TERF partie le deuxième

Getting a rant off my chest. I made the mistake of interacting with some of these misanthropic, unconfident excuses for educated human beings and found myself quite disturbed.

Let me start with gender studies. In studies at the university level we have the hard sciences such as mathematics, physics, chemistry and biologic as well as the applied versions in the form of many engineering disciplines and architecture. These are all informed by testing and peer reviewed journals, and the repeatability of results. There are well known issues, but mostly the truth will come out over time.

At the next level of rigor are soft sciences like economics, psychology and sociology that deal with different ways of viewing people’s behavior. This is notoriously hard to quantify and analyse and is therefore more prone toward bias in experimental analysis. In both these soft sciences and even in harder disciplines when dealing with cohorts (groups of people chosen for a study) there are issues of how to choose representative samples or large enough samples.

We come to the liberal arts. Some liberal arts like philosophy are branches of the sciences. Philosophy uses logic to form inferences or deductions. You may not agree with the conclusions or the preconditions but at least there’s structure.

Expressive liberal arts like writing and music are harder because they are subjective. A student doing well is not just about technique but also about figuring out how to please the grader. Yet art, writing and music all have millenia old wells of knowledge to draw from. For example, in music you can be writing a piece using a particular old scale that evokes a certain kind of feeling. There are principals to be applied, it isn’t random.

Then we come to gender studies. Although I think it’s probably possible to actually study what they purport to study, that isn’t what I see from the students of such programs. Instead the most visible ones are radical feminists who spend their time talking about patriarchy and painting all women as victims and men as evil oppressors. Apparently there are no male victims or female oppressors.

The particular subset known as Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists simply say that trans women are men and therefore can’t be part of feminism because we aren’t women. Logical arguments are basically met with ad hominem attacks, after all a discussion with a man? Of course he doesn’t understand. Another tact is to take a simple statement, turn it into a strawman and tear down that argument – the one you didn’t actually make.

Not the best debaters in the world.

They’re very fixated on periods. I’m not sure why since some women (even by their standards) don’t get them and have never gotten them. When pointed out they get testy and say “of course we know that but that’s rare”, of course “that’s rare” is not an argument, not even an inkling of an argument if your argument about me not being a women is that I don’t get a period – not that I’d get one at my age anyway.

They do however accept transmen as female. This is fascinating since most transmen take testosterone, which as far as I know stops their period. Many get hysterectomies, more get top surgery. Kind of a stupid as well as ironic argument to make in my opinion.

So don’t argue with these losers. They’ll just waste your time. Oh, and try not to laugh like I did when they say their movement is on the rise……

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s