Is it because SJWs use a lack of gender to divide and a presence of race to divide, so you can be trans gender but may not be trans race?
Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods
The Immortal Goon wrote:The money we use at a daily level is also a social construct. By rightwing logic, that means I can just decide that the dollar bill in my pocket is worth 90 billion dollars and never work again!
Frollein wrote:Uh, no, that would be left-wing logic. You know, the guys who started the whole "social-construct-today-I-identify-as-a-unicorn" bullshit.
Merriam Webster wrote:Social Construct: an idea that has been created and accepted by the people in a society
...egardless of how nuanced the concept may be in academic literature, in political discourse it has taken on a particular character, which I believe is essentialist and rigid, and takes “gender identity” to be fixed, unchanging, and beyond question or scrutiny. Something I am currently writing for a monograph to be published next year, is the fact that the current political discourse about gender identity has travelled a long way from its queer theoretical origins, in ways that I think the original proponents of these theories would probably now come to reject.
quetzalcoatl wrote:Gender non-binarism and racial fluidity are marginal issues. That they loom so large in the imaginations of social conservatives and social justice activists does neither of them any credit. Their obsession only serves to illuminate the sterility of their respective viewpoints.
anasawad wrote:In a scientific definition, transgenderism is the process of transionning between genders. before the process began, the person has gender dyphoria and not yet considered trans gender. Gender dysphoria is when the biological structure of the person does not match the nurulogical structure.
After the transition is over, the person becomes the new gender and no longer is a transgender.
There are only 2 genders and this is the only right definition being based scientifically, anything else is not transgender.
anasawad wrote:A food for thought is to consider this statement; Gender is not a social construct but rather society is a gender construct.
The Immortal Goon wrote:As predicted in this thread, it was apparently too much to expect a rightwinger to pick up a dictionary, let alone understand what they're whining about.
There you go, that's wasn't so hard!
Whenever we try to have a conversation on this forum that doesn't rely on colorful pictures, a rightwinger comes in and responds like this:
MY FEELINGS ARE HURT!!!
IT'S A MARXIST CONSPIRACY !!1111.
Is it really too much to ask that a rightwinger know what he's talking about before starting a thread or attacking an explanation? I suppose it always was an ideological orientation for the ignorant.
Or are you going to argue that there's no such thing as a concept that's been accepted by a society?
Thompson_NCL wrote:What does any of this have to do with what Frollein wrote?
Thompson_NCL wrote:Anyway, as to the topic at hand: neither race nor gender are social constructs. Trannies are mentally ill. People who think they are of a different race are mentally ill.
Suntzu wrote:Race, subspecies, breed, call it what you want. There are no breeds of dogs. Breed is just a social construct. The differences between a Great Dane and a Chihuahua are very superficial. Same goes for a Kenyan and a Irishman or a Honduran and a Japanese.
The Immortal Goon wrote:As the dictionary said, and as I pointed out with money before the predictable rightwing temper-tantrum started, a social construct is simply something we agree upon.
SolarCross wrote:The trouble with that definition is that there really isn't that much agreement about the nature of race, sex, money, class etc People all have their own ideas about that stuff.
Talk to a monetarist (or most any normal person) and money is just the most practical way to reward a complete stranger for helping you out and thus is the veritable mortar of a healthy civilisation.
Talk to certain kinds of kooky Christian and money is the root of all evil (whilst passing the collection plate).
Talk to other kooky people and money is a jew conspiracy against the gentiles.
The Immortal Goon wrote:But I specifically said, "every day interaction," or some similar qualifier.
Whatever moral spin they put on it, it's still shiny rocks, slips of paper, or a series of 1's and 0's stored in a bank computer that all the people you mentioned agree has a particular value. If one does not agree that the shiny rock is valuable, than even your most militant Christian won't say that it's the root of all evil; or that a slip of green paper is a Jewish conspiracy.
It's the social construction of value that's important in each of these cases.
@foxdemon maybe that big rock you have in Centr[…]
History is a thing, but you'd have a tough time ar[…]
Did anyone have a strategy? Serious question. I s[…]
This is propaganda. All that was said was that […]