Department of wack definitions
Is that a fact.
It’s not an “idea” that humans are sexually dimorphic, it’s a fact. It’s an idea that humans are not sexually dimorphic and that there’s a joyous rich tapestry of sexes open to us: a silly, childish, fantasy-based idea.
It’s not any kind of phobia to refuse orders to agree with and endorse and submit to fantasy-based ideas, especially ones as sweeping and fundamental as that.
What a ridiculous definition. Disagreement with an important tenet of a group is a phobia about that group, is it? So disagreeing that Jesus was divine is Christianophobia, and disagreement over whether Jesus was the Jewish Messiah is Jewishophobia, and disagreeing that Muhammad was a prophet is Islamophobia? I suppose there are people who insist that disagreement with “born this way” doctrine are homophobic. So all
Also, this tendency to refer to “prejudice or discrimination against or animosity toward X” as “X phobia” is terribly annoying and perhaps dangerously wrong. But this definition is even worse.
@Sackbut: I agree with the vocabulary thing. -phobia is inappropriate. A quick google search reveals that English has a perfectly serviceable suffix for dislike/hatred/animus in -misia (and prefix in mis-).
Nullius, that might be better, but it would still be inaccurate. We don’t hate trans people, we disagree with the doctrine that men can become women by saying so (and some of us believe that surgery and hormone therapy doesn’t literally make you a woman, only gives you somewhat more female-like characteristics).
Does anyone get more confused about sex and gender than the “gender diversity” crowd? I thought they were supposed to be experts on this stuff, constantly schooling us boring men and women.
Is it gender diversity? Sex diversity? Do the borings think there are only two sexes? Or only two genders?
The gender diversity crowd doesn’t seem to know anything except that they’re right. It’s exhausting.
Well, duh. Anyone that has had any med / biology training can tell you about sexual divisions in humans / other creatures, and that it revolves around there being two gametes produced by their respective sexes. There are entire sections in such courses about the differences between the sexes; how the fuck do these types think people are sexed – sometimes millennia after their death – if not for identifiable differences between the sexes?
Holms, that’s exactly it. I am a plant ecologist, and I learned how to sex plants based on their reproductive structures. I have never once asked a cedar tree how it identified, or listed it as “AFAB” or any other such nonsense, and no one is going to call me out for it, because it makes sense. The female tree produces the egg, the male tree produces the pollen.
The presence of sex changing fish (and other creatures) is duly noted, as is the fact that many plants have both sexes on the same flower. That doesn’t change anything. Fish change sexes as a result of various environmental factors; humans do not.