Regurgitating the same MRA talking points…

Considering that MRAs are actively anti-trans, unlike me, I’m cutting out this entire bit.



1. Racial distinctions based on inferiority/superiority are a product of the confederacy, i.e. WHITE MALE SUPREMACY.

I’m interrupting here to point out that you haven’t found any contradiction between those statements. Meaning that NONE of those statements implies that the others are false. For example: if I point out that the concept of “human beings can be scientifically divided into racial groups who deserve different amounts of basic human rights”, I do NOT deny that racism exists.

And, so far, you aren’t disagreeing with me.

Now, let’s try again with different statements:

The concept of “human beings can be scientifically divided into two (and ONLY two) sexes” is bullshit. Many people believe that the concept of “ human beings can be scientifically divided into two (and ONLY two) sexes ” is true. Many people systemically discriminate against certain groups of people, because they believe that said groups belong to the “inferior sex”.

Does any of the above statements contradicts any of the other statements? If so, which statements are in contradiction with each others?

(Failure to point out any contradiction between those statements will be interpreted as “No, those statements do NOT contradict each other”. Refusing to answer the question means, obviously, that you fail to point out any contradiction.)

Gender stereotypes…

Off-topic. We’re talking about gender identities here; which are a separate concept from gender stereotypes.



2. Race and sex are immutable biological distinctions based on observable reality at birth.

The idea that we can divide humanity into a limited number of objectively-defined and clearly-cut races is bullshit. It’s not based on science. Pretty much everyone who tries to divide humanity into a limited number of objectively-defined and clearly-cut races completely fails to do so in an objective manner; instead, they always end up classifying people as they please, conveniently ignoring any and all exceptions and problems with their classification system.



Likewise, the idea that we can divide humanity into two and only two objectively-defined and clearly-cut sexes is bullshit. It’s not based on science. Pretty much everyone who tries to divide humanity into two and only two objectively-defined and clearly-cut sexes completely fails to do so in an objective manner; instead, they always end up classifying people as they please, conveniently ignoring any and all exceptions and problems with their classification system.



They are not “arbitrarily assigned”. They are supported by intrinsic genetic codes that are detectable by chromosome signatures in the womb.

Do you check people’s chromosomes before determining that they’re “male” or “female”?

Because here’s the problem. ALL transphobes do the following three things:

1) They claim that humanity can be divided into two (and ONLY two) SEPARATE sexes. Sometimes, they’ll allow a tiny amount of exceptions; but they always follow that up with “But they’re too few to acknowledge, so we can ignore them”.

You qualify.

2) They claim that a person’s sex must be determined by looking at some specific and objectively measurable biological characteristics.

You qualify, given that you claim that sex is “supported by intrinsic genetic codes that are detectable by chromosome signatures in the womb”.

3) They’re actively against anyone who refuses to divide humanity into two separate human sexes and/or who refuses to use the aforementioned “specific and objectively measurable biological characteristics” to determine people’s sex.

Trans people refuse to accept your beliefs on the human sexes. You claim that they’re perpetuating misogyny in doing so. Therefore, you definitely qualify.

Now, here’s the catch: every single transphobe ends up invalidating their own beliefs, in one of two ways:

Transphobe claims that there’s only two separate human sexes, and that everyone who claims otherwise is wrong >>> Transphobe fails to divide humanity into two (and only two) separate human sexes >>> That transphobe’s claim is wrong, and can therefore be safely ignored.

Transphobe claims that people’s sex MUST be determined by using a specific method (which involves checking specific biological characteristics), and that everyone who refuses to use that method is wrong >>> Transphobe fails to use that method to determine people’s sex >>> That transphobe’s claim is wrong, and can therefore be safely ignored.



3. Feminism is a philosophical argument against gender based oppression and institutional sexism.

Again: you’re talking about gender roles/stereotypes, which sexist people try to impose on others.

Gender identity, instead, is determined by an individual solely for themselves. “A trans person determining their own gender identity” is NOT an attempt to impose gender-based oppression on other people.



4. Men (including men with gender dysphoria) systematically discriminate against women bc of institutional misogyny. One of the ways they do this is through pejorative slurs like cis…

False, because again: cis simply means not trans.

Not to mention that, again: “cis” is not directed at women the way “c*nt”, “b*tch” or “Feminazi” are. Because it’s not an attack on women. It’s used indifferently on women and men alike.



…or terf…

“TERF” stands for “Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist”. It indicates a radical feminist who also actively excludes trans people (for example, by insisting that trans men are actually women). Contrast trans-inclusionary radical feminists.



While the specific term “TERF” originated around 2008, the idea to separate trans-exclusionary and trans-inclusionary radical feminists originated at least since the ‘70… from radical feminists themselves.



…which are used interchangeably with “c*nt”, “b*tch” or “Feminazi”.

No, they aren’t.



Owing to the fact that you have internalized the false victimization of Men’s Rights Activism…

Fun fact 1: MRAs believe that “cis” is, at best, a bullshit SJW term. At worst, a slur that trans people use against “normal” people.

Fun fact 2: MRAs generally don’t talk about TERFs specifically. That’s because they’re against feminists in general; MRAs don’t distinguish between trans-exclusionary and trans-inclusionary feminists, because MRAs don’t care about how trans people are treated. (In fact, many MRAs actually share the same beliefs on trans people that trans-exclusionary feminists have.)



you must be reminded that due to institutionalized sexism, the practical consequence of treating transwomen as women is that the male interest is placed first.

By the same logic treating trans men as men has the primary consequence of placing female interest before the male one.

Mh. Apparently, respecting trans people’s gender is NOT an issue of placing “male” interest above the “female” one. Who would’ve thought.



The female right to self-organise comes after the male right to be treated as a woman.

This makes no sense. You really believe that treating trans women (which, I remind you, are a small percentage of women) as women will SOMEHOW massively and negatively impact cis women’s ability to self-organize?



The female right to critique femininity comes after the male right to claim femininity.

Again, that makes no sense. You’re claiming that, if you let one woman determine what “femininity” means for herself without trying to impose on others, then you cannot critique how gender stereotypes are imposed on women?



The female right to describe your body and what that body means under patriarchy comes after the male right not to be offended by descriptions of female bodies.

So, let me get this straight. If you were to acknowledge that not all women have an uterus, then you cannot talk about issues that affect people with uteri? That makes negative sense.



5. The term “terf” is a manipulation intended to reframe feminist ideas…

Nope, sorry, I must once again interrupt you here. The term doesn’t refer to feminist ideas in general; it refers, SPECIFICALLY, to certain feminists’ transphobic ideas.

I think that you’re under the impression that all, or at least the vast majority of feminist, are referred to as “TERFs”. This is false. Likewise, the idea that feminism is necessarily based on the exclusion of trans people is also wrong.



6. The “Cis” slur implies that women—lesbians, call center workers, single mothers—have an inherent “privilege” over trans people.

…Because they do. Just like white women have an inherent “privilege” over black men, due to systemic racism; while at the same time, black men have an inherent “privilege” over white women, due to systemic sexism.



Again, let’s not forget that trans is an umbrella term. A gender non conforming male…

You’re, once again, going off-topic. What gender identity you chose for yourself (and whether or not it conforms to the label that society believes to be “correct” for you) is a completely different issue to what gender stereotypes, if any, you follow (and whether or not they conform to the stereotypes that society believes to be “correct” for you).

See, here’s a giant problem with TERFs: trans activists explain, in detail, the difference between gender identity, gender stereotypes and gender conformity/non-conformity. TERFs completely ignore the explanation and believe that it’s all “the imposition of gender roles”, even when it makes no sense for TERFs to believe that. They fundamentally refuse to listen.



‘Cis’ by your definition means to agree with what gender superficiality says you are.

See what I mean? A cis woman has chosen “woman/female” as her own gender identity. She can conform to “femal” gender stereotypes; or go against that. “What gender identity she chooses” and “what gender stereotypes, if any, she decides to follow” are two ENTIRELY different things.

Not only that, but both of those things are completely separate from the fact that society forces gender stereotypes on people. That woman can decide her own gender identity, and still be against imposing gender stereotypes on other people; she can decide whether to follow or not “female” gender stereotypes, and still be against imposing gender stereotypes on other people.



But you refuse to listen. You beieve that somehow, by choosing a gender identity for herself, a woman is automatically imposing gender stereotypes on all women. You believe that somehow, by choosing to follow “feminine” stereotypes, a woman is automatically imposing gender stereotypes on all women. It makes no sense.



PS The non-binary declaration is a slap in the face to all women, who, if they haven’t come out as ‘genderqueer,’ presumably possess an internal essence perfectly in-line with the misogynistic parody of womanhood created by patriarchy that you whole heartedly endorse.

I have absolutely no idea what this means.



There’s a twisted bigoted cruelty in arguing that the primary problem with gender is its impact on the chosen identities of individuals, and not the way it operates systemically, under patriarchy, to normalize and encourage male violence and female subordination.

See? Once again you’re mixing gender identity (“the chosen identities of individuals”) and the imposition of gender roles/stereotypes (”the way it operates systemically, under patriarchy, to normalize and encourage male violence and female subordination”).

For you, someone choosing a label for themselves means that, somehow, that same person normalizes and encourages male violence and female subordination. Which is a reasoning that only works if you assume that there’s absolutely no difference between an individual choosing their own gender identity; an individual choosing whether to conform to gender roles or not; and society systematically imposing gender roles on everyone.

Assumption that is complete bullshit.



PPS Cis’, as in ‘Cis Woman’ implies femininity is innate…

Nope. “Cis” means that you use the same label that society believes to be “correct” for you.

Basically, society believes that people with vaginas are innately feminine - and that includes referring to themselves as “women/female”. If a person with a vagina picks “woman/female” as their own gender identity, they’re picking the same label that society deems to be the “correct” one for people with vaginas. Hence: cis.



…and women identify with their oppression and with our inferior status which we’ve socialized into - through the social constructs femininity.

Nope. Again: you can be born with a vagina, identify as a “woman” (CIS), and still be against women’s oppression. Likewise, you could be born with a penis, identify as a “woman” (TRANS), and still be in favor of women’s oppression.

Again: whether or not you believe that misogyny is correct is COMPLETELY SEPARATE from what gender identity you choose.



PPPS Sexist men exist in the trans community…



And homophobic women exist in the feminist community. Your point?

…and the cis slur is a function of that sexism.



Again: your claim makes no sense. It’s like claiming that sexist men exist in the disabled community, and the slur “neurotypical” is a function of that sexism.

