|
|
|
|
|
by allovernow
2361 days ago
|
|
Why does your personal conviction supersede that of those who do not agree with the non-binary classification of gender? Is it not valid to be offended over being forced to conform to minority views which are deeply rooted in politics and justified with a potentially exaggerated narrative of victimhood? These modern ideas are far from confirmed scientific fact. Yes, there some sort of a spectrum, but just as the entire concept of "gender" is a social construct, the real argument is over the definition of the construct, and one could argue that truly "non-binary" or transgender individuals form a tiny cluster of outliers near the plane separating conventional male and female grouping. If that is the case, I personally find it offensive to afford such a tiny minority such a disproportionate amount of power by allowing it to shape thought through language policing. The idea of intersectionality is mathematically equivalent to reducing an extremely high dimensional space, that of human physiology and behavior, to a simplified subset with fuzzy clusters separated by an arbitrary number of hyperplanes (gay, black, trans, etc). The particular modern formulation is one of an infinite number of possibilities, and it isn't fair to pick a handful of tiny minority clusters from this particular basis by those with vested interests, claim that those in particular are oppressed, and then afford them what are actually special priveledges under the guise of equality. Particularly when this mindset bleeds into politics and industry, it just comes off as a blatant powergrab for people who have defined their own social construct in a manner that benefits themselves. This is why identity politics drives populations apart. The space of human nature is sufficiently high dimensional that it is impossible to divide it into priveledged clusters without picking what amount to arbitrary favorites. |
|