Men cannot simply decide they are women. This is a basic truth that conservatives should not deny for fear of social strife.

Federalist
David Marcus

A thoughtful and important, although wildly wrongheaded, article appeared in National Review Online this week, urging conservatives to compromise on the transgender issue. Author J.J. McCullough and National Review are to be commended for running the article. Not only is it a testament to ideological diversity, it’s an important conversation that we need to have.

That said, the conservative shift on the definition of gender the author suggests is not a compromise, it’s surrender. Moreover, it’s a surrender that is not justified.

Two arguments stand out and require serious scrutiny. The author refers to transgenderism first as “a persistent aspect of humanity,” then again as “an inescapable human phenomenon.” These phrases are used to draw a comparison between transgenderism and homosexuality, the central analogy of the article. The idea is that, just as conservatives lost the battle over gay marriage, they are destined to lose the battle over transgenderism. The suggestion is that we should somehow get in front of this inevitable defeat.

There is no doubt that homosexuality is a persistent aspect of humanity and an inescapable human phenomenon. But the evidence that this is also true of transgenderism is a fantasy. There are thousands of years of cultural reference to homosexuality — some in favor, more against. But we see it everywhere in our history. This is simply not true of the notion that a man can choose to actually be a woman, or the reverse. In fact, that notion is a recent development.

Cross-dressing does have a storied literary history and is an old practice. But transgenderism is essentially different from cross-dressing in that the latter does not pretend to change the basic biological reality underlying gender. McCullough offers no evidence that a thousand, a hundred, or even 30 years ago a significant number of people born as men actually asserted that they were literally women. This is new, and we are under no obligation to treat it as scientific truth, especially because biological science does not bear it out.

2 Plus 2 isn’t 5

The compromise McCullough imagines goes a good deal farther than using preferred pronouns. McCullough is demanding we stipulate that men can actually become women. We are meant to accept this absurd and fantastical claim because if we don’t there will be social strife.

Well, some things are worth a little social strife. The biological differences between men and women are scientifically well-established. What’s great about science is that it doesn’t draw judgments based on cultural stereotypes, which is exactly what the trans movement does.

On what basis does a man decide he is actually a woman? He prefers women’s clothes? He feels more feminine than masculine? What does any of this mean? Why can’t a man wear women’s clothes, be feminine, engage in traditionally feminine behavior, and still be a man?

More importantly, if a man decides this is not enough, that he must upend thousands of years of what it means to be a woman, why should we accept that? To be nice? Can’t we be nice without abandoning reality? McCullough argues that conservatives should stop being reactionary about social acceptance of trans individuals, and in doing so he misses entirely that the problem is with trans ideology, not individuals.

The Other Side Of The Compromise

Assuming we do abandon the notion that gender has no biological basis, and is instead a question of who likes Barbie dolls, what do we get in return? McCullough suggests we will receive a reprieve in laws that compel us to express agreement with the transgender agenda. Hey, thanks, but actually the First Amendment already covers that. Compelled speech is not allowable.

He further suggests that this capitulation will lead to an open conversation on protecting children from puberty blockers and sterility in the name of switching genders. But it won’t. That will simply be the next precipice off which conservative ideals are dropped.

In fact, the moment it is stipulated that gender is not a biological reality but a state of mind, there is no rational justification for denying a nine-year-old hormone treatments. In fact, such denial becomes cruel. If gender is simply the way we feel, not the body parts we posses, then on what possible basis could we deny a child a right to occupy the body he knows he should have? This is where the compromise not only falls apart, but leads to something very close to child abuse.

Women, Only Better

The acceptance of trans ideology opens us to a world in which men become women to perfect womanhood. No female to male trans person will ever be the heavyweight champion of the world, but Bruce Jenners who become Caitlyns will absolutely dominate women’s sports. They can even be sexier. They can win college scholarships and government contracts set aside for women.

This is a future that not only conservatives, but everyone, should reject. Being a woman, being subject to rape and impregnation and catcalling, are real things. They are not things a man can simply appropriate and lay claim to. And there is no long-documented history of men doing so that we must accept or to which we must pay homage. I’m all for compromise, but some things are just true and we must hold fast to their truth. Gender is one of these things.

Perhaps in 20 years my views on gender will seem as outdated and bigoted as opposition to gay marriage seemed 20 years ago. But I doubt it. There is a difference. No person’s sexual proclivities threaten my basic understanding of biological reality. This is not true of transgenderism. It requires me to suspend disbelief and accept as real something I know is a fantasy. This I cannot do.

To the extent there can be a compromise, here are the terms. People can call themselves whatever they want to call themselves. I may even use their terms out of politeness. But I will never believe that a man can become a woman. And if that is what McCullough is asking of me, the answer will forever be no.

Link

quote:

The author refers to transgenderism first as “a persistent aspect of humanity,” then again as “an inescapable human phenomenon.”

Wrong and wrong, it is and will always be a serious psychiatric disorder. Viewing it as anything else drags society into self inflicted mental illness and absurdity. 2 + 2 = 4, water is wet, fire is hot, and men and women are not the same nor will they ever be. Some things simply are not, and should never be, open to compromise.

Its all nonsense, and while I appreciate that crazy people still deserve all the protections the law affords, they are still crazy and we're not going to be friends.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

quote:

The author refers to transgenderism first as “a persistent aspect of humanity,” then again as “an inescapable human phenomenon.”

Wrong and wrong, it is and will always be a serious psychiatric disorder. Viewing it as anything else drags society into self inflicted mental illness and absurdity. 2 + 2 = 4, water is wet, fire is hot, and men and women are not the same nor will they ever be. Some things simply are not, and should never be, open to compromise.

Uhhh, he is criticizing an earlier article, by J. J. McCullough, on National Review, making exactly the same point as you.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

quote:

The author refers to transgenderism first as “a persistent aspect of humanity,” then again as “an inescapable human phenomenon.”

Wrong and wrong, it is and will always be a serious psychiatric disorder. Viewing it as anything else drags society into self inflicted mental illness and absurdity. 2 + 2 = 4, water is wet, fire is hot, and men and women are not the same nor will they ever be. Some things simply are not, and should never be, open to compromise.

Uhhh, he is criticizing an earlier article, by J. J. McCullough, on National Review, making exactly the same point as you.

Correct. And although I likely could have penned my response a bit differently, I was simply expressing a personal opinion that refutes McCullough's commentary, not the authors.

I really don't care if a guy wants to remove his S#$% but if he's still swinging and goes into a restroom where my granddaughters are, he has a major problem. Plus this BS "I identify as a woman" is another reason for a major problem. Grandfather Chris

The Left metaphorically wants to drive the train off the cliff. A compromise means slowing the rate at which train meets its demise. We can't compromise with that.

The brakes must be applied posthaste, then the train must be backed up and redirected on a sound course.



.

Chromosomes are real.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

quote:

The author refers to transgenderism first as “a persistent aspect of humanity,” then again as “an inescapable human phenomenon.”

Wrong and wrong, it is and will always be a serious psychiatric disorder. Viewing it as anything else drags society into self inflicted mental illness and absurdity. 2 + 2 = 4, water is wet, fire is hot, and men and women are not the same nor will they ever be. Some things simply are not, and should never be, open to compromise.

I believe the correct psychological diagnosis is "delusional."

quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

quote:

The author refers to transgenderism first as “a persistent aspect of humanity,” then again as “an inescapable human phenomenon.”

Wrong and wrong, it is and will always be a serious psychiatric disorder. Viewing it as anything else drags society into self inflicted mental illness and absurdity. 2 + 2 = 4, water is wet, fire is hot, and men and women are not the same nor will they ever be. Some things simply are not, and should never be, open to compromise.

I believe the correct psychological diagnosis is "delusional."

I'm not a psychiatrist nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

And coming soon is a new show on FX: Pose.
Looks quite bizarre.

Where are the "You can't appropriate my gender" crowds?

The Left is never satisfied until they get their enemies to not only say their lies are the truth, but to "celebrate" their reeducation.

oh you want to be transgender...

isn't that just special

let me ask you the following:

if you couldn't accept you as you were born, what makes you think I should accept you now?

Assuming it's a psychological disorder (which I do believe), and that there's no good treatment for it, then what do you do about/with/for these people? Their brains are screaming that they're a gender which they are obviously physically not. Do we try to force them to be their physical gender, or do we allow them to try and function in their psychological gender? There are downsides to both.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

quote:

The author refers to transgenderism first as “a persistent aspect of humanity,” then again as “an inescapable human phenomenon.”

Wrong and wrong, it is and will always be a serious psychiatric disorder. Viewing it as anything else drags society into self inflicted mental illness and absurdity. 2 + 2 = 4, water is wet, fire is hot, and men and women are not the same nor will they ever be. Some things simply are not, and should never be, open to compromise.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
Assuming it's a psychological disorder (which I do believe), and that there's no good treatment for it, then what do you do about/with/for these people? Their brains are screaming that they're a gender which they are obviously physically not. Do we try to force them to be their physical gender, or do we allow them to try and function in their psychological gender? There are downsides to both.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

quote:

The author refers to transgenderism first as “a persistent aspect of humanity,” then again as “an inescapable human phenomenon.”

Wrong and wrong, it is and will always be a serious psychiatric disorder. Viewing it as anything else drags society into self inflicted mental illness and absurdity. 2 + 2 = 4, water is wet, fire is hot, and men and women are not the same nor will they ever be. Some things simply are not, and should never be, open to compromise.

I truly do not know how to deal with them. But under no circumstances should we even entertain accepting this as normal. It needs to carry the stigma of complete illegitimacy. Who knows, maybe that approach might cause some of these folks to re-think their position. But how to deal with them as a society once their 'condition' is deemed illegitimate, your guess is as good as mine.

If they truly cannot be reconditioned to accept their biological sex as their "gender", then they are certifiably insane and should be committed to a facility that allows them to practice their delusion away from normal folks.

flashguy

At this point, the only reason to commit someone is if they're actively dangerous. Someone trying to live their life as the opposite of their physical gender comes nowhere near close to qualifying.

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:
If they truly cannot be reconditions to accept their biological sex as their "gender", then they are certifiably insane and should be committed to a facility that allows them to practice their delusion away from normal folks.

flashguy

It doesn’t matter what you lop off or add on, or how they feel about what they think they are; there are two versions which nobody has control of XX and XY. No matter how much the leftist thinks compromise will help you can’t change DNA.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
At this point, the only reason to commit someone is if they're actively dangerous. Someone trying to live their life as the opposite of their physical gender comes nowhere near close to qualifying.

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:
If they truly cannot be reconditions to accept their biological sex as their "gender", then they are certifiably insane and should be committed to a facility that allows them to practice their delusion away from normal folks.

flashguy

But they are dangerous. They serve as examples of derangement that could negatively impact young children to emulate them. I believe it's happening even now.

flashguy