£10,000 prize for arguing both sides of trans debate

[IcakethereforeIam]

This could be interesting. I expect to see FWR being cited 😁

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/10k-essay-prize-for-arguing-both-sides-of-trans-debate-vvfgmbc8k

https://archive.ph/NzNEy archive link

Although, the journalist quoted seems to have transwomen/trans women mixed up.

Transmen are, once more, conspicuous by their absence.

X post with @IcakethereforeIam

Agree, "agender" is a gender identity.

And there's the problem. The instinct is to argue against the arguments from the other side instead of constructing them!

If you think that everyone has a gender identity then you need to explain the people who don't think that they have one, and that is covered by 'agender'.

I didn't realise you were participating in the both sides argument, I thought you were making a statement of how you perceived it, @noblegiraffe

And you have to be able to argue against GI too, so it's all good.

Apologies, forgot which thread I was on.

I stand by what I posted though 😁

I thought you were making a statement of how you perceived it

No, it's a clear case of propping up a failed model with epicycles to explain abnormalities.

nauticant · Yesterday 16:42

"What does a match look like? It looks like gender stereotypes."

No, it's a little splinter with a rounded pink blob on one end.

Dons jacket, exits via side door...

I don't consider myself that. Asking me my gender identity is vaguely akin to asking me which sect of Islam I'm signed up to (Sunni, Shiite, the other one). To me the question is non applicable, I don't believe in any of it. If people who do believe want to put a word to that then fine but I won't ever use it.

I know you were! I was commenting on the argument! Thought that's what we were all doing.

No, it's a little splinter with a rounded pink blob on one end.

That's just the female ones. What have you got against male matches? They're not all volatile and prone to explosion...

https://interestingliterature.com/2023/08/woman-word-origin-etymology/
I thought this article, the first part anyway, might be of interest to anyone tackling the essay and wishing to consider wif+man=woman alongside whether trans+woman=transwoman.

@Gagagardener

That's an interesting article, but I think it misses an important part of the historical origins of the word woman.

Wif-man indeed was the origin, but the "man" in that sense didn't mean a bloke, it meant human, or person.

A man in the sense we mean today was a were-man, the "were" surviving in the word virile, and of course werewolf.

A woman wasn't being compared to a man linguistically, they had equal grammatical standing.