Response to @TheRightColumn’s thread

Thread unroll: https://twitter-thread.com/t/1640837014265163777 (archived version)

Summary

In short, @TheRightColumn’s argument rests on the presupposition that the only definitions that are valid are essentialist ones¹. This is short-sighted² when it comes to discussing sociological issues like the nature of the class of people we call ‘women’: the definition is a fluid culturally-constructed amalgamation of traits and characteristics of which none are essential. Essentialist thinking lies at the core of many reductive, discriminatory and extremist ideologies, and is correlated with racial prejudice³.

@TheRightColumn then brazenly characterizes criticism of these misunderstandings as accusations and dodges⁴, without realizing that their whole argument relying on essentialism is a direct and valid criticism of the underpinning presupposition.

Extended response

@TheRightColumn claims that users of @WhatIsAWomanBot are flailing at the question “What is a woman?” and hiding behind the bot. The bot’s purpose is to provide a robust and thorough response to the question and the context behind asking the question. This has nothing to do with the user’s ability to answer the question themselves, which is part of the childish goading (“You’re not answering because you can’t!”) that is touched upon in the response. Because this question is so often asked in good faith, it makes sense to automate it.

@TheRightColumn then goes on to explain how categories work and pre-supposes that “woman” is an expression of a “physical, biological reality” (something the bot explicitly challenges, and that has only really come into the fore since the 18th century⁵⁶) He argues that because one such definition of trans women “anyone who identifies as a woman” is circular, the logic behind a cohesive definition of trans women is invalid⁷. This subtly invokes the nature of essentialism, which is the belief that all “things” including human-made categories such as male and female, must inherently have some set of properties or characteristics that in and of themselves make that thing a member of that category, without which they are not a member of that category. As explained more in the definition of social construct, social constructs generate their meaning through social and cultural worldviews - this directly means that the definition of women (a social construct) is not dictated by any one person or any one definition, but by the collective understanding of the traits and characteristics that women have. It is also worth noting that the definitions of social constructs change over time and vary by culture.

@TheRightColumn then goes on to state that @WhatIsAWomanBot argues that there is no such thing as female⁸. It is the same argument - by pointing to the dictionary definitions of male and female as “having a gender identity that is the opposite of other gender identity” he claims that it has no inherent meaning⁹. This is incorrect for the same reasons above. The definition of the male and female gender identity is socially constructed and not objectively measurable—just like race (n.b. this does not mean it isn’t real.)

@WhatIsAWomanBot claims there isn’t a definitive answer to the question asking it to “List the specific traits that make a gender identity uniquely female, and the different specific traits that make a gender identity uniquely male.” @TheRightColumn takes this to mean that this means “there is no answer to how males and females differ.”¹⁰ Again, this is pre-supposing an essentialist definition of male and female.

@TheRightColumn then makes a critical misunderstanding of @WhatIsAWomanBot’s explanation of gender. Gender is a larger concept that encompasses roles, behaviors, activities and attributes—gender identity is the internal representation of one’s place in relation to gender. @TheRightColumn says, “the idea that men & women are just social roles is nonsense” when referring to gender as a broader, society-wide concept, but then claims @WhatIsAWomanBot denies the existence of those roles as it explains that gender identity (not gender as a whole) is based only on the person who has that gender identity¹¹.

---