Perhaps, if the theological conflict was between inclusivists and exclusionists, in circumstances where the exclusionists were saying that the inclusivists shouldn't exist.JimC wrote:Sorry, but this sort of gender argy-bargy seems to me like medieval theologians arguing about how many angels will fit on the end of a pin...
People like Linehan and Rowling not only provide moral cover for the violent and nasty, but they perpetuate the narrative that the existence of the people on the recieving end of the violent and the nasty justify the abuse they endure by being unnatural and wrong. Objecting to, pushing back against, or resisting the view that your existence is illegitimate identifies one's unnatural wrongness and is usually taken as further justification for abuse - similar to the charges that we were intolerant, strident, radical, fundamentals and Marxists when we objected to, pushed back against, or resisted the view that our atheism was immoral, threatening, socially divisive or dangerous, or otherwise illegitimate.Many more serious issues than some academics expressing views about gender; the actual real oppression of non-hetero people all over the world, frequently violent and nasty...