View Single Post
  #32  
Old 05-10-2019, 08:42 AM
senoy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,830
This is also partially a Rachel Dolezal question. Why isn't Rachel Dolezal black? She said she's black, she ostensibly believed she was black, she acted in ways in which a black person would act, she changed her appearance cosmetically to appear to be black, she seems to say that she identified as black not out of some sort of choice, but rather as an expression of her 'true nature.' The bottom-line though is that Rachel Dolezal was not able to be black because she did not live the life of oppression and have the experience that was necessary to be considered black.

It's a similar argument from feminists over transgender rights. They certainly live a life with their own struggles, but they are not the same struggles that women have to go through. They can always choose to return to/pass as/whatever-you-want-to-call-it to their birth gender and escape the inherent oppression of being a woman. The fight that they have may sometimes intersect with the fight of biological women, but they are not the same and sometimes they are at odds, particularly when you start to get into the realm of 'self-identification.' If there is a scholarship for 'Women in Science' and someone who claims to be transgendered applies and is awarded this scholarship, is that really helping women? I think that many would argue it is not. If a company is found to be sexist in their hiring practices and has to hire more women, but hires biological males claiming to be transgendered women, are they now less sexist? Have opportunities actually been created for women? I think that's where a lot of the feminist concern comes from. It may or may not be ill-founded concern, but I think that it's legitimate concern.