You are reading a single comment by @ffm and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
London Fixed Gear and Single-Speed is a community of predominantly fixed gear and single-speed cyclists in and around London, UK.
This site is supported almost exclusively by donations. Please consider donating a small amount regularly.
@ffm
I'd agree, but "treated the same" how? Trans rights activists would argue that everyone should be treated the same in being able to be recognised as their self-perceived gender; opponents would say that they want everyone to be treated the same by being recognised only as their "chromosomal" (?) gender. If you can't split them on that basis then you have to get down to the real nitty gritty of what each of those approaches would mean for society; what they would require us to actually do.
Again I'd agree, but who gets to decide whether the statement is of that type? Some people don't even buy into models of privilege and oppression so, as you say, you're not going to get everyone to agree.
You do notice in these debates that it often very quickly gets framed in terms of rights. You'll see the "[insert group here] rights are human rights!" banners and hashtags. On its own that's just another annoying, meaningless slogan. I can never work out how to parse that sentence to actually make it mean anything, but the reason that it is couched in terms of rights is because something being a right is the ultimate legal trump card. Once something is established as a right, then the law and the government have to protect it and nothing can supercede it. By claiming something as a right you are effectively short-circuiting the public debate by getting directly to what we should actually do i.e., we (the law and government) must protect it. What's being skipped over is the discussion of what our rights should be and what new rights can be established (and/or old ones removed) to improve things for a specific group or just generally.