1/
Woke people believe men can give birth.
This total nonsense, which they want taught in schools, is a result of what the woke call "deconstructing gender."
A thread about what that is, and what we can do about it:
Woke people believe men can give birth.
This total nonsense, which they want taught in schools, is a result of what the woke call "deconstructing gender."
A thread about what that is, and what we can do about it:
2/
To begins, we must see that what the woke are engaged in here is not DISAGREEMENT about FACTS... it is DECONSTRUCTION of CONCEPTS.
The woke are not arguing with us about the facts of reality. The woke are arguing with us about the meaning of concepts.
Which means...
To begins, we must see that what the woke are engaged in here is not DISAGREEMENT about FACTS... it is DECONSTRUCTION of CONCEPTS.
The woke are not arguing with us about the facts of reality. The woke are arguing with us about the meaning of concepts.
Which means...
3/
They want to deconstruct gender. In other words, they are going to attack the concepts of masculinity and femininity. The goal here to destroy our understanding of what it means to be a man (or woman). Note that they aren't talking about facts, they are talking about concepts.
They want to deconstruct gender. In other words, they are going to attack the concepts of masculinity and femininity. The goal here to destroy our understanding of what it means to be a man (or woman). Note that they aren't talking about facts, they are talking about concepts.
4/
Most of us think
1. Healthy Men have penises, testicles, and make sperm
2. Healthy Women wombs, vaginas, and eggs
3. Men are typically bigger and stronger that women
We think who is male and female is a matter of biology
This is not what the woke think...
Most of us think
1. Healthy Men have penises, testicles, and make sperm
2. Healthy Women wombs, vaginas, and eggs
3. Men are typically bigger and stronger that women
We think who is male and female is a matter of biology
This is not what the woke think...
5/
The woke think "Man" and "Woman" are PURELY social roles enforced by social rules that don't describe any inherent biological reality
For them, to talk about biological women is just like talking about "biological Presidents" or "biological lawyers."
It makes no sense to them.
The woke think "Man" and "Woman" are PURELY social roles enforced by social rules that don't describe any inherent biological reality
For them, to talk about biological women is just like talking about "biological Presidents" or "biological lawyers."
It makes no sense to them.
6/The key thing here is to realize woke people see the words "woman" or "man" as referring entirely to social roles, not to biology.
So where did this come come from?
It began in the 70's and 80's when feminists and gender theorists first began to look at postmodernism.
So where did this come come from?
It began in the 70's and 80's when feminists and gender theorists first began to look at postmodernism.
7/
Here is Gayle Rubin's first deconstruction of gender. Here she proceeds by recontextualizing the debate. Instead of saying "compare men and women to each other and we see differences" she says "compare both a men and a women to an animal, and you see they are very similar"
Here is Gayle Rubin's first deconstruction of gender. Here she proceeds by recontextualizing the debate. Instead of saying "compare men and women to each other and we see differences" she says "compare both a men and a women to an animal, and you see they are very similar"
8/
Instead of focusing on how men and women differ, Rubin focuses on how (because they are both human) men and women are similar. She flips the debate on its head and reverses that way of thinking about it by changing the context.
Do we see how subtle that is?
Instead of focusing on how men and women differ, Rubin focuses on how (because they are both human) men and women are similar. She flips the debate on its head and reverses that way of thinking about it by changing the context.
Do we see how subtle that is?
9/
Rubin's method of deconstruction (invented by Jacques Derrida) works by taking concepts (in this case men and women) and figuring out how to re-interpret them in ways that undercut the meaning of those concepts (in this case changing the context)
Feminist Joan Scott explains:
Rubin's method of deconstruction (invented by Jacques Derrida) works by taking concepts (in this case men and women) and figuring out how to re-interpret them in ways that undercut the meaning of those concepts (in this case changing the context)
Feminist Joan Scott explains:
10/
Joan Scott wrote that paper in 1988.
What is even more interesting then her explanation of deconstruction, is when she lists feminist criteria for adopting theories, she never mentions truth as a criteria. But she does say theories must be useful for doing POLITICS:
Joan Scott wrote that paper in 1988.
What is even more interesting then her explanation of deconstruction, is when she lists feminist criteria for adopting theories, she never mentions truth as a criteria. But she does say theories must be useful for doing POLITICS:
11/
Joan Scott explicitly states that feminists adopt theories for political reasons, not because they are true.
Let that sink in.
Then let it sink in that she thought that putting politics above truth was so acceptable that she put that in a paper and published it.
Joan Scott explicitly states that feminists adopt theories for political reasons, not because they are true.
Let that sink in.
Then let it sink in that she thought that putting politics above truth was so acceptable that she put that in a paper and published it.
12/
When cigarette companies adopted bad theories for political reasons, theories that that said smoking did not cause cancer, they got sued for billions. Rightly so.
Keep all that in mind when you read stories of young man and women who regret having various gender surgeries.
When cigarette companies adopted bad theories for political reasons, theories that that said smoking did not cause cancer, they got sued for billions. Rightly so.
Keep all that in mind when you read stories of young man and women who regret having various gender surgeries.
13/
So Joan Scott admits they adopt a postmodern theory of language so they can use deconstruction to attack the MEANING of categories we use to describe reality.
The goal here is, as Scott says "confound, disrupt, and render ambiguous the meaning of any fixed binary opposition"
So Joan Scott admits they adopt a postmodern theory of language so they can use deconstruction to attack the MEANING of categories we use to describe reality.
The goal here is, as Scott says "confound, disrupt, and render ambiguous the meaning of any fixed binary opposition"
14/
They want to destroy the MEANING of our ideas
Why?
Because if you destroy the MEANING of ideas (or the words and concepts that communicate ideas) you can suck the power out of those ideas. If ideas lose their power, whatever those ideas hold together will start falling apart
They want to destroy the MEANING of our ideas
Why?
Because if you destroy the MEANING of ideas (or the words and concepts that communicate ideas) you can suck the power out of those ideas. If ideas lose their power, whatever those ideas hold together will start falling apart
15/
In this case, the thing they want to destroy is, as Scott and Rubin both state, is our view of men and women. This is because they think that the concepts of "man" and "women" create expectations of what men and women are and place pressure on people to conform.
In this case, the thing they want to destroy is, as Scott and Rubin both state, is our view of men and women. This is because they think that the concepts of "man" and "women" create expectations of what men and women are and place pressure on people to conform.
16/
Because they have adopted politically motivated theories, they see the concept of woman as referring entirely to a social role. They think that we could group humans according to height, eye color, weights, hair color, shoes size, or whatever else...why choose genitals?
Because they have adopted politically motivated theories, they see the concept of woman as referring entirely to a social role. They think that we could group humans according to height, eye color, weights, hair color, shoes size, or whatever else...why choose genitals?
17/
This theory ignores:
1. We are a sexually reproductive species and that mating is how we keep our species alive, so genitals matter.
2. Men are almost always bigger and stronger than women
The thing is they IGNORE it, they haven't MISSED it. They IGNORE it on purpose
This theory ignores:
1. We are a sexually reproductive species and that mating is how we keep our species alive, so genitals matter.
2. Men are almost always bigger and stronger than women
The thing is they IGNORE it, they haven't MISSED it. They IGNORE it on purpose
18/
They think restricting the categories of "women" and "man" based on the genitals isn't fair, people should play whatever role they like, and if a woman means using the women's locker room then a 6'6 220 pound trans woman with a penis gets to change with the ladies.
They think restricting the categories of "women" and "man" based on the genitals isn't fair, people should play whatever role they like, and if a woman means using the women's locker room then a 6'6 220 pound trans woman with a penis gets to change with the ladies.
19/
For them saying "you cannot be a woman because you have a penis and testicles" is like saying "You cannot be president because you have a penis and testicles"
So in their heads, being a man is about playing the role of being a man. Even if if you are pregnant while doing so
For them saying "you cannot be a woman because you have a penis and testicles" is like saying "You cannot be president because you have a penis and testicles"
So in their heads, being a man is about playing the role of being a man. Even if if you are pregnant while doing so
20/
And they mean it! Gender Theorist Judith Halberstam wrote a book called "Female Masculinity" and argued you could have masculinity without men.
At this juncture I believe it is appropriate to say that I am not joking, that is a real book, it is by a real college professor:
And they mean it! Gender Theorist Judith Halberstam wrote a book called "Female Masculinity" and argued you could have masculinity without men.
At this juncture I believe it is appropriate to say that I am not joking, that is a real book, it is by a real college professor:
21/
How do you fight back?
Well it is simple to say and hard to do: You must reject their game and call it out so that people see it. When people see the game being played they refuse to take part. Like a man refusing cards from a dishonest black jack dealer people reject it...
How do you fight back?
Well it is simple to say and hard to do: You must reject their game and call it out so that people see it. When people see the game being played they refuse to take part. Like a man refusing cards from a dishonest black jack dealer people reject it...
22/
But they need to see it for what it is in order to reject it. That where you come in. expose it for what it is. Help people see it, and don't let them play their dishonest games.
/fin
But they need to see it for what it is in order to reject it. That where you come in. expose it for what it is. Help people see it, and don't let them play their dishonest games.
/fin
