying as French meaning they legally become French and the French people are not allowed to object or else bigot.

Absolutely.

I recently renewed my French passport (had it for birth but it had lapsed) and was informed that I could apply for French citizenship for my children and husband.

The children don't speak French and have never been to France, but I'm going to apply. Why? Because it's legal and I can.

Should I? A different matter altogether... (I imagine many French people might say not).

But my behaviour here underlines the problem with self ID.

If Self-ID becomes legal, it doesn't matter who applies (just like my very non-French children) - if they say they are, then they are, no questions asked.
If it's legal, people will take advantage for their own benefit.

*from birth not for birth

I was saying this just yesterday after seeing a Dr Phil clip of a black lady claiming she is white and everyone basically telling her she's fucking crazy and she can't change her DNA, she's quite clearly black..I thought 'what's the fucking difference?'

On the plus side, the more examples of people trying to deny reality and insist others do the same (like the Dr Phil woman), the more it makes people think and question the narrative.

We must be allowed debate.