>>113593552>If gender roles are social constructs (which obviously they are)Gender roles didn't form in a vacuum, nobody sat down with parchment and ink and just invented them. They developed organically over 150,000 years due to a combination of inherent biological nature and changing environmental circumstances. Dismissing them as "obviously socially constructed" is disingenuous to the integral nature gender roles play in the functioning of every human society ever. Which leads us to the can of worms
>for me being a woman consists on being the female component of our sexual reproduction and that's itNow you're getting close to TERF territory and that's a philosophical quagmire all it's own
>For them it seems to mean wearing dresses and makeup, acting like spoiled children and things like that>Which is also why I don't understand how a movement purely based on sexist notions can be considered feministFor what it's worth, I mostly agree with you. Identity politics misses the forest for the trees; What's the point of being a transgender bisexual woman of color if you're just as narccisistic, greedy and ruthless as the heterosexual white male patriarch you're blaming for society's ills?
Honesty, loyalty, generosity, empathy. These are the things that one should identify themselves with and if you want to define what it means to be a woman, define it by being a virtuous woman (whatever that means to you.) Ultimately, what does your preferred pronoun have to do with being human?
