Tomas Bogardus & Holly Lawford-Smith | Response to 'Being Transgender in a Cisgender World'
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 05. 2024
- Tomas & Holly meet in Malibu and respond to a recent interview of Sophie Grace Chappell by Jason Chen, about Sophie's new book 'Trans Figured' and related views about sex and gender.
The original interview is here:
• Being Transgender in a...
Holly talks in the video about property cluster views of sex giving asymmetric verdicts between trans men and transwomen. Here are two essays about this (the first is shorter):
www.thearticle.com/is-it-poss...
hollylawford-smith.org/is-it-...
And here's a link to Tomas's paper about the difference between identifying as something and being something:
philpapers.org/rec/BOGWTT
He's also done some great video debates and discussions which you can find by searching his name here, but this one is my favourite:
• Is Sex Binary or is it...
Can I point out - the word ‘cis’ is totally inappropriate, offensive and silly.
Wow, Matt Walsh really gets around! 😂
Why are you writing "trans men" but "transwomen"'? Is their validity different iyo?
Love you, Holly! You are my favorite TERFILF!
The same Gov cited in the UK is the same Govt that over the last 14yrs brought in/ allowed the trans rights and policy changes in favour of trans people.
Thanks guys -- that was fun!
loved this! its always great to see content from you, and from tomas as well. its a perspective on the topic that gets too little attention in my opinion, and you two work really well together. i would love to see more, the ending was hilarious!
Well, that was a wild ride. Always a pleasure to hear or read Prof. Bogardus's analyses.
😊 My two favourite philosophers. ❤
The necessary and sufficient conditions of a concept are going to depend on the concept's use. Some concepts centre on some essential quality, whilst others, on some Wittgensteinian cluster of qualities. The concept 'sex' only occured to us once we noticed that there is some variation with the way living things reproduce. That is, 'sex' is about the mode by which an organism is able to reproduce sexually, and it happens to be that we have observed a 'female' and 'male' mode. The secondary qualities which either of these modes typically display - gonads, mammary glands, bone structure, etc- are incidental, and are not necessary and sufficient indicators of being either female or male. So yes, it is the gamete or apparatus view of 'sex' is the more rigorous version of the concept, as opposed to the cluster version. The "thing-in-itself" that 'sex' refers to, however, is irrelevant, insofar that we only know of "things-in-themselves" in virtue of our use of concepts. So, sex is only immutable because that's how the concept functions (and rightly so), not because that's how the "thing-in-itself" functions. We could have decided that 'sex' refers to the difference between females and females, but where change in secondary sex characteristics can change an organism's sex. Indeed, the "things-in-themselves" (organisms with a sex)
Regarding "Being Anti-Theory'
Cool conversation. I could've listened to another 5 hours of you two chatting, listening & thinking
"Professor Holly Lawford-Smith was found stabbed to death this morning near the office of Professor Thomas Bogardus. Police say they have no theories about the cause of death, the weapon used, the identity of the killer or his motive, as they're fundamentally anti-theory."
Philosophers, great. I've been trying to find an answer to a question.
Stop using cisgender it is a ridiculous word.
Regarding employing the term "Holly": This always feels like a Gettier-style problem, as though the trans side of the discussion has very different intuitions about knowledge & belief with respect to illusions (or other perceptual confounders). On their view, to have a justified belief that S is Holly materially implies that it is true that S is Holly.
The UK is the most tolerant kind place. But we don’t like liars. And this ideology is all about lies, so why should we feel sorry for them, and why should we keep silent and not call out the lies? The only response the ideology has is to try and bully and attack. Disgraceful. No facts, no science. Just dreadful behaviour from the trans community.
I think one reason people fall back on the psychologisation tactic because it's rhetorically effective.
transwomen are not women. they are men pretending to be women.
Sigh...another dude getting his r*