Culture Wars, Must Reads, recent

It’s Time for ‘LGB’ and ‘T’ to Go Their Separate Ways

The growing rift between increasingly radicalized transgender-rights activists and the lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) communities has finally come out into the open. This week, Europe’s biggest LGBT-rights organization, the London-based Stonewall charity, was publicly accused of subordinating LGB rights to the group’s increasingly single-minded goal of replacing sex with gender as a marker of identity. As Helen Joyce recently wrote in Standpoint, “Stonewall went all in for gender self-ID. Its online glossary now describes biological sex as ‘assigned at birth’ (presumably by a midwife with a Hogwarts-style Sorting Hat). ‘Gay’ and ‘lesbian’ now mean same-gender, not same-sex, attraction. ‘Transphobia’ is the ‘fear or dislike of someone based on the fact that they are trans, including the denial/refusal to accept their gender identity.’ At a stroke, anyone who declares themselves exclusively attracted to people of the same sex has become a bigot.”

As a gay man who lives in the United States, I have no direct stake in Britain’s intra-LGBT politics. (“LGB/T” might now be a more apt term.) But I am surprised that it has taken this long for such a formal breach to occur. The same pressures have been building everywhere, and it was only a matter of time before someone acted on them.

After the U.S. Supreme Court legalized gay marriage nationwide in the landmark 2015 decision Obergefell v. Hodges, many believed the fight for gay rights would begin to wind down. Yet that didn’t happen. Instead, the LGBT-advocacy sector simply redirected its available staff, fundraising and rhetoric to other projects. I know this because I saw this happen, both as a university student, gay man and equal-rights advocate.

LGBT flag designed by Daniel Quasar.

In a relatively short period of time, the gay-rights movement fused with more radical campus-based gender and identity-politics movements, to become the compound movement now known as “LGBTQ+”—lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, “queer” and more. Even many people within the movement now have trouble keeping up with all the new subcategories contained within that plus sign. One version of the rainbow flag unveiled last year has 11 different colors on it. The creator, Daniel Quasar, identifies as a “queer non-binary demiguy” whose pronouns are “xe/xem/xyr.” None of these bizarre neologisms have any resonance to those of us who joined the gay-rights movement simply to affirm and protect the basic rights of people to be who they are and love who they choose without stigma or legal sanction. We’ve been forced to watch the simple moral logic of non-discrimination be transformed into a self-parodic alphabet soup of invented identities.

Over the last few months, a Democratic presidential debate focused on LGBT issues was highjacked by a rogue transgender woman who shouted slogans about trans rights while the candidates and moderators nodded along robotically. Presidential candidate Joe Biden has called for unisex prisons, a policy that, if implemented, would lead to the rape of female prisoners. Senator Kamala Harris, another Democrat running for president, even came under fire for daring to suggest that pregnancy is a “women’s” issue—since it is now fashionable to highlight the fact that trans men and the “non-binary” also can bear children.

In his recent Netflix special Sticks and Stones, comedian Dave Chappelle nearly got himself canceled for pointing out the growing estrangement between the LGB and trans communities (whom he collectively referred to as “alphabet people”). This being a forbidden topic, it goes without saying that the ultra-woke outlet Vice ran a scathing review of the special, later echoed by other progressive outlets, such as Salon. LGBT activists chided Chappelle for his alleged transphobia on Twitter, despite the fact that viewers themselves gave the show a 99% rating. This is now a typical pattern: Whenever someone runs afoul of gender orthodoxy, the official pundit class has to pretend it’s appalled, a difficult conceit to sustain when sites such as Rotten Tomatoes make popular assessments a matter of public record.

Chappelle used the analogy of a car trip shared by passengers G, L, T and B. The Gs are driving, with the Ls in the passenger seat. The Ts are in the back. “Everyone in the car resents the Ts,” Chappelle says. “The Ts are making the trip take longer.Trans comedians and activists, who’ve become accustomed to pride of place in the intersectionalist hierarchy, were up in arms. But Chappelle made it abundantly clear that he had no animus toward anyone in the LGBT community: The target of his satire was not any one group, but the increasingly ridiculous conceit that all of these “alphabet people” are happy fellow travelers. LGB rights and T activism have been revealed to be unnatural bedfellows, and it’s inevitable that, as is happening in Britain, they will go their separate ways.

Gays, lesbians and bisexuals all have something obvious in common: same-sex attraction. This is an alternative sexual orientation that, to some extent at least, shapes our experiences and alters our life outcomes. We typically identify with our biological sex—and in fact, sometimes have spent many years feeling trapped by it. To be gay is to understand that sex is set at birth. My sexual attraction, likewise, is based on hard-wired factors beyond my control.

Transgenderism is a separate concept. While homosexuality leads to obvious differences in real-life behavior, transgenderism offers a categorial redefinition of what it means to be a man or a woman. As Joyce describes it, a “gender identity” is a quasi-spiritual concept—almost like a soul—that is “something between an internal essence, knowable only to its possessor, and stereotypically masculine or feminine appearance and behavior.”

Gay rights activists simply want society to accept their different ways of living and loving—since gay men and lesbians pursue romantic interests and build families in ways that are at odds with conventional heterosexual expectations. Followers of radical gender theory, on the other hand, demand that we all reject our basic understanding of biological sex in favor of a recently conceptualized abstract notion of human identity.

Of course, the idea of transgenderism per se isn’t new—nor is the (perfectly valid and just) demand that people with gender dysphoria be treated with decency and respect. But the original form of this demand was based on the far more reasonable idea that gender is a social construct distinct from biological sex. It was not disputed that a transgender woman is a biologically male human who identifies with the social norms traditionally associated with woman. But in recent years, transgender activists have demanded that sex and gender be conflated, and that the very idea of innate biological differences be pushed into the background. At the most absurd extreme, there are now athletes and scholars who seriously suggest that being male offers no competitive physical advantages over being female, a proposition that even small children know to be unhinged.

One of the unsettling elements embedded within this advocacy is the demand that women—lesbians, more specifically—make themselves sexually available to trans women, on the far-fetched theory that gender identity, not sex, is the real source of human attraction. As Jonathan Best notes, Stonewall now has defined “homosexuality” as referring to “someone who has an emotional romantic and/or sexual orientation towards someone of the same gender.”

“Did you see what happened there?” Best writes. “Same-sex attraction has become same-gender attraction. This might seem academic. But take a moment to reflect on what it means in the context of Stonewall’s affirmation of gender identity. Stonewall is asserting that lesbians are attracted to anyone with a female gender identity, whether that person is biologically male or female. This turns gay and lesbian desire into transphobia. I’m a gay man—I’m attracted to male bodies—not people performing male gender roles. And, yes, that means I like male genitalia. (I really like it). Trans activists argue that my sex-focused homosexuality is transphobic. I’ve seen trans activists compare non-trans inclusive gay desire to racism and describe gay sexuality as ‘genital hang-ups.’”

In the United States, the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives has passed the Equality Act, a so-called LGBT rights bill that outlaws discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. That is a noble goal that would seem to be in keeping with America’s larger civil-rights legacy. But the Act explicitly redefines biological sex under federal law according to self-defined gender identity—so it easily could allow for a whole host of adverse consequences. And as we have seen in Canada, where a trans woman tried to leverage human-rights law to force immigrant aestheticians to wax her “female” scrotum and penis, the victims of this movement tend to be women.

Even under current U.S. law, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act serves to outlaw discrimination on the basis of “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” Activists are arguing that transgender identity is protected under the law’s reference to “sex,” even though “gender identity” is mentioned nowhere in the law. Trans activists also are demanding government support for policies that subject gender-confused children to potentially sterilizing hormones and other aggressive therapies. Their rights are being sacrificed on the altar of gender self-identification as well.

The redefinition of sex as gender is a step that most people—even the most well-meaning and humane members of society—simply will never accept, no matter what laws activists manage to get passed. And the effort to ram this doctrine down the throats of ordinary people will tarnish any movement that insists on such mantras. So long as self-described “LGBT” activists demand that a male with gender dysphoria is “really” a female, many otherwise accepting people will remain opposed to, or at least skeptical of, the wider movement.

As a right-of-center journalist, I know dozens of young conservatives, particularly women, who are completely open and accepting of their gay and lesbian friends, and supportive of gay rights; but simply won’t accept that a man can be a woman, even if they are forced to give lip service to this mantra as a condition of passing sensitivity-training courses or using social media. Many progressive news outlets were aghast when new polling showed that “young people are growing less tolerant of LGBTQ individuals.” But a closer look into the survey’s methodology revealed that on most questions, they were asked about “LGBTQ people,” not gay people. Support for “equal rights” remained steady, but comfort around “LGBTQ” people has declined. Notably, the survey found that comfort levels around “a same-sex couple holding hands” remain virtually unchanged. Although it’s fashionable to pretend otherwise, it’s the T that’s the issue.

To repeat what I wrote above, transgender people deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. And I have spoken out strongly against anti-trans policies (such as a ban on trans soldiers in the U.S. military). To say that these two causes—LGB and T—should separate isn’t to say that one has value and the other does not. I am simply noting that their goals are at odds. As gay writer Andrew Sullivan recently wrote in New York magazine:

The truth is that many lesbians and gay men are quite attached to the concept of sex as a natural, biological, material thing. And gay men are defined by our attraction to our own biological sex. We are men and attracted to other men. If the concept of a man is deconstructed, so that someone without a penis is a man, then homosexuality itself is deconstructed. Transgender people pose no threat to us, and the vast majority of gay men and lesbians wholeheartedly support protections for transgender people. But transgenderist ideology — including postmodern conceptions of sex and gender — is indeed a threat to homosexuality, because it is a threat to biological sex as a concept.

Canadian writer Sky Gilbert, a gay writer, made a similar point in Quillette, noting that transgender activists increasingly are telling young children who may grow up to be gay or lesbian that their effeminate or butch expression is actually a sign of a transgender soul trapped in the wrong body: “Until the latter decades of the twentieth century, if parents caught their son playing with dolls, they might suspect he was gay. And if he grew up to be an adult with same-sex desire, he would go to a psychiatrist to seek help. Now that we have (spuriously) separated sexuality from gender, a parent who catches his boy playing with dolls will take a trip to a psychiatrist—but this time for different reasons: Little he might be a little she.”

The idea of biological sex is at the core to the gay identity—of my gay identity—and the stereotypical definitions of gender expression that the transgender movement peddles ignores the existence of men and women who happen to express their gender in unorthodox ways without actually being transgender. Most of these people simply grow up to be gay. To demand that these children be instead labeled gender dysphoric is essentially a form of woke conversion therapy. We gays experienced quite enough of that phobic behavior from the socially conservative right. We have no interest in getting force-fed another serving from the progressive left.

 

Brad Polumbo is an editor at the Washington Examiner. His work has appeared in The Daily Beast, USA Today and National Review. He tweets at @Brad_Polumbo.

Comments

  1. the (perfectly valid and just) demand that people with gender dysphoria be treated with decency and respect

    I was contemplating this & I think it is an impossibly tall order. Compassion for the suffering human can be expected, but I fail to see what is to be respected in this case.

  2. Like most people, I really don’t care what an adult wants to do with his or her own body and in the privacy of his/her bedroom. I also firmly believe every human being is deserving of the same basic rights.

    That said, the T movement is a particularly deranged strand of intersectionality that not only underscores its irrationality and cult-like groupthink based, not on reason, but on emotional desire and fear/guilt/rage, but also is used as a tool to bludgeon our core values. Some egregious aspects:

    1. Transitioning before the age of consent. 80-85% of children who believe themselves to be the opposite gender, eventually, by the time of majority, realize they’re gay. To sterilize them, deform their genitalia, and subject them as guinea pigs to dangerous chemicals that scientists have no clue of the long term effects, eg cancer or other maladies, because they might be gay, is outright homophobic at the very least. (Imagine 10 years ago if I said it was good idea, for a small child who might be gay, to sterilize them and never let them enjoy sex.)

    But it’s also extremely regressive thinking about child development and sexuality, and a very regressive view of gender roles. These people simultaneously argue that gender is fluid and theoretical and that it is so ingrained in the brain as to be equivalent to a soul, with no markers whatsoever, but mystical power to be felt. Basically, you take a small boy who likes wearing dresses, or a girl who is a tomboy, and rather than say, either, “Take the dress off,” or else, “Ok they’re pretending,” you say, “Oh my goodness, my son does one or two stereotyped girly things or my daughter one or two stereotyped boy things, and therefore, rather than see if he/she is gay, or straight, I must sterilize them and surgically deform them irrevocably. No waiting for me!” Parents who hesitate are told, falsely but firmly, that this means their kid will commit suicide, even though the rates of suicide seem to not go down post transition, and there is no research to indicate that waiting harms. This is major surgery and chemical castration on a child.

    All this is child abuse, pure and simple. More than that, it is a tyrannical overreach of the government in forcing compliance through threat of imprisonment, career loss, and ostracism for daring to not be in lockstep with all the tenants of this irrational ideology that has no basis in fact or research. Parents no longer have a right to raise their child as they deem fit, but instead the state wants to coerce and bully parents to stay silent as schools indoctrinate their children and courts rob them of liberty. A doctor can lose his/her license, and an individual his/her career for merely for speaking an informed science based opinion. And children lose the chance to have children, and even to enjoy sex. All without their consent, for a small child cannot possibly give consent for that. The whole thing is loathsome. In 10-15 years, all these ‘specialists’ will be hit with giant lawsuits. Watch. And watch all the groupthink abusers pretend they never cheered all this.

    1. The T movement is anti-woman as well. The ludicrous decisions about sports and prisons, and the vicious attacks on feminists like Greer, are exactly the sort of actions one would expect from the most reviled misogynist.

    2. The most vicious aspect - well, no, the child abuse is the most vicious - is the way the deranged T movement is used as a way for a handful of career politicians or ideologies to force societal change in the most brutal tyrannical way. The post-marxist-ish movement - the anti-Western, anti-capitalist, collectivist approach - uses the most delusional view of trans as a means by which to shut down debate, instill fear in the populace for the mere act of speaking, and drive a wedge between swaths of people.

    Again, I have zero against individual people deciding to perform surgery on themselves or call themselves the opposite gender. I have two friends who are trans in fact. Both are happier now they are men. Great. But that’s not what this whole movement is about.

  3. The LGB community has been responsible for much of the PC madness that torments humanity, and to see them now tormented by the Ts seems like poetic justice.

    Every time I see a T screaming hate and abuse at an L, I can’t help but smile. A plague on both your houses.

  4. Lurking in the heart of the utopian is the statist. If I refuse to comply, then I must be force to.

  5. The more the letters screech at each other, the less they are screeching at the 96% of us cursed with a primitive, unevolved M or F. This is a blessing to be cherished and nurtured.

  6. All those Ls and Gs who signed up with the T program can go fuck themselves now. It was always obvious that T-centrism would turn gay boys into ‘other’ through medical intervention. Christ on a popsicle stick! - they just got homosexuality out of the psychological pathology category, and they stand back and allow surgical/chemical ‘reassignment?’ Fuck them all - they deserve this.

    As for the rest of you - why does it take radical lesbian feminists to figure this out and go public? I have yet to hear a single politician in Washington speak out on this subject in plain language. So-called transgender people are delusional - they think they are something they aren’t. That’s a pathology, not an identity. We have become a nation of cowards.

  7. Definitely it is a good idea for homosexual people to distance themselves from transgender people as a movement. With homosexuality, all that’s required of the general public is to live and let live. It’s a very reasonable and defensible position for gay people to ask this of the majority. It’s none of my business whom other adults choose to have sex with or marry. Likewise, it would seem very unfair for a gay person to be fired from a job for lifestyle-associated activities unrelated to the job which take place in private and on the person’s own time. With transgender people, during every interaction they are requiring the majority to suspend disbelief in biology, break grammatical rules, and pretend that extremely abnormal and irrational public behavior (dressing as the opposite sex) is perfectly normal. This situation could also be very relevant to job performance, as in the case of the transgender funeral home employee currently under review by the US supreme court. It seems very reasonable for the funeral home director to think that his bereaved clients might not want to deal with another person’s mental illness and consequent antisocial behavior while making arrangements for the burial of loved ones. It seems like if a person is unwilling to adhere to standard rules such as a professional dress code, then it is fair to let that person go for this reason. I certainly support any person’s right to make his or her own lifestyle choices, and am fine with a man wearing women’s clothes, for example. However, given the extreme abnormality of this behavior, they should be aware that it will necessarily be involuntarily offputting to most, and will limit romantic, professional, and other opportunities. There is no rational reason why a person should feel a deep need to engage in this public behavior. People are not hardwired to want to dress a certain way, as evidenced by the large differences in dress seen in different cultures and historical periods. Rational people simply choose clothing based on current standards in order to fit in with society and maximize romantic, professional, and other social opportunities. Therefore, in my interactions with transgender individuals I have treated them always with courtesy, but I recognize them to be seriously mentally ill and therefore deserving of sympathy but also warranting some degree of trepidation.

  8. Respect is a tough word that has no real place if you assume people should respect you or your class/faction/group/tribe/race/nationality/ethnicity/sex/gender/… Respect is earned.

    They should, of course, have equal protection under the law. I don’t have to care about their dysphoria no more than they care about my hemorrhoids or depression, and I’m damn sure I don’t want anybody to respect me for my hemorrhoids or depression!

  9. Well, there are two sources of respect:

    • the feeling of appreciation felt over seeing a worthy accomplishment
    • fear
  10. I’ve recently seen Ts mocked and mobbed on Facebook for claiming there are only two genders. Like the Gs and Ls feel the redefinition of man and woman erase their homosexual identities, some Ts think the concept of non-binary and constantly shifting gender identities makes a mockery of their identity, reducing it to a fad for the attention-seeking. This has been declared unwoke, and I believe there is already a mean nickname for these non-binary-exclusive trans people, but I don’t recall what it is. God knows what’s next.

    The left is a circular firing squad where the smallest, lowest-status, most dysfunctional fringe occupies the moral high ground, shoots dissenters, and takes over the movement. In the age of the internet, this has resulted in the empowerment of actually mentally ill people and the leftist crusaders of only a few years ago being branded conservatives.

  11. Excluding people damaged by their early or later life experiences, those who are attracted partly or entirely to those of their own sex are not mentally ill. They do not have a thought, mood or “personality” disorder - schizophrenia, depression or bipolar or “borderline personality disorder” which is really an attachment disorder, I suspect often fueled by high levels of caffeine. The best explanation for their sexual attraction parts of their brain being different from those of other people of their sex is that it developed differently, presumably in-utero.

    With the exception of the development of duct structures and either ovaries or testes, and the consequent generation of testosterone in people with the latter, all sexual differentiation is driven by hormonal differences. A striking example of this is genetic males with CAIS, whose androgen receptors (for testosterone and di-hydro-testosterone) do not work. They develop physically (in most respects) - and in terms of self identity and sexual attraction - like normal women. The physical differences are due to them having testes which eventually descend, and no ovaries or uterus.

    So same-sex attracted and bisexual people (with the above exclusion) are distinguished by the development of their sexual attraction brain structures being atypical, presumably due to some hormonal disturbance in the weeks or month or whatever it is when those structures built themselves. I have also heard (though I don’t have a journal reference for this) that about half MtF people using HRT (or I guess with their testes removed and using estrogens) change from their former attraction to females to being attracted to males. If this is true, then it shows that these brain structures, which were typical for males, can be altered later in life with reduced androgen receptor activation and increased estrogen receptor activation, to function in ways typical of women.

    These two patterns by which particular brain structures can develop, are both normal for humans - and perfectly functional and healthy when the attraction is to people of the opposite sex. I don’t think this qualifies as a mental illness. It is a development abnormality with profound impacts - obviously negative in terms of reproductive success.

    These may be associated with some arguable benefits - for instance, same-sex attracted men being more attracted to and/or proficient in the creative arts. However, I think this is probably due to the feminising developmental abnormalities affecting brain structures other than those concerned with sexual attraction. Increased emotional sensitivity and lower proclivity for boofheadedness are surely advantages in the creative arts - and their lower proclivity for aggression and typical healthy masculine risk taking and physical initiative is no disadvantage.

    Again excluding those with damaging upbringings and life experiences, it is easy to think of the brain structures for self-identity in the same ways. Normally males develop these structures which makes them feel male, and vice-versa for females. If there are hormonal disturbances in utero, the outcome can be partially or entirely the opposite of normal. Again there are profound consequences. Its not surprising that there would be correlations in outcomes for sexual attraction and sense of self, but not complete correlation since the times of development may differ and because there are endless vagaries in biology.

    A male with feminised sexual identity brain structures is “gay” - attracted to males. A male with feminised sense of self (gender identity) is a MtF trans person or perhaps non-binary, having a sense of self partly being male and partly female. Such a person would be attracted to females. A male with both structures fully feminised wants to live as a woman and have sex, marriage etc. with males.

    None of this is mental illness in the normal sense of the word. The brain structures are normal for humanity, but are out of place.

    There are very high levels of males born with same sex attraction and/or feminine sense of self in Thailand and neighboring countries like the Philippines, where it is common for fertile women to be using skin creams made from pueraria mirifica - a plant with numerous strongly estrogenic compounds. They do this - and ingest such products - to feminise their skin, make their breasts grow bigger etc. This is surely sufficient explanation for the high rate of neurally (and I guess grossly physically) feminised males there. These products should come with a warning about not using them while pregnant, but this will be ignored - and many women don’t know when they are pregnant. Furthermore, some of these estrogenic compounds might have very long lifetimes, so they could be in the woman’s tissue and blood for months later, including when they are pregnant. Then, if they cross the placenta, they will alter the sexually differentiated aspects of brain development.

    Such products with pueraria mirifiica and other estrogenic compounds are increasingly commonly used in Western countries, so we can expect even more MtF people reaching adulthood in the decades to come. There are other estrogenic compounds in common use, such as soy, flaxseed and various industrial compounds.

    So MtF trans people are going to be an increasing part of life in the West for the next few decades at least. There is no chemical, surgical or talk-therapy treatment which reverses this condition.

    It can obviously be crazy-making, but these people have stable cognition and emotions like other people - which is not the case for people conventionally defined as “mentally ill”.

    That said, the extremes of trans-activism are bizarre, at odds with reality and doomed to fail in the long term. The fact that Wokies support these extremes shows how craven the Wokies are to adopting any group of supposed victims into the portfolio of mistreated people they claim to support.

    It is a long time since I had anything to do with MtF trans people, and I have never (knowingly) known any F-Ms. I can’t imagine that most MtF trans people support all the crap which the extreme trans-activists present when they claim to speak for all, for instance, MtF trans people. The whole drama of “woman being trapped in a man’s body”
    is so false, simplistic and binary. Not every MtF trans-inclined person wants to live wholly as a woman, with no connection to their own male identity.

    The redefinition of the concepts “woman” and “man” in terms of whatever a person feels themselves to be is insane. I expect that some M-F people have been swept into the radicalists fold, by feeling themselves to be activists themselves by virtue of what they propagate on social media and by signing petitions and attending protests. This general sweeping up of people into activism and some of its extremes is a surely driven in large part by social media. See the graphs here for US Woke proclivities rising ever since 2014:

    “The Great Awokening” Matthew Yglesias.

    Without doing a deep and intrusive survey to find a representative sample of MtF trans-inclined people (and they do not band together - they just want to be wholly or partially feminine) there’s no way of knowing for sure what such people think of the radicals who are so visible and politically influential.

    That these people, while disagreeing with the radicals, are not jumping up and down in public about it is to be expected. They want to be feminine - like ordinary women, which means not being noisy like feminists. I recall reading Quillette Circle folks stating that they knew MtF folks who stated privately that they do not at all identify with the efforts of radical trans-activists.

    The same thing happened with women and the extremes of feminism - beyond that which supports the right to vote, respect, safety and equality of opportunity etc. The feminists who are most visible are not at all like most other men-loving, baby-wanting, family- and home-oriented women. They are hostile to these things which most women want. Quite a few of them probably have their gender identity (sense of self) brain structures developed along masculine lines and they resent the expectations society has of them, as females. Ordinary women did not rise en-masse in protests at the way extreme feminists portrayed themselves as representatives of whole of woman-kind. They just got on with their lives, an talked about it in private.

    Quillettarians are rightly alarmed at the extremes of trans activism. I think it is pretty much the worst thing which could have happened to trans people - and to the extent that it succeeds, there will be profound damage to society in general and women in particular. I think some folks here have conflated the actual, typical, state of MtF trans or partially trans being with the activities and claims of the extreme MtF trans activists. This would be like thinking all women are crazy man-hating harridans because you have never met a women, and only know of them according to the behaviour and claims of radical feminists.

    Most likely, you have met MtF people and never noticed - either because they were in M mode, or because they were convincingly F in the circumstances you met them - and you didn’t notice various physical, vocal, and behavioural clues you would have noticed if you had thought to look for them.

    The desire of most trans people to “simply be the other” (as a friend who ran a clothing shop with many trans customers told me recently) raises all sorts of practical problems for themselves and everyone else. I am not suggesting that society should contort itself to enable trans people to satisfy every such desire.

    I don’t support drug or surgical intervention until the age of 18 or so. At any age I think such interventions are probably the best thing for those who are really fully trans and likely to remain that way. However, I suspect that many partially trans people are drawn to this as if the grass is greener on the other side, and find out later that the other side is not actually male or female, and nor can they access their original sexual identity and societal role. Ideally there would be ways they can have a bit of both.

    I don’t support trans people inserting themselves unwanted into sports or organisations of their preferred sex. Nor do I think that altering birth certificates is the best way of giving trans people a legal status which enables them to live as they prefer.

    I knew of one instance of a fully feminised MtF (post operative, femininely attractive and seeking sex with males) romancing a straight male, hiding their trans-nature. This is an appalling betrayal of trust, and I think such people should fully expect to have their heads smashed with the nearest sturdy object. I like to think viciously deceitful behaviour is rare, but I have no way of knowing.

  12. Yes, when archeologists dig up a MtF skeleton in a few hundred years time, they will classify it as male.

  13. Some time ago, I watched a video of Blaire White (M-F) prior to transitioning. It filled me with nostalgia and mourning for a certain type of person who will be lost to this trans ideology. While many might find Blaire to be a convincing female, regardless of how much I respect her, she’s a parody of femininity, full stop. From the hair whacking to the Frederick’s of Hollywood wardrobe to the anime eyes, she resembles a sex doll.

    Her male self was a certain type of gay boy – quite effeminate – but absolutely adorable. And without all the plastic surgery – an authentic person. A kind of overtly feminine male that I will miss, having sought them out in my younger years. I’m sorry Blaire – love you – but I miss your super fem male self. And no matter how many surgeries you have – you read as a female caricature – not as a bona fide woman.

    Most of us can see this right away. The ‘T’s’ aren’t fooling many. Their wrath, when they fail to fool us, is a form of malignant narcissism. Can’t handle “criticism” even if it’s a fact. The main goal of the malignant narcissist is to cause disharmony.

    To “feel” like a woman is not the same as BEING a woman. The case can be argued ad nauseam. It won’t matter. People will not see what you demand they see. You will always be a man pretending to be a woman.

    To imagine a world devoid of the feminine man, replaced with ersatz “females” is a world that has lost the bridge between the TWO sexes. We need the bridge. The in-betweens. Indeed, there are numerous permutations of “gender.” Why not just let it be as it is? Why remodel to suit the image, rather than accept the reality? Isn’t that more … “authentic”?

    It IS time for the other letters to cast off the ‘T.’ The T’s are destroying them, and themselves. This is the worst kind of literal thinking. Why not be what you are? A man who exudes a feminine charm? Or a masculine female? We have always been aware of these permutations. We don’t need to “celebrate” it.

    Last, but not least, where I once embraced the permutations – I now feel contempt for the freakin’ rainbow. You can’t force me to “celebrate” your narcissism.

  14. Its interesting and somewhat disturbing to see how similar the most extreme ‘progressives’ are the most extreme conservative. You are right about this recent tendency to treat non-conforming behaviour as gender disphoria being nothing more than a very scary flavour of conversion therapy (at least the religious folk will only lock you up, not actually cut you up). Time to cut ties with the insane and go back to the original intent of these movements (from LGBT to feminism) which was to make sure that you can’t lose your livelihood or suffer physical harm because of something that is nobody else’s business.

  15. " After the U.S. Supreme Court legalized gay marriage nationwide in the landmark 2015 decision Obergefell v. Hodges, many believed the fight for gay rights would begin to wind down. Yet that didn’t happen. Instead, the LGBT-advocacy sector simply redirected its available staff, fundraising and rhetoric to other projects. ."

    Of course it did, it had become the LGBT ‘Industrial Complex’ by then,meaning there’s no winning the war, that would mean they advocates would have to pick up their placards and go home…so its a slow forever grind from one outrage to another…

Continue the discussion in Quillette Circle

85 more replies

Participants

Comments have moved to our forum