And what does that have to do with my question? You explained the reasoning you think is behind every discrimination against people trying to break societal norms. I brought you an example of discrimination against people trying to break societal norms that definitely doesn’t fit your definition. So that would, in theory, prove that such discrimination is not based on what you think it is (or at least, not entirely). If you still think that type of discrimination against males is misogyny you should refute that part of my argument. I never said TERFs rule society, but if they discriminate against males on the basis of something different than what you said, why is it so unthinkable that the ruling class might think in a similar way?
Just a rando passing by. I wanted to say I really appreciate you breaking this down. This type of head to head debating is what I was really hoping to find on Lemmy.
And what does that have to do with my question? You explained the reasoning you think is behind every discrimination against people trying to break societal norms. I brought you an example of discrimination against people trying to break societal norms that definitely doesn’t fit your definition. So that would, in theory, prove that such discrimination is not based on what you think it is (or at least, not entirely). If you still think that type of discrimination against males is misogyny you should refute that part of my argument. I never said TERFs rule society, but if they discriminate against males on the basis of something different than what you said, why is it so unthinkable that the ruling class might think in a similar way?
Just a rando passing by. I wanted to say I really appreciate you breaking this down. This type of head to head debating is what I was really hoping to find on Lemmy.