Another thought: sadly, I fear that at best this will come off as one of those “hate the sin, love the sinner” approaches. The argument will be made that even if this isn’t a “war on trans-identified PEOPLE,” it’s a war on trans identification, and that will be portrayed as just as bad.
But I just want to shake those people who insist “trans women are women” and ask them to define “women” and “trans” in a way that isn’t circular, or dependent on either gender stereotypes or on the binary nature of sex.
To paraphrase something someone else said: If a kid insists he is actually Spider-Man and you say he isn’t, you are not “erasing” him or denying his existence (much less issuing a death threat or committing “literal genocide”). You are simply stating a fact about reality.
But the hysteria I am seeing in my social circles online is unreal. I just wish I could have a rational discussion with these people. How can the term “transgender” even be meaningful or defined absent the reality of sex? Though I suppose even that could be twisted around: if sex isn’t a real thing, if male and female are not a true binary distinction, then there really wouldn’t be a difference between “trans” and “cis” people and I guess everyone would just be what they say they are at any given moment. (Which, to be clear, is absurd.)
Sorry, trans activists, but the winner of the 1976 men’s Olympic decathlon was not (and still isn’t) a woman, and the star of the movie Juno wasn’t (and still isn’t) a man. But they both still exist, as the unique humans they have always been.
And perhaps those "gender" celebrities could have had the option of a wellness program to recover from obsessive cross-sex ideation and rumination. The hormones and surgeries do not reconnect mind and body, but rather choreograph a social/political path, a religious cause, which is placebo effect and not addressing the problem. The shrinks simply got it wrong, all the way back to James/Jan Morris and Renee Richards. (the later confesses his regret in private now, he did so to a friend of mine at his Manhattan medical practice a decade ago)
Another thought: sadly, I fear that at best this will come off as one of those “hate the sin, love the sinner” approaches. The argument will be made that even if this isn’t a “war on trans-identified PEOPLE,” it’s a war on trans identification, and that will be portrayed as just as bad.
But I just want to shake those people who insist “trans women are women” and ask them to define “women” and “trans” in a way that isn’t circular, or dependent on either gender stereotypes or on the binary nature of sex.
To paraphrase something someone else said: If a kid insists he is actually Spider-Man and you say he isn’t, you are not “erasing” him or denying his existence (much less issuing a death threat or committing “literal genocide”). You are simply stating a fact about reality.
But the hysteria I am seeing in my social circles online is unreal. I just wish I could have a rational discussion with these people. How can the term “transgender” even be meaningful or defined absent the reality of sex? Though I suppose even that could be twisted around: if sex isn’t a real thing, if male and female are not a true binary distinction, then there really wouldn’t be a difference between “trans” and “cis” people and I guess everyone would just be what they say they are at any given moment. (Which, to be clear, is absurd.)
Sorry, trans activists, but the winner of the 1976 men’s Olympic decathlon was not (and still isn’t) a woman, and the star of the movie Juno wasn’t (and still isn’t) a man. But they both still exist, as the unique humans they have always been.
And perhaps those "gender" celebrities could have had the option of a wellness program to recover from obsessive cross-sex ideation and rumination. The hormones and surgeries do not reconnect mind and body, but rather choreograph a social/political path, a religious cause, which is placebo effect and not addressing the problem. The shrinks simply got it wrong, all the way back to James/Jan Morris and Renee Richards. (the later confesses his regret in private now, he did so to a friend of mine at his Manhattan medical practice a decade ago)