Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: fortes fortuna juvat; Jim Noble; Tax-chick
Thanks for stepping in, ffj .. had to run errands and just got back.

You clarified it quite well and, assuming those raising objections weren't just picking nits, that's precisely what my earlier post meant.

One is what one's birth gear says one is, and all the surgery and/or crossdressing in the world won't change that.

I could dye my skin black and wear my caps sideways, but underneath I'd still be a medium sized white boy who hates rap and can't play basketball worth a damn   ;-)

85 posted on 01/11/2019 7:43:02 AM PST by tomkat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies ]


To: tomkat; fortes fortuna juvat; Jim Noble; Tax-chick

Not picking nits, but making a point about using language with strict accuracy. Another example is using the word “sex,” not “gender,” to identify biological reproductive dimorphism.

An adult human is either a man or a woman. If Bruce Jenner is not a man, then Bruce Jenner is a woman. (Is Caitlin his legal name, or just his stage name?) I understand the point one is attempting to make by using the adjective, “male,” in place of the noun, “man,” but an adjective doesn’t fly on its own. “Male human” = “man.”

Given an inch on this is a philosophical and tactical mistake, in my opinion.


92 posted on 01/11/2019 8:03:40 AM PST by Tax-chick (What can I do to fight entropy today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson