How do people get themselves here? People old enough to vote and drive and enlist?
If you were to ask me “What is a woman” today, I, like a lot of people would struggle to give an answer. That doesn’t mean I don’t have a belief. What it comes down to is that what a woman is to me might not be a woman to someone else. Just like if I were to ask someone “what is god?”
No. Not just like that at all. Pretty much the opposite of that in fact. “god” is imaginary, and “woman” is not. How does a grown-ass adult not know that? Or pretend not to know that?
Also how interesting that he says it about “woman” and not about “man.” Men are real but women are just a figment of everyone’s imagination, eh?
A lot of people would have an exact definition, while others will have a differing view. Some would say God doesn’t exist. Other would say that God is different for everyone. To me God is whatever someone wants to believe God is. My answer for what a woman is, would be the same thing.
Why would it be the same thing??? He’s met women, he exists because he came out of a woman, he sees women all around him all the time. None of that applies to God. Why would he think this is a good analogy?
It’s whatever you want it to mean to you. I know what I believe, but I wouldn’t force those beliefs onto someone else, just like I would tell a Jewish person or Muslim person “Merry Christmas.”
No, not just like that at all. Women are not a religious holiday.
I’ll give James Esses the last word here.
Comments
11 responses to “Other people’s perspectives”
This drivel, and the delusions of the non-binary shopper, … I was going to say that it’s inevitable that the Trans-Cult will destroy itself. Then I remember that some people think Donald Trump is a hero and other people believe in Russiagate to this day.
So, maybe not.
And apparently this is why AI will make humans extinct. Misinformation aka systematic lying.
It’s so hard for people to accept that perception of reality is not the same thing as actual reality. So Ed has decided now that the truth of the word “woman” is less important than the individual perceptions of what the word means. Yes, language is socially constructed, but if we declare that.this means that the symbol, in this case a word, no longer has shared meaning, then the symbol has no reference point. Symbols must have shared meaning or they have no value.
I think Ed fell down even before the perception/reality distinction. I think he just forgot or ignored the fact that some words are indeed abstract and debatable and subject to change while others are not. “God” does indeed mean different things to different people. “Women” not so much…unless you fall prey to an idiotic new religious doctrine.
I think I can decode this:
“What it comes down to is that what a woman is to me might not be a woman to someone else. Just like if I were to ask someone “what is god?”
That means; you women have to let men in your dressing rooms, but I’m not fucking one.
It’s amusing to me that Ed seems to not understand what a self-own comparing trans definitions of ‘woman’ to religionists’ definition of ‘God’ i9s.
What he, and so many of the ostensible feminist trans-advocates seem to be doing, is literally reversing the process that feminism undertook. Feminism, in so many ways, has been about decoupling unnecessary and unwanted baggage from the definition of the word ‘woman’. So ditch dress-wearing, and nurturing, and housekeeping, and subservience, and all the rest of the bullshit that had been layered onto the word, stripping it down to the bare bones definition: Adult Human Female.
But the TRAs are desperately trying to re-add elements to this. And they just refuse to understand why this pisses off so many feminists.
And here we have — a wonderful new tactic for all the atheists, skeptics, and humanists who have wholeheartedly embraced TWAW! They can look sternly at us recalcitrant nonbelievers who haven’t got on board the New Civil Rights Issue and emphatically inform us that, hey we need to treat being a woman the way we treat God: it’s true if you believe it’s true.
This is just so delicious.
“Someone with a vagina???” I’m sure that’s the best he can do, but it’s a hell of a rude way of putting it. How about an adult female? There’s a whole lot more to what a woman is than a vagina. I wonder if he really thinks that whenever he encounters a woman — is that the first thing that enters his little mind? “Oh there goes a vagina, uh, I mean woman.” Yes adult females have vaginas, and only females have them, but really? Did he have some kind of sex ed malfunction when he was young?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T3wcxHiorJ4
Oh, except for offending women. Women don’t count as “people,” nor are they any part of “humanity in general.”
@8 I particularly hate this formation – if people really want to identify ‘woman’ by anatomy, why not ‘someone with a uterus’?
@9 it’s been decades since I first noticed the distinction between ‘people’ and ‘women’ but it never fails to upset me.
From the thread:
I love when men spend their days discussing whether or not 51% of the population exists. – Hilary Coulson
Apparently Ed Krassenstein isn’t a parody account.