comment: >
  
  
  but hundreds of thousands of trans people have transitioned inter the sexes, to use the Latin word for "between"
  
  So they had their chromosomes modified to change their biological sex?
  Im not being flip here, I'm legitimately asking if you believe that trans people are affecting their biological sex.
context: Feminism historically has been a movement about equality between sexes. It has accomplished many things that now benefit AFAB non-binary people. >
  
  But sex is not gender >
  
  My cat is not a human being, but he still benefits from accomplishments done in the name of human progress like central heating, access to clean drinking water, etc. >
  
  Gender benefit is not the same as gender equality. Gender equality is gender benefit until the genders are equal. >
  
  What specifically do you mean by:
  
  Gender equality is gender benefit until the genders are equal.
  
  What are concrete examples of what you're implying? >
  
  Protecting nonbinary people from 50% of gender based harassment benefits nonbinary people, but it does not make them equal. Nonbinary people are equal in terms of harassment when 100% of gender based harassment is removed. 
  Feminist action benefits nonbinary people in some incidental ways. But not enough to make them equal. >
  
  
  Protecting nonbinary people from 50% of gender based harassment benefits nonbinary people, but it does not make them equal.
  
  How so?
  How are non-binary people not made equal through laws that prohibit gender based discrimination?
  What are some specific examples of discrimination they would still face? >
  
  
  Feminism has zero interest in rendering women equal to the thousands of other genders, because this would be a reduction in women's rights. 
  
  This is wrong. "Rights" are not zero sum. Giving other people equal rights does not reduce your own, unless you view some aspect of your rights rooted in oppression and/or superiority. (While some individuals undoubtedly do, it's not a belief inherent to feminism or even commonly tied to it.)
  As for the rest, feminist goals are often beneficial to other genders on their own. I'll give a quick example and leave it at that:
  Feminism is concerned with the gender pay gap. The gender pay gap, in those industries where it exists, is often tied to the fact that women are socially pressured to take months or years off from their job to raise children. The solution to this is to remove that social pressure. Removing that social pressure means sharing the burden of childcare with men. Sharing the burden of childcare creates a new social norm that men spend more time with their children. Men spending more time with their children is... a regularly asserted goal on Men's Rights Activist forums?
  Gender equality for women means removing gendered expectations for both men and women and everyone else. >
  
  
  The solution to this is to remove that social pressure. Removing that social pressure means sharing the burden of childcare with men
  
  So, does she do the first 4.5 months of pregnancy, and he the last 4.5? Or the other way around? Oh, I got it- they alternate!  And he can get hormone shots so he can breast feed, too!
  Sorry. But despite the fact that men should perhaps be more involved with childcare, the simple fact is that only women get pregnant.  And only women can breast feed.  This means that she's out of the workforce for a significant time anyway. It only makes sense that she continue to care for the child after that as it gets older, too. 
  Now, with modern times comes modern solutions- with pumping and formula, it's not just the women that can care for a baby.  But these are not universally used. So, it's still mostly women who stay home to raise the children.  Thus, women (on average) have less seniority and less experience. And thus earn lower wages.  And that's before choice of job is looked at- as the (probable) primary care giver, the woman needs a job that is... less demanding, time-wise.  One she doesn't have to do a lot of OT, and has a flexible schedule so she can pick up little Billy from soccer. And so on.  These less demanding jobs... pay less.
  
  Gender equality for women means removing gendered expectations for both men and women and everyone else.
  
  And yet feminism always seem to point out that only a tiny percentage of CEOs are women... and never points out that only a tiny percentage of, say, coal miners are women.  They push for 'equality', where that means getting more rights. But never seem to mention taking on more responsibility.  And that why some people don't like feminism. >
  
  I agree with you. (I'm a woman btw). 
  Some strains of Feminism imo are so obsessed with equality that biological differences are wilfully ignored. 
  Anyway, this is a whole different topic to what OP is on about. Just wanted you to know that not all feminists are like that ^ >
  
  Look, I'm no feminist scholar or anything of the sort... but, even with my superficial understanding of feminism, it's pretty clear that it ain't a monolith. There's no feminist manifesto by which all card-carrying feminists must abide. It encompasses a broad range of socio-political ideologies that all fall under the umbrella of feminism. So, in conclusion, I simply don't understand how you are able to draw such a conclusion as yours about a movement that can't so easily be pigeon-holed. >
  
  I don't really agree with a lot of your core principles here but I think what's honestly most important is that feminism isn't a coherent movement and hasn't been for a very long time. It's more of a label that people apply to themselves for a whole manner of reasons and with a whole bunch of ideas of what feminism means. 
  ​
  If Theresa May (former British conservative prime minister), Serrin Foster (pro life campaigner), Muammar Gaddafi (former Libyan dictator known for sexually assaulting his all female bodyguard unit), Ruth Bader Ginsburg (former supreme court justice) and Gloria Steinem (American left wing activist) can all consider themselves feminists then the word as a whole means relatively little and is better spoken about with specific movements within feminism. >
  
  There's so much to unpack here. 
  First thing's first, "feminism" is different things to different people. One person's feminism is not the same as someone else's. Just as someone might call themselves a "leftist" and have very different views from another leftist. The basic premise of their leanings may have a similar grounding, but the specifics will vary. 
  With that being said, 
  
  Women are more privileged than thousands of other genders
  
  Many people will disagree with your premise that there are "thousands" of genders. 
  
  it is wrong to call feminism a gender equality movement. Feminism is a women's liberation movement
  
  The idea of Feminism came about when it was accepted that female = woman. To some, their feminism includes those who identify as women. To others it only includes females. 
  
  calling feminism a gender equality movement is harmful. It erases nonbinary identities. It would be true if there are two genders, and thus most people who say it are reinforcing the idea of there being two genders
  
  Would you prefer if those people called it a sex equality movement? >
  
  
  Many people will disagree with your premise that there are "thousands" of genders. 
  
  And I believe all of those people are fools or simply ignorant. There are tens of millions of nonbinary people. If one in ten thousand nonbinary people has a unique gender, there are thousands of genders. Many of the nonbinary people I have met had unique genders.
  
  The idea of Feminism came about when it was accepted that female = woman
  
  That is why I believe that feminism at its most base level, before any additional qualifiers are added, isn't helpful to nonbinaries.
  
  Would you prefer if those people called it a sex equality movement?
  
  No. There are many sexes. Equality between males and females would not result in equality for my sex. >
  
  
  Many of the nonbinary people I have met had unique genders.
  
  Many of the Non-binary people you have met identify as Non-binary/a unique gender. 
  If I identify as Griflorb gender, is that a gender identity, because I said it?
  
  before any additional qualifiers are added, is helpful to nonbinaries
  
  "Is" or "isn't", I'm trying to keep up with your point. 
  
  No. There are many sexes. Equality between males and females would not result in equality for my sex
  
  You do not have a sex other than male or female. If you tell me you have an intersex condition then that's a different conversation. >
  
  
  If I identify as Griflorb gender, is that a gender identity, because I said it?
  
  Yes
  
  "Is" or "isn't", I'm trying to keep up with your point. 
  
  Fixed
  
  You do not have a sex other than male or female. If you tell me you have an intersex condition then that's a different conversation.
  
  I have an intersex condition. I was born with mine, but hundreds of thousands of trans people have transitioned inter the sexes, to use the Latin word for "between"