Even from a categorical standpoint I don’t see how the distinction matters. Like, if the categories were “can give birth” and “can’t/won’t give birth” that’s one thing because the “can’t/won’t” category would include trans and cis women but having the categories be “trans women” and “women who can give birth” feels very gender essentialism to me. By that logic we should also have a separate category for cis women that can’t/won’t give birth but then at that point why even differentiate based on whether they’re trans or cis at all?
I mean, I’m happy for you and your partner I suppose, but like you’re creating an unnecessary and arbitrary divide between cis and trans women for no real reason. Plenty of trans women can and do have biological children, so if it’s an issue of being able to have kids at all (which it seems to be going off of your other comments) their ability to give birth doesn’t really matter. The only time it would matter is if a trans woman and a cis man wanted a child but even then there’s ways around that, albeit in slightly more complicated ways. And also, you’re not receiving negative feedback due to a lack of “enthusiastic praise for trans positivity”, your getting negative feedback because you came onto a trans sub to proclaim your opinion that trans women are “categorically different” than cis women and are treating it like a fact when it simply isn’t
Is it? Where does being able to give birth matter when it comes to the social construct of a woman? There are men, specifically trans men, who can give birth. Conflating the ability to give birth being inherently a feature of a woman is trans masc erasure.
I assume the comparison with diamonds has something to do with relationships, engagements, marriage, and the like. Being able to give birth is important if your marriage goal is to raise a family.
Of course it could be referring to the other major use for diamonds which is in industrial abrasives and cutting tools. In that case, maybe you value women for their abrasiveness!
Removed by mod
Not all cis women have the ability to give birth tho, and even if they did, not all cis women want to give birth. How is that meaningfully different?
Removed by mod
Even from a categorical standpoint I don’t see how the distinction matters. Like, if the categories were “can give birth” and “can’t/won’t give birth” that’s one thing because the “can’t/won’t” category would include trans and cis women but having the categories be “trans women” and “women who can give birth” feels very gender essentialism to me. By that logic we should also have a separate category for cis women that can’t/won’t give birth but then at that point why even differentiate based on whether they’re trans or cis at all?
Removed by mod
I mean, I’m happy for you and your partner I suppose, but like you’re creating an unnecessary and arbitrary divide between cis and trans women for no real reason. Plenty of trans women can and do have biological children, so if it’s an issue of being able to have kids at all (which it seems to be going off of your other comments) their ability to give birth doesn’t really matter. The only time it would matter is if a trans woman and a cis man wanted a child but even then there’s ways around that, albeit in slightly more complicated ways. And also, you’re not receiving negative feedback due to a lack of “enthusiastic praise for trans positivity”, your getting negative feedback because you came onto a trans sub to proclaim your opinion that trans women are “categorically different” than cis women and are treating it like a fact when it simply isn’t
Is it? Where does being able to give birth matter when it comes to the social construct of a woman? There are men, specifically trans men, who can give birth. Conflating the ability to give birth being inherently a feature of a woman is trans masc erasure.
I assume the comparison with diamonds has something to do with relationships, engagements, marriage, and the like. Being able to give birth is important if your marriage goal is to raise a family.
Of course it could be referring to the other major use for diamonds which is in industrial abrasives and cutting tools. In that case, maybe you value women for their abrasiveness!
Are you? Sorry, your volunteering of this plus your instance makes me doubt.
Removed by mod
Is it? I’m a cis woman who paid good money not to be able to give birth.
(Edit: technically I can still give birth I guess, just made sure it won’t happen without a lot of pre-work in a lab.
did they ask you to hand over your woman card?
Same boat (other aisle) for me! The fact that some people are… pre-disposed to this is–at the very least–meaningful.
Pre-disposed like the 1.6 million cis girls born without a womb every year?
@ThunderQueen @Zoomboingding There are 8 billion people in the world and half of them are women 🤦♂️
…yes and 1 in 5000 are born wthout wombs
edit: ah i did miscalculate then. I forget about men all the time. I suppose it would be closer to 800,000. Every year. As a very rough estimate…