News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The moral case against equity language by dragonwriter on Friday March 03, 2023 @01:58AM (#35006647)
Like a “race”, a “gender” is a social grouping of either identity or ascribed membership that is distinguished by being viewed as being exclusive with (though, in some models, admitting mixtures as their own unique possibilities), others in the same named group.
Re:The moral case against equity language by catiopatio on Friday March 03, 2023 @09:20AM (#35009941)
By that definition, isn’t “emo” — or literally any other social category — a gender?

Do you believe that segregated services — sports, bathrooms, locker rooms, etc — were intended to be segregated by gender, as opposed to sex?

Re:The moral case against equity language by dragonwriter on Friday March 03, 2023 @11:58AM (#35012145)
> By that definition, isn’t “emo” — or literally any other social category — a gender

No, “emo” is a social category that is not exclusive with genders, its in a different bucket.

But, yes, the distinction of social categories into groups like “gender”, “race”, etc., is, like the categories themselves, fundamentally an arbitrary social construct.

> Do you believe that segregated services — sports, bathrooms, locker rooms, etc — were intended to be segregated by gender, as opposed to sex?

Binary “sex” is just ascribed gender on the basis of a subset of sex traits. To the extent there is a valid basis for segregating services, it varies from service to service. Similarly, the motivations vary from service to service (and, generally differ from the legitimate justifications, if any.)