Edit for context:
My view is transracial isn’t valid and this person is trying to dogwhistle. I’ve already blocked this person, and now they’re going after my friend saying my friend is transphobic because they disagreed with them about transracial being a thing (they’re purposefully leaving the context out so my friend looks transphobic when what my friend really said was transgender is valid but transracial isn’t)
race doesn’t work that way though, does it? it’s impossible for Black people to not pass as Black because it’s been proven they experience racism based on an immutable characteristic.
gender identity isn’t based on appearance, race is strictly appearance based. the fact you’re bringing self-identification into this makes it sound like you’re arguing in bad faith and trying to diminish Black people’s experiences.
PS: using ciswomen and transwomen makes you sound like a TERF.
What would be a correct way to distinguish between the two?
“Woman” seems like it works refer to both, to be used in the majority of cases when the distinction is irrelevant.
I don’t want to say “natural” women, or “real” women, as even someone as thick as me can see that’s insulting.
It seems that using the prefix for both makes them equal.
What do you think world be more appropriate?
But they would suggest that as soon as we discover a way to change that characteristic, transrace world be valid.
Further, while gender identity may not be based on appearance, the way one is treated is very much based on appearance. If I look male, I get treated as male. If I look female, I get treated as female. If I look like one, but insist I am the other, people tend to have disagreements between their deliberate and automatic behaviors. (Well, the same people do, anyway.)
I can’t think of a good way to prove it, but I am legitimately curious about this topic. I’m never happy with the answer “because this one is right, and that one is wrong.” There needs to be reasons why.