Next time I think I'll go for my boxer analogy: "If I say that the best lightweight boxer in the world will never beat the best middleweight, have I insulted the lightweight boxers of the world? Of course not. It is ok and necessary to be aware of strength differences in sports categories."
A self-sabotaging analogy, I believe. If you sort boxers by tiers of physical capacity, why is it necessary to separate men and women?
(I will let people more knowledgeable on boxing talk about the veracity of this claim, but generally, I think it is never a bad idea to expect the assumption that size on its own is an insurmountable advantage is hyperbolic folly at best.)
A new memo seems to gone out from TRA HQ to all Dems and trans "allies" in the USA advising them to use this line of reasoning as a new ploy. Coz I've seen the same exact nonsense today on a sports forum where I post.
Because it’s not like people with similar believes could ever come to similar conclusions. Nor could ideas spread quickly organically in the age of the internet. No, obviously, your opponents must be nothing but brainwashed mindless pawns with no reasons for believing what they believe beyond being told to by a shadowy cabal of masters!
The new line of reasoning they're using seems to be based on the assumption that there's something weak, deficient and shameful about being the member of a group that benefits from laws and policies that provide protections against
By their logic, all Americans should be embarrassed by the protections provided by the First Amendment, by the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and by the Environmental Protection Agency - coz they show us to be creatures who are weak and vulnerable. By their reasoning, laws that provide workplace protections mean everyone who works for a living, or has ever applied for a job, is weak and vulnerable; and wearing protective personal equipment or using a seatbelt is a sign of weakness and helplessnessness too. Having a homeowner's protection policy or product warranty means you're weak and helpless. And so on...
…okay, this misses the point so badly one really has to ask whether you are dishonest or really that stupid.
Surely, as an “enlightened” “radical” “feminist”, you are keenly aware and vigilant over the fact that one of the core rationalisations of patriarchy, the big thing that causes otherwise good men to oppress the women they love and women to accept and perpetuate their own oppression, is the idea that all these constraints and restrictions are for women’s own protection?