C

That text post that's been making the rounds that goes something like "Omg you made it to the same red light as everyone else but faster and more dangerously and recklessly, should we call nascar? Do you want a medal?" summarizes exactly what I'm trying to talk about.

It's like when I have to change buses at one of the bigger and busier bus stops, and the people who get off the same bus as me shove and elbow past me to get off before me, and then shove and elbow past anyone even slightly in their way on the way to the bus they're switching, only to end up on the same bus as all the people they shoved and elbowed with several minutes to spare before it leaves and plenty of open seats left.

I think this unnecessary urgency a lot of people feel in their day to day lives drives a lot of bad behavior. I'm not saying I'm innocent of this, I've felt it too in plenty of situations that didn't call for it, and regrettably was less kind than I should have been as a result. But I try to be aware of it, and always try to ask myself it it's really as urgent as my lizard brain is trying to tell me it is, and even if it was that urgent, does that still justify unkind behavior?

Is shoving or elbowing another person aside going to make the difference between whether or not you make it to the bus before it pulls away? (hint: at least where I live, most of the time that's a no because the drivers usually won't leave if they see people from another bus heading towards their bus). Is shoving and elbowing people aside in a crowded grocery store going to make any noticeable difference in how quickly you get your shopping done?

That fully rewired my brain.

Sexual reproduction is the historical nucleus for patriarchy and sex-gender, but it is not the sole source. After all, women who can't or don't bear children are not spared from misogyny. Children are subject to sex-gender assignment and its associated social conditioning long before they achieve sexual maturity. It is insufficient to understand patriarchy as merely resulting from reproductive capacity. The gendered division of labor has material benefits for men and for the bourgeoisie as well. Unpaid domestic labor within heterosexual relationships is a material benefit. Patriarchal control of household assets and income is a material benefit. Employers benefit from underpaying employees. And on that note, despite not being capable of pregnancy in the first place, trans women are paid less than cis women:

If reproductive capacity were the sole basis for misogyny, then transmisogyny wouldn't be a thing. Rather, there is not only a dialectical relationship between sex-gender and biology, but between sex-gender and capitalist property relations more broadly. And as we've seen in the last couple centuries, increased economic equality has routinely correlated with increased gender equality, something that would be impossible were patriarchy and misogyny based solely in reproductive capacity.

I have had a much more in-depth conversation on the topic of biological essentialism which you can find here (warning, it's long):

An Iranian motorist rides his motorbike past a mural depicting a scene from the torture of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. personnel at the Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad, on a major highway in the Iranian capital Tehran, June 1, 2004.

*looks inside*