College professor -“I am a white person who has incorrectly identified as Native my whole life.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still don't understand why identifying as any gender you choose is encouraged, but identifying as any race you choose is forbidden. Makes zero sense. Like so much liberal nonsense.

If you can't figure out the difference between the two you're honestly just stupid.

Race is based on heritage. Gender is a social construct.

It’s been widely argued that race is also a social construct.

Heritage would be more akin to, say, sex.

Yeah but the difference is that race is unchangeable.

Gender identity is frequently confused with biological sex. One is changeable, the other is not.

Race is absolutely changeable for some people. People literally did it to save their lives in certain contexts. Do not speak nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still don't understand why identifying as any gender you choose is encouraged, but identifying as any race you choose is forbidden. Makes zero sense. Like so much liberal nonsense.

If you can't figure out the difference between the two you're honestly just stupid.

Race is based on heritage. Gender is a social construct.

You're throwing out nonsense like that and claiming others are stupid? Okey doke.

PP - Gender is quite literally a social construct. Think about how in the Victorian era it was acceptable for men to wear dresses but now it is considered "feminine".

What are you talking about?

Sorry I meant renaissance, not victorian era

That is fashion, not gender. Nobody, including King Henry VIII, was saying he was female.

You're surely purposely being obtuse right? The different fashion rules for what men could wear back then versus what they can wear now is all the proof that gender is a social construct.

No, I think your argument is flawed. I don’t think you’ve “proven” anything.

Certainly cultural customs and practices related to gender, including fashion, are flexible and reflective of the wider culture. Culture is about how groups deal with life. Over time, they find the ways that work best for them, and sometimes those preferences change, as they are social constructs, but it doesn’t mean the underlying cause is a social construct.

Cultural customs and practices related to age also vary widely. Think about how different cultures view the very young and very old. Are children meant to be seen and not heard or listened to and validated? We agree that child labor and child brides are despicable practices, but in other cultures through history, one or both of those practices have been accepted. Some cultures venerate their elders, us not so much. Other cultures have killed their elderly.

Regardless of how an individual or their culture treat age, the aging process is not a social construct. Universally, everyone starts young, and if they live long enough, ends up old. Life expectancies, rates of aging, etc., may vary according to biological and environmental factors, but the general trend is unavoidable. Everyone is born, everyone dies, and in between they age.

Changing cultural practices, like fashion and how we treat the young/elderly, are social constructs. The underlying factors are not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still don't understand why identifying as any gender you choose is encouraged, but identifying as any race you choose is forbidden. Makes zero sense. Like so much liberal nonsense.

If you can't figure out the difference between the two you're honestly just stupid.

Race is based on heritage. Gender is a social construct.

You're throwing out nonsense like that and claiming others are stupid? Okey doke.

PP - Gender is quite literally a social construct. Think about how in the Victorian era it was acceptable for men to wear dresses but now it is considered "feminine".

What are you talking about?

Sorry I meant renaissance, not victorian era

That is fashion, not gender. Nobody, including King Henry VIII, was saying he was female.

You're surely purposely being obtuse right? The different fashion rules for what men could wear back then versus what they can wear now is all the proof that gender is a social construct.

No, I think your argument is flawed. I don’t think you’ve “proven” anything.

Certainly cultural customs and practices related to gender, including fashion, are flexible and reflective of the wider culture. Culture is about how groups deal with life. Over time, they find the ways that work best for them, and sometimes those preferences change, as they are social constructs, but it doesn’t mean the underlying cause is a social construct.

Cultural customs and practices related to age also vary widely. Think about how different cultures view the very young and very old. Are children meant to be seen and not heard or listened to and validated? We agree that child labor and child brides are despicable practices, but in other cultures through history, one or both of those practices have been accepted. Some cultures venerate their elders, us not so much. Other cultures have killed their elderly.

Regardless of how an individual or their culture treat age, the aging process is not a social construct. Universally, everyone starts young, and if they live long enough, ends up old. Life expectancies, rates of aging, etc., may vary according to biological and environmental factors, but the general trend is unavoidable. Everyone is born, everyone dies, and in between they age.

Changing cultural practices, like fashion and how we treat the young/elderly, are social constructs. The underlying factors are not.

Weird side tangent aside, you're conflating sex and gender. These are not the same thing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still don't understand why identifying as any gender you choose is encouraged, but identifying as any race you choose is forbidden. Makes zero sense. Like so much liberal nonsense.

If you can't figure out the difference between the two you're honestly just stupid.

Race is based on heritage. Gender is a social construct.

You're throwing out nonsense like that and claiming others are stupid? Okey doke.

PP - Gender is quite literally a social construct. Think about how in the Victorian era it was acceptable for men to wear dresses but now it is considered "feminine".

What are you talking about?

Sorry I meant renaissance, not victorian era

That is fashion, not gender. Nobody, including King Henry VIII, was saying he was female.

You're surely purposely being obtuse right? The different fashion rules for what men could wear back then versus what they can wear now is all the proof that gender is a social construct.

No, I think your argument is flawed. I don’t think you’ve “proven” anything.

Certainly cultural customs and practices related to gender, including fashion, are flexible and reflective of the wider culture. Culture is about how groups deal with life. Over time, they find the ways that work best for them, and sometimes those preferences change, as they are social constructs, but it doesn’t mean the underlying cause is a social construct.

Cultural customs and practices related to age also vary widely. Think about how different cultures view the very young and very old. Are children meant to be seen and not heard or listened to and validated? We agree that child labor and child brides are despicable practices, but in other cultures through history, one or both of those practices have been accepted. Some cultures venerate their elders, us not so much. Other cultures have killed their elderly.

Regardless of how an individual or their culture treat age, the aging process is not a social construct. Universally, everyone starts young, and if they live long enough, ends up old. Life expectancies, rates of aging, etc., may vary according to biological and environmental factors, but the general trend is unavoidable. Everyone is born, everyone dies, and in between they age.

Changing cultural practices, like fashion and how we treat the young/elderly, are social constructs. The underlying factors are not.

Weird side tangent aside, you're conflating sex and gender. These are not the same thing

+1. Unlike sex, race and gender are social constructs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still don't understand why identifying as any gender you choose is encouraged, but identifying as any race you choose is forbidden. Makes zero sense. Like so much liberal nonsense.

If you can't figure out the difference between the two you're honestly just stupid.

Race is based on heritage. Gender is a social construct.

It’s been widely argued that race is also a social construct.

Heritage would be more akin to, say, sex.

Yeah but the difference is that race is unchangeable.

Gender identity is frequently confused with biological sex. One is changeable, the other is not.

Race is absolutely changeable for some people. People literally did it to save their lives in certain contexts. Do not speak nonsense.

It's not the same thing as being transgender. The original topic of this thread was completely unrelated to trans people, so I really don't understand why they had to be brought up and demonized. You're obsessed with the smallest of minorities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I still don't understand why identifying as any gender you choose is encouraged, but identifying as any race you choose is forbidden. Makes zero sense. Like so much liberal nonsense.

Academics have addressed this question. The gist of the argument I've seen is that the effects of racial oppression are generational and cumulative in nature, and society's attempts to redress these wrongs (through affirmative action programs or reparations) are greatly harmed if the benefits of these programs are unjustly claimed by members of groups that were not subject to this oppression. The effects of gender oppression are not cumulative in the same way, the scope of ameliorative programs is narrower, and the risk of harm done to such programs by trans women seems very remote.
Personally I think this argument has some weak points, but it's not "liberal nonsense." The closest transgender parallel to the transracial stories of women like Rachel Dolezal, Jessica Krug, and Elizabeth Hoover passing as minorities (and reaping benefits) is probably trans women in women's sports. Even among those who would otherwise support the trans community, this is a contentious issue.