Yeah… this is just vile.

A finite definition of feminism isn't really relevant to this point (I didn't use one in my first comment). The question you asked wasn't about what people believe about women and whether it counted as feminists.

I think it is a bit of a meaningless question. The label "feminism"doesn't necessarily mean anything about a person's view on how women should be understood and treated (well, beyond them, a woman, not being understood as a "feminist" ).

The issue is not so much unrealistic expectations about love (all sorts of people find love all the time, and have all sorts of experiences, sometimes even bordering on the unrealistic ones in the media, even it it is only for a few moments), but rather the particularly vile expectation being "nice" will make someone…

The distinction people are drawing here is to avoid equivocating the value of sex with rape.

I'm actually telling you what is true of the world and logic and it is important to recognise this. (I should ad that feelings are part of this: there is no subjective/objective split: feelings are objective states of the world too and the have an objective relation to everything else which happens in the world).

No… I'm pointing out how you have no idea what you are talking about, that you are misusing the notion of empirical observation to assert something is illegitimate on ethical grounds. (in short: you do not know how to practice science or what empirical observation of the world means , with respect to the subject we…

I should add this is one of the few times doctor unknown is making a mistake on these sort of issues. So eager to present "scientific proof" to oppose the sort of nonsense opposition you are giving here, doctor unknown has missed that we already have that "proof (i.e. the existence of trans people)" and is actually…

No, I'm describing what you said and how it is, with respect to the empirical proof of the existence of trans people, irrelevant. What you argument is doing is treating trans entity as if it is a "delusion" unless it has some specific biological cause we can identify.

Of course… it is a term referring to how your argument is logically bankrupt because you are demanding something (one known specific cause in the body) which is to required for the given empirical proof of the presence of trans people.

Nope… and this isn't even a matter of the logical distinctions of a person in relationship to culture that are frequently and erroneously dismissed as irrelevant to science (when in fact they are quite imprint to describing the state of society).

I should also add that not everyone choses, wants to or can transition at all. Some trans* people just don't have have dysphoria about their body. Some trans* people have medical issues which prevents the use of hormone therapy.

Actually, it is you who does not know what constitutes empirical proof. All it takes for empirical proof of a trans person is the presence of person who's body generates the sense should have difference sexual physiology and/or sex and gender categorisation. We have this. We know these people exist. It has been shown.

Well… of course… that would be a requirement of understanding something. If someone is describing something, the are always reifying it in terms of how they understand the issue (i.e. presenting their conceptual abstraction, their understanding, of a state of the world or logical distinction as it is present in…

Bodies are easily measurable. We can look at at body and note what shape it is, what it does, etc.,etc.

As I went into at greater length with Hans Richter, there is really no difference at the level we are talking about. Neither trans identity nor BIID are a problem because someone happens to exist with a feeling there body ought to be different. People aren't "wrong" or "mistaken" for existing with such feelings.…

I actually left out a distinction because there isn't really a meaningful difference at the level we are talking about. BIID is considered a "condition" in that manner because we have a problem with the consequences of respecting it (i.e. we don't want to accept the idea someone ought to have less limbs).

Yeah… that just silly because gender identify is a concept. What gender someone belongs to is an idea, an understanding of what category someone belongs to. It is not an observable state of the body. It is a state of understanding people use and feel. It is not defined on the basis of a state of the world.

“There are people who experience BodyIntegrity Idenity disorder, they believe they should not have all of their limbs that they were born with. This is a medically documented

Just a warning about Butler: her writing is tortuously convoluted and obscure. And she can get rather obsessed with the language, notions of identification another relationship to power. Butler can also be somewhat weak when discussing practical activism.