PhilArchive
open access
Reading trouble? On a rejected alternative to Kathleen Stock’s immersion-in-a-fiction explanation
This paper responds to Kathleen Stock’s attempt to explain a puzzling fact, at least from her standpoint: widespread assertions that some people who are biologically male are women and some people who are biologically female are men. She regards these assertions as made while immersed in a fiction. Stock rejects an alternative explanation – that a lot of these people have read Judith Butler or 1970s feminism. Clarifying that explanation reveals it to be not so easy to dismiss.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- No brilliant friend? Literary acknowledgement between the sexes#84017
- Book Review: Novalis, _À la fin tout devient poésie_#95769
- Spitting Out the Kool-Aid: A Review of Kate Manne’s _Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny_#731423
- Those around the Corner: Sexual Difference and the Cartography of ReXistence#109775
- Familiar Studies of Men and Books#315
Record · ID 726363
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive