This person claims both a different gender identity than assigned at birth and a different racial identity. One of those things will win you praise and the other will get you cancelled. Doesn't make much sense.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/17/us/wisconsin-grad-student-race-trnd/index.html
This person claims both a different gender identity than assigned at birth and a different racial identity. One of those things will win you praise and the other will get you cancelled. Doesn't make much sense.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/17/us/wisconsin-grad-student-race-trnd/index.html
Your late to the convo
You're*
This person claims both a different gender identity than assigned at birth and a different racial identity. One of those things will win you praise and the other will get you cancelled. Doesn't make much sense.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/17/us/wisconsin-grad-student-race-trnd/index.html
Your late to the convo
This person claims both a different gender identity than assigned at birth and a different racial identity. One of those things will win you praise and the other will get you cancelled. Doesn't make much sense.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/17/us/wisconsin-grad-student-race-trnd/index.html
Did OP miss SOC 101? No one is ‘born’ with a gender.
This person claims both a different gender identity than assigned at birth and a different racial identity. One of those things will win you praise and the other will get you cancelled. Doesn't make much sense.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/17/us/wisconsin-grad-student-race-trnd/index.html
Did OP miss SOC 101? No one is �born� with a gender.
Looks to me like OP understands the concept. And the question is valid. No one can give a cogent answer as to why we support gender fluidity but not racial fluidity.
This is apples and oranges.
Neither of these people are claiming to be transracial or race-fluid.
The woman at GW and the person at Madison (who lost a TA position) have BOTH SAID that they misled people about their racial identities.
yeah, there's a lot of research on racial fluidity among multi-racial people, how their sense of identity changes depending upon their social context.
This isn't one of those situations. These are people just straight up making stuff up, dying their hair, etc.
This is apples and oranges.
Neither of these people are claiming to be transracial or race-fluid.
The woman at GW and the person at Madison (who lost a TA position) have BOTH SAID that they misled people about their racial identities.
The fact that these two subjects are essentialist doesn’t mean that we need to accept their assumptions when analyzing their cases. The fact is that they were indeed transracial, and successfully pulled it off until they decided to stop.
Not sure what your apples and oranges cliche applies to. Try to be more articulate.
These are people just straight up making stuff up, dying their hair, etc.
Kind of like how transgender people try to pass by manipulating their appearance, eh?
I guess, IDK. I don't really care that much. let people be transgender or transracial or whatever. its a big yawn from me on this issue.
my point is only that there is a lot of research on "racial fluidity" from sociologists, which is something you'd think that people on a sociology board would know.
These are people just straight up making stuff up, dying their hair, etc.
Kind of like how transgender people try to pass by manipulating their appearance, eh?
I guess, IDK. I don't really care that much. let people be transgender or transracial or whatever. its a big yawn from me on this issue.
my point is only that there is a lot of research on "racial fluidity" from sociologists, which is something you'd think that people on a sociology board would know.
Why do you assume we don’t know about it? Get over yourself.
These are people just straight up making stuff up, dying their hair, etc.
Kind of like how transgender people try to pass by manipulating their appearance, eh?
I guess, IDK. I don't really care that much. let people be transgender or transracial or whatever. its a big yawn from me on this issue.
my point is only that there is a lot of research on "racial fluidity" from sociologists, which is something you'd think that people on a sociology board would know.
Why do you assume we don�t know about it? Get over yourself.
literally never been brought up in all the threads on this topic.
Also, someone said earlier "we are against racial fluidity". that's not the sense I get from people who study it. Most seem interested in understanding it, not really critiquing it or saying it isnt' legit.
Once again, for the reasons that I pointed out, neither one of them was transracial.
They said that they weren't and (for the slow people who only see the picture once the flash is on) neither had trans experiences.
This is apples and oranges.
Neither of these people are claiming to be transracial or race-fluid.
The woman at GW and the person at Madison (who lost a TA position) have BOTH SAID that they misled people about their racial identities.
The fact that these two subjects are essentialist doesn�t mean that we need to accept their assumptions when analyzing their cases. The fact is that they were indeed transracial, and successfully pulled it off until they decided to stop.
Not sure what your apples and oranges cliche applies to. Try to be more articulate.
Once again, for the reasons that I pointed out, neither one of them was transracial.
They said that they weren't and (for the slow people who only see the picture once the flash is on) neither had trans experiences.
This is apples and oranges.
Neither of these people are claiming to be transracial or race-fluid.
The woman at GW and the person at Madison (who lost a TA position) have BOTH SAID that they misled people about their racial identities.
The fact that these two subjects are essentialist doesn?t mean that we need to accept their assumptions when analyzing their cases. The fact is that they were indeed transracial, and successfully pulled it off until they decided to stop.
Not sure what your apples and oranges cliche applies to. Try to be more articulate.
Your rationale for saying they're not trans is rooted in essentialism though. From a sociological perspective it makes no sense at all.
literally never been brought up in all the threads on this topic.
Also, someone said earlier "we are against racial fluidity". that's not the sense I get from people who study it. Most seem interested in understanding it, not really critiquing it or saying it isnt' legit.
Most of the soc research on racial fluidity is of very poor quality though. More significantly, studies of category shifting on the census tell us nothing about individual cases, nor about how people respond to them.
The question stands: Is there a cogent rationale for treating trans gender differently than trans race?
The question stands: Is there a cogent rationale for treating trans gender differently than trans race?
The obvious analogy is in the animal kingdom: many animals have ability to change sex under particular circumstances, while no animal has ability to change to another species of animal. The different races of humans are really different species regarding genetic, morphological, and behavioral differentiation.