Livre d'Or

Thank you, this is a really pertinent and cogent argument. I'm generally on the side of more representation anyway, so I'm already sympathetic towards your side of the argument. And the fact that some of the people who agree with you on this issue are a bit militant doesn't really detract from that.

I don't think political or not political falls into two clearly defined sets, though. There's a continuum between things like race, which is almost entirely political (although there are certainly some physiological and medical implications), and things like, oh, acute, treatable injury or infection which are almost purely medical (although I wouldn't want to deny any relevance at all for politics and identity). This issue is somewhere in between, and I think there's a legitimate debate about which aspect is more important.

I think there's also a question of tactics. There are some kinds of political change you can really only achieve by defining an Identity, and shouting about it loudly and marching in the streets and yes, demanding more representation. However, doing that has downsides as well; I wonder if it's possible to reach a point where the original political goals have been sufficiently achieved that the harm of strident Identity politics starts to outweigh the benefits. I mean, in many ways the goal of the political campaign in the first place is that the identity shouldn't make an important difference, right?