"..as Richard Dawkins and others have asked, if sex, which is biologically determined and binary, is really a matter of self-identification, then why isn’t race, which is also biologically determined but much less binary, also a matter of self-identification? If I identify as black, why aren’t I really black? Why aren’t you “transracialphobic” if you don’t accept my transracial claim as literally true? People excoriated Rachel Dolezal, a white woman in the U.S. who had long been a campaigner for civil rights and had consistently claimed to be black and to have a “lived experience” of being black. Why was she excoriated?

The usual response is to say that white people cannot know the oppression of black people. I completely understand that. Indeed, I agree with it. In a racist society, it is simply not possible for a member of the racially favored group to understand the lived experience of a member of the racially oppressed group. But then, how can, say, a male—a member of the patriarchy—understand the lived experience of a woman as a member of the group oppressed on the basis of sex?

Another response is to say that there is an innate sense of gender and there is no innate sense of race. Who says? Once we say that a biological male can have the spirit or soul or innate feeling or whatever of being a woman, and that makes the male a woman, what possible argument can be made that a white person (and keep in mind that race is less binary than sex and it is very possible for a white person to have black ancestry) cannot have the soul or spirit or innate feeling of being black? Or of being a different nationality? Some who embrace RCTA (“race change to another”) maintain that those of us who are not, say, Korean can identify as Korean. Indeed, internet personality Oli London is a white British man who had a number of surgeries and announced his identity as a Korean woman. He is now detransitioning back to being a British man."

Tīri labs un izvērsts raksts, iesaku https://www.philosophersmag.com/essays/321-the-transgender-rights-issue

Nesen arī lasīju par prāvu, kur viens amer.policists vērsies tiesā, jo, stājoties darbā un aizpildot formu, nav norādījis savu īsto rasi (jo tādas tolaik formā neesot bijis), bet šīs izmaiņas veikt viņam ir liegts. Taču nomainīt info, lai būtu sieviete, viņš var droši.

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2024/02/29/chicago-cop-citing-gender-precedent-and-seeking-affirmative-action-benefits-wants-to-change-race-from-caucasian-to-person-of-color/

------

p.s. Var iebilst, ka pirmajā rindkopā, kur runāts par identificēšanos minēts sex, kur vajadzētu būt gender, bet trešā rindkopa visu paskaidro. Dzimte ir kā mākslīgs un mainīgs papildinājums dzimumam, kas atdalījies un it kā sācis pats savu dzīvi, bet tomēr nepārtraukti arī izliekas par dzimumu tad, kad tas ir ērti. Dzimums ir vienīgā statiskā, nemainīgā vienība (stereotipi, t.i. dzimte, relatīvi īsā laika gaitā var mainīties, bet dzimumi ir sena evolucionāra stratēğija.) Sievietes ķermenis un jebkāda personība, nevis jebkāds ķermenis un "sievietes personība".

Joprojām šad tad domāju par to kā Judins un Jonīte pie Dombura apgalvoja, ka šī ir viena un tā pati definīcija: