THREAD (1/6):

Consider four positions:
1) marriage = man + woman
2) #1 plus forced gay marriage (TERF)
3) #1 plus forced transgender inclusion
4) all of the above
Which makes most sense *logically*?

2/6. First, the TERFs argue for #2, but not #3 or #4. Logically, transgenderism is anti-feminist. It is mutually exclusive with transgenderism. Indeed, transgenderism is often implicitly transphobic. https://twitter.com/alessabocchi/status/1271714434759692290?s=19">https://twitter.com/alessaboc...

3/6. However, as this thread demonstrates, the TERF position leads to #4. In short, TERFs do not hold logically consistent position. https://twitter.com/ThyRamMan/status/1272636299300741126?s=19">https://twitter.com/ThyRamMan...

4/6. The problem with #3 is that transgenderism insists not merely that people *feel* they have a different gender, but that sex is non-biological/mutable or that chosen gender should be used in place of sex. These are not logical (e.g. transgender women playing women& #39;s sports).

5/6. Since #2 and #3 are mutually exclusive, #4 is an illogical position to hold (though this is the position the law now holds). Since #2 and #3 are both illogical positions, that leaves #1 remaining.

6/6. Traditional marriage is exclusionary, but logical. It is the only such option. Promotion of the others leads to logical contradiction. This is why reformers are unhappy when reforms don& #39;t stop and then conflict with their preferred identity. https://twitter.com/ThyRamMan/status/1273661932671766528?s=19">https://twitter.com/ThyRamMan...

Correction in 2/6, "transphobic" should be "homophobic".