it’s not a coincidence that it is female bodies, and not male bodies, that are objectified in the semantics of debate. women are or are not defined by a vagina, by a uterus, by a pair of tits.
it’s not a coincidence that you see the phrases “reduced to” and “nothing but” next to disembodied vulvas, vaginas, and breasts.
in this discussion, male bodies are respected enough to remain whole and human – there is no repetition ad nauseam of, “men are more than just a dick and a set of balls!” what is not said speaks as loudly as what is said.
it’s not a coincidence that men retain the privilege of bodily integrity, both figurative and in the real world, while women everywhere are treated as things, “reduced to” and “nothing [but].”
this is very true, people are offended by the idea that woman = biologically female person because they believe that being female and having female body parts in itself is degrading and it’s therefore degrading to define women by our femaleness. the same people would still disagree with defining men as biological males, but it would never occur to them to say “so you think men are just walking penises?” because being male and having a penis is not considered degrading or something that lessens your personhood.
