Sorry if this has been done before, but gender identity and race identity

[BabyOctopus]

Hi all,

I am discussing the GC and TRA debate with my lovely best friend. I fall very much on the GC side, while she is very much of the view that transwomen should be treated as a category under the umbrella of ‘woman’.

The debate has stayed friendly and respectful, and neither of us have at any point got angry with each other

The one thing I am trying to get my head around is the race vs gender identity question and why we might reject one and accept the other.

I am musing over this article as a topic for our next debate. It’s written by an assistant professor in the philosophy department at Yale University who identifies as non-binary, and a PhD candidate in Philosophy at Rutgers University.

The argument hinges on the concept of ‘accumulated generational inequality’ as a basis for justifying why a white person shouldn't be able to identify as black, but a man should be able to identify as a woman.

The authors claim that since they believe women as a sex class don’t experience this accumulated generational inequality (due to multi-gender households), it’s okay for a male bodied person to identify as a woman, despite the sexism they experience.

It also describes J K Rowling as an ‘anti-trans activist’ and contains what I think is a bit of pseudo-science thrown into the mix.

They also state:
“In cases where revising a classification would have a negative sociopolitical impact that outweighs the good of respecting how an individual identifies, we think that the classification should not be revised. And we think that revising the rules of race classification to accommodate transracial identification into Blackness is a case like this.”

But while they talk about the negative consequences of a person identifying as black, they make no acknowledgement of any potential negative impact of expanding the classification of ‘woman’.

Nevertheless, I’m not a philosopher (albeit I am universality educated to MA level in a similar subject), so it’s quite possible I’m missing something.

I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on its merits and weaknesses, as this will help aid the discussion!

bostonreview.net/race-philosophy-religion-gender-sexuality/robin-dembroff-dee-payton-why-we-shouldnt-compare

Thanks all!

I wouldn't muse over anything written by an extreme gender ideologist. I'd actively avoid it in fact.
I'm sure intelligent people have written about Rachel Dolezal out there.

It was briefly touched on here. www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a4215681-richard-dawkins-request-for-discussion-on-identity?msgid=106373969#106373969

I think it's a huge attempt to arse cover.

Would racism not be a problem if it was happening to the black adopted child of a white family then?

Girls have been oppressed throughout history and across the world by their fathers. They have not benefited from being in a "multi-gender household". Women have been systematically excluded from inheritance!

Not to mention aborted and prevented from ever having a life by "multi gender households".

Forced to cover their hair/face in "multi gender households".

The whole premise of the author reeks of gender ideology fantasy.

The argument hinges on the concept of ‘accumulated generational inequality’ as a basis for justifying why a white person shouldn't be able to identify as black, but a man should be able to identify as a woman.

‘accumulated generational inequality’ is a specific kind of inequality, but there are plenty of other drivers of inequality. It’s glaringly obvious that women have been excluded from equal participation in society because of their reproductive role and that they face direct and indirect discrimination because of their sex. Women will continue to need rights that men don’t because they are physically different.

On the other hand the differences between races are a social construct, and the accumulated generational inequality referred to is hundreds of years old, but that is comparatively recent. In a few hundred more years they may just be a note in a history book. The racial inequality referred to is also geographically specific.
However none of that means that racial inequality in America doesn’t exist.

The argument seems to be that this kind of inequality is less important than that kind of inequality, so it’s fine to treat those people as a set of stereotypes. People have been saying that about women for a very long time.

Between meetings but Jane Clare Jones on Dembroff:

janeclarejones.com/2021/05/02/sex-based-vs-gender-based-oppression-a-fisk-of-dembroff/

Personally I think trans race is the next battle these loons will wage. There is zero difference. In fact, race as a category has far less basis in reality than sex. It is the obvious next target to be queered.

See: Oli London, who is non-binary AND trans-Korean. I think OL is actually doing this as performance art, but the people who accept the NB identity also argue against the validity of OL's Korean identity.

I think trans race will prove difficult. I suspect trans age will be the next one, with most people afflicted by this condition identifying as very much younger than their physical appearance might suggest.

@WaltzingToWalsingham

I think trans race will prove difficult. I suspect trans age will be the next one, with most people afflicted by this condition identifying as very much younger than their physical appearance might suggest.

Well, I am actually younger than I look as well

The more I think on it, the less convinced I am there is any coherent argument why identifying as another race is different to identifying as another sex. Didnt IW today offer to show people their cervix today?

Martina Big - German model

I don't know, would you debate someone who believes in God?

A debate is supposed to be a place of logic, you can't debate emotional concepts. There is no logic in gender identity.

Sorry I mean would you debate someone who believes in God about the existence of God? It's so pointless.

@WaltzingToWalsingham

I think trans race will prove difficult. I suspect trans age will be the next one, with most people afflicted by this condition identifying as very much younger than their physical appearance might suggest.

That may happen with some, but I can see the appeal of women like me adding a few years and retiring early, because why not. I've got quite a lot of years working ahead, and I'm starting to fall apart.

Trans age already a thing, Google stefonknee

Will this mean I can apply for a senior bus pass whenever I like?

@speakout

Will this mean I can apply for a senior bus pass whenever I like?

Don't see why not. Stefonknee is umm 6 or something now, so yeah crack on with the free bus pass and I'll get on with applying for my state pension

Yes of course, speakout. Just identify as a pensioner, and scream “literal violence” if they refuse you a bus pass. Oh, and demand your state pension too. Why can’t thirty year olds be trans pensioners? It’s no crazier than trans race or trans… anything else.

Trans age has negative implications for the economy, unlike trans sexual identity, which is apparently a big business booster. So I don't think it would receive support and finance by the elite in the same way. Unless (a nasty thought has just occurred to me) that is, to facilitate relationships with younger people🤢

Trans race would be world war 3 in my opinion.

My mother in law was saying she can get a free boiler due to her age? I fancy that!

I don't see how Rachael Dolezal situation any different to transgenderiam. One is derided as a nutter, the other is lauded as stunning an brave?

I don't get it .

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

See: Oli London, who is non-binary AND trans-Korean. I think OL is actually doing this as performance art, but the people who accept the NB identity also argue against the validity of OL's Korean identity.

Which is crazy because one is hardly different from the other

I'm waiting for transcitizenship.

I'd like my birth certificate reissued with a place of birth in some EU country that offers birthright citizenship, please. Although really any EU country I choose should just issue me a passport no questions asked as I've lived as an EU national for more than six months. Maybe I'll be French today, Swedish tomorrow, Lithuanian on Wednesday... Pips Bunce-style!

Or maybe the entire world could just never check anyone's documents for any reason, just take each person's word for everything.

It'd be libertarian utopia.

I can see the appeal of women like me adding a few years and retiring early

But they don't want women to work until pension age. Doesn't it turn out that for every woman who remains in work and works a 30hour+ week it costs the state £5K in the care work that she would otherwise do free of charge?

The whole premise of the author reeks of gender ideology fantasy.

Yup. As pointless to debate with as a creationist.

The argument hinges on the concept of ‘accumulated generational inequality’ as a basis for justifying why a white person shouldn't be able to identify as black, but a man should be able to identify as a woman.

Well it is obvious that women have accumulated generational inequality for magnitudes longer and in a more universal global way than any race based version.

In cases where revising a classification would have a negative sociopolitical impact that outweighs the good of respecting how an individual identifies, we think that the classification should not be revised.

So, here I think they are acknowledging that while women might have accumulated generational inequality, the negative sociopolitical impact of this is worth less than respecting the man that identifies as a woman.

In other words, a small % of today’s men wishing to identify as women outweighs all the thousands of generations of oppressed women. Man important. Women not important. It’s just cleverly argued justification for yet more sexism and sex based oppression.