This not some some sideline issue but a growing trend in public policy to appease the transactivist lobby at the direct expense of gains made by women in the public domain. I have asked my elected representative to find out how and why convicted male abusers are being housed in the same prisons and sharing the same common areas as their victims. I kid you not. Other than a response of eventually getting back to me… crickets.
Convicted males claiming female identity are allowed access to their victim targets BY OFFICIAL POLICY. This is unconscionable stupidity and cruelty in the name of placating the promoters and defenders of Identity Politics in general and indoctrinated supporters of gender fluidity by feelings specifically. But this is only one small example.
That’s why this issue needs a much wider audience from those still able to rub two neurons together. Read it and weep at how easily we allow our elected representatives to step aside and allow the True Believer inmates to run the gender-based insane asylum throughout the public domain. Of course, banning critics of the gender-based insanity sweeping the public domain from the public domain is the primary tool used by its ideological defenders. That’s a clue….
So that means the rest of us have to step up and do our small but important job of spreading the news on their behalf.
From the Arb:
Replicate far and wide folks. The stakes are very high for females in our society. We need to push back and defend the sex based rights of females in our society.
Unlike any other social justice movement in history, the contemporary push for “Transgender Rights” as it is currently being played out are unique in that they are based on eliminating the sex-based rights and protections of women and girls.
“Here is a list of the Human Rights of Women that transactivism is eliminating. No-one is saying trans-identified individuals should not have rights civil protections such as housing, employment etc. But what IS wrong is that the transactivists are erasing females as a protected sex class and erasing the sex-based protections of women and girls.”
• Removing the right of women to assemble outside the presence of men.
• Removing the legal right of women to organize politically against sex-based oppression by males.
• Elimination of the patient right of dependent females to hospital/facility/bed assignments separate from males.
• Removing the legal right of women to be free from the presence of men in areas of public accommodation where nudity occurs.
• Elimination of the right of dependent females to prefer female providers for their intimate personal care requirements.
• Removing the legal right of women to educational programs created for women outside the presence of men.
• Elimination of sex-based crime statistics.
• Elimination of the human right of female prisoners under state confinement to housed separately from male prisoners.
• Eliminating athletic programs and sports competition for women and girls.
• Eliminating data collection of sex-based inequalities in areas where females are underrepresented.
• Elimination of grants, scholarships, board and trustee designations, representative positions and affirmative programs for women.
• Removing the legal right of women to create reproductive clinics, rape crisis services, support groups or any organisation for females.
• Eliminating media and all public discourse specific to females.
• Removal of the right of journalists to report the sex, and history, of subjects.
• Eliminating the legal right of lesbians to congregate publicly.
• Elimination of lesbian-specific organisations and advocacy groups.
• Removing the legal right of women to free speech related to sex roles and gender.
• Elimination of the legal right of women to protection from state-enforced sex-roles (appearance/behaviour/thought).
• Elimination of the legal right of girls to protection from state-enforced sex-roles in public education.
Edited to add, since compiling this list Gallus Mag has been censored and had her account deleted by WordPress for advocating for women’s lawful sex based rights. I had to hunt for this list, it, it was not easy to find, and had I not already seen it at one point and known her name and what to search for it would never have come up in any queries about women’s rights being eliminated by transactivists. Please share.
tildeb
Questionable Motives 
“…as it is currently being played out …”
What would be your proposal for the correct playing out of “transgender rights” and by what standard would your proposal be more right than the current state of affairs?
Comment by Tiribulus — December 4, 2019 @ 11:13 am |
I am a fan of reality. I really think it is the best arbitrator of whatever beliefs I bring to it. And so reality arbitrates that gender and feelings about gender is not a good basis for determining and addressing in public policy the very real differences between the females and males. Sex-based differences are reality’s arbitrator of our gender-based beliefs and so therefore the correct standard of ‘correctly playing out’ this gender-based ideology is biology and not ideology.
Comment by tildeb — December 4, 2019 @ 12:00 pm |
What did you expect? For decades radical feminists argued that gender is a social construct, insisted that women be treated equal to men and demanded access to previously male-only enclaves. But now that the shoe is on the other foot the tune has abruptly changed to a demand for gender segregation and female-only safe spaces based on the premise that men and women are indeed quite different.
This is what happens when you play identity politics. Eventually someone else claims top spot in the victimhood olympics and you end up becoming the oppressor. Guess you should have fought for a more libertarian ideal: freedom of association.
Comment by Ron — December 4, 2019 @ 3:41 pm |
What is a “male-only enclave”?
Comment by john zande — December 4, 2019 @ 6:53 pm |
Talk about reading into it what you already believe!
Let’s dismantle your points one by one:
I expected more people to see the totalitarianism inherent in identity politics and be far more critical of it.
Radical feminists correctly argued that gender is a social construct in the sense that certain unequal values and unequal expectations were included in the gender category. This fight continues. Like any fair-minded person, the typical radical feminist argued that having a vagina or penis should not dictate certain privileges, certain access to public offices, certain leadership or professional roles. In this sense, equality in such fundamental rights and freedoms should be shared by all. This is hardly a bad thing but neatly fits into King’s call for quality of character to be the most important consideration over other ‘identities’.
The shoe is not on the other foot, meaning the roles have not been reversed. At all. Women do not hold the vast majority of business and government leadership and economic power like men have historically held. Women do not enjoy the privilege of walking down a street without being judged as an object of sexuality like men have historically held. Women do not enjoy the sense of being immune to open sexual harassment and the social expectations to defend themselves from constant and uncalled for judgement on provocativeness. And the list goes on and on and on. So it’s in no way a ‘reversal’. In fact, this systemic dismantling of those few spaces where women can be free from these never-ending male forms of open discrimination is what is being stolen from them with this new definition of sex-based physiology as the ‘ social construct’ and gender being touted as the biological reality. This is the inversion of reality. Presenting this hostile take-over of safe female only spaces, of invading sex-based activities like male and female competitive sports, as if these were the mirror image of ‘radical’ feminists taking over male spaces (no ‘radical’ feminist has demanded that women should be able to compete in all male-dominated sports) is a radical warping of reality, Ron. That is NOT what ‘radical’ feminists have been after. At all.
Yes, this altered reality based on an absurd ideological framing is what happens when identity politics becomes public policy. And yes, biased and discriminatory group-based victimhood is a primary consideration in it (including the idiotic intersectionality it must account for). But the solution isn’t to go back to the male dominated, male privilege society of old as you seem to smugly be trying to argue; that’s a really weird conclusion that does not follow in either logic or reality. The solution is to call out the ideologues, stop going along with their demands to ban and censor and deplatform and disinvite and destroy the careers not just of those who are critical of this Marxist ideology but those who are willing to give the critics consideration. That’s the cowardly crime here: going along with bullies. The way forward is to make the proponents of identity politics try to defend these indefensible group-based competing constructs with good reasons drawn from reality. Let reality arbitrate their bigoted and deplorable irrational claims. And then institute public policies that reflect reality’s arbitration of them rather than promote, or go along, or stay silent, with this absurd totalitarian ideology in action.
Comment by tildeb — December 4, 2019 @ 4:55 pm |
I am going to come to the defense of Ron and push back a little. I can’t speak for him directly, but when I think of radical feminist, I think Andrea Dworkin, Judith Butler, Gloria Steinem, etc. The kind of radical feminist that insists that there’s no difference between men and women and that gender is merely a social construct. The kind of radical feminist that truly believes that there’s an all pervasive “patriarchy” that’s preventing women from ascending their rightful place in the power structure hierarchy. The kind of radical feminist that believes that hierarchies themselves have nothing to do with merit, competence or effort, but are merely about brute power. The kind of radical feminist that will vilify and slander anyone who would dare question this “fact”. The kind of radical feminist that doesn’t really much care about the plight of ordinary women, but instead has their ideology rooted in a pathological resentment and hatred of men, especially rich, successful, white men. The shoe does now appear to be on the other foot with the slander machine aimed at them and it doesn’t seem so fair now all of a sudden. I would argue that both of these competing ideologies (radical feminism and Trans activism) have their roots grounded in the same denial of biological reality. The rest of the women who don’t subscribe to this nonsense are caught in the cross fire.
Unfortunately, what passes for public debate on this issue is the equivalent of primate feces-slinging. Being my pessimistic self, I anxiously await to see exactly how low this can go. Johnathan/Jessica Yaniv is scrapping the bottom of the barrel – or at least I think so. But then again, life is full of surprises.
Comment by Ashley — December 5, 2019 @ 7:32 am |
What I believe is irrelevant. But what I do advocate for is the personal autonomy of the individual, and concepts like freedom of belief, conscience, thought, expression, assembly and association — principles frequently subverted by authoritarian ideologues, of which feminism is just one group.
If true legal equality is your ultimate goal, then the choice is clear: either permit every group to set its membership criteria, or force every group to admit everyone who wants to become a member. Arguing that certain groups be exempted from those standards amounts to special pleading.
Comment by Ron — December 14, 2019 @ 3:39 pm |
Consider your comment to Ron ‘liked’, Tildeb (since you have no button for that)
Hats off to you and Arb for your commentary. It’s getting increasingly difficult to see when/where this madness will be ending.
Comment by Carmen — December 4, 2019 @ 6:18 pm |
I have become much mode cynical and pessimistic in recent months, especially since the re election of Justin Trudeau.
I truly think that in terms of Western Civilization, we are now witnessing the beginning of the end.
Either the lefty lunatics and/or the Islamists will sink this country. There is no one left in politics that will even touch these issues and people and institutions will continue to capitulate to ridiculous demand after ridiculous demand.
Comment by Ashley — December 4, 2019 @ 7:27 pm |
Just remember, Ashley, we will always live somewhere in a pendulum of public policies. It’s my experience that conditions change over the long haul time and almost always the center of the pendulum shifts towards the better. But the turning point almost always requires a lot of really bad stuff at the extreme end of the swing first before it begins to reverse direction. It’s not the adversity we face that matters so much; it’s how we respond to it. As best we can. Doing so to bring about something better is what takes good character and courage and both of these are like muscles that gain strength only with use. So hang in there. Our civilization will adjust because unlike totalitarian regimes that’s what liberal secular democracies do best: change.
Comment by tildeb — December 4, 2019 @ 8:40 pm |
Thanks Carmen. I don’t know how prison officials can go along with putting sexual predators and pedophiles into a more marginalized place for women than one of Canada’s terrible female prisons… all in the name of ‘fairness’ to a tiny minority of the population that claims ‘victimhood’ due to their chosen gender. What about the REAL female victims who are also in the same prison and what about their ‘feelings’? Oh right… such supposedly transsexual predators are biological men, of course! And we wouldn’t want to be unfair to them! And this inclusion for the tiny minority will also skew the statistics about which sex is instigating sex-based violence! Imagine being the victim of domestic violence and being assigned a room at a local women’s shelter that then allows a bearded man in combat boots to sleep next to you because he claims to be a woman? What about HER feelings in this matter? To then have the shelter suffer a loss of revenue unless it caves in to the gender-based demands for inclusion is adding insult and injury to the very place trying to help real victims in real life… all in the name of something called ‘gender equality’. I mean, how can this travesty not be front and center in public policy?
It’s also interesting to me that a young woman from Syria whose Yezidi family was destroyed by ISIS asks why it’s more important for Muslims to be able to wear the uniform of her family’s enemy here in Canada and no one asks her about her feelings having a teacher – a person in a position of public authority over her – is not just free to do so but actively encouraged by misguided politicians and other students keen to signal their ‘virtue’ of tolerance and respect? Meanwhile, this student is reminded daily about her very real personal losses and horrors by those who proudly and without any criticism wear the same religious uniform as her teacher. Imagine how that must feel. And she’s a real victim and not a member of some imaginary group ‘suffering’ discrimination here in Canada. Who speaks on her behalf? Well, doing so will gain you not just the label of Islamophobe and bigot but cause to have one’s career dismantled by the virtue mob and one’s family subject to social media vilification and lies.
Comment by tildeb — December 4, 2019 @ 8:32 pm |
Seen this?
https://www.theblaze.com/news/comedian-ricky-gervais-brutally-mocks-transgender-activist?utm_content=buffer6889f&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=tw-theblaze
Comment by john zande — December 5, 2019 @ 6:39 am |
No, but good on Ricky. Reality demonstrates the absurdity of the transactivist position that they are biological females.
Yaniv – a Canadian male-claiming-to-be-a-female transactivist who took about a dozen women who do hair removal for female-only clients to the provincial human rights tribunal for refusing to wax his scrotum – drove many of them out of business in his ideological crusade to overturn reality and he had lots of help from the transactivist ‘community’ to vilify them for having the estrogen to respect it over and above his own insistence. This article doesn’t mention the actual harm he has caused to real women in real life by using the kangaroo court of human right tribunals to help him bully real women to go along with his desire to impose his ideology on others. Paying some tribunal-related costs does not even begin to properly address the intentional damage he does to real women. He has also gained some notoriety for pushing what would properly be identified as a pedophile agenda, especially regarding his contact with young girls, his demands for bathroom/changing room access around children, as well as engaging with girls online to find out more about them in the name of ‘advising’ them on what he thinks is proper feminine hygiene. But of course his supporters care nothing about the welfare of others or the damage he inflicts because, hey, a shared transgender ideology matters more. What a piece of work. And his feelings are what everyone is supposed to focus on, tolerate, and support. Good grief.
Comment by tildeb — December 5, 2019 @ 10:02 am |
Going to the gynaecologist, when you have a dick, then whining when you won’t be seen, is just the height of shit-stirring. It’s not serious. And if he were serious, then we’re dealing with a severe mental problem.
Comment by john zande — December 5, 2019 @ 10:25 am
I’m at the point where I no longer know which is which. What’s the term? Oh right… Poe’s Law.
Comment by tildeb — December 5, 2019 @ 10:39 am |
Groups aren’t real. People are. And I think we should share identical equality rights under law. Anything else is institutionalized privilege enforced by the State.
Comment by tildeb — December 14, 2019 @ 11:46 pm |
Well, by that reasoning one can argue that ‘rights’ and ‘laws’ and ‘the State’ aren’t real either, because they are merely human conceptions of how individuals should organize and interact among themselves. But for the purposes of this discussion the word ‘group’ refers to a voluntary assembly of individuals sharing a common interest.
So the question is really: By what means can any number of individuals obtain or (delegate to someone else) the moral right to do something which the individuals themselves do not have the moral right to do?
Comment by Ron — December 15, 2019 @ 1:25 pm |
No, one cannot argue equivalency between rights/laws/State and group identity (and think my point refuted about the reality of individuals because these, too, are all constructs and therefore not real things like individuals); the point is not refuted because you offer a a false equivalency that they are all the same category (of not real things). I was talking specifically about groups and individuals and within this category of people you cannot have the former without the latter and so the base unit IS the individual. That is what’s real; the individual that constitutes any constructed group. When speaking about rights, I insist that these must rest with the base unit – the individual – and this is where everyone enjoys legal equality. Versus this fact is the ongoing idiocy that RESULTS of some group comparison is the important metric to define ‘real’ equality. What’s being described from a result is EQUITY and this is not – repeat, NOT – a liberal value nor a feminist value but a totalitarian benchmark that can only occur when all other legal rights of the individual are eliminated. To equate feminism – the desire to achieve legal equality in rights and freedoms – with this ideological objective of those who support identity politics and special exemptions based on group affiliation is misrepresenting feminism.
Sure, many feminists are working directly against their best interests by promoting and supporting group ideology. After all, sociology (borrowing from the weasel term ‘society’) is widely accepted as a standard academic field of ‘research’ when in fact (that I have argued for decades) it’s either group-based comparisons (ie lies about many of the individuals who constitute the group) or stolen from another legitimate field of study and repackaged under some group-based presentation. And we’ve seen this shift into group-based thinking by many younger feminists attracted to the shiny allure of this pseudo-religious purity cult we now call the Woke. But don’t mistake these misguided illiberal virtue signalling despots – men and women, males and females – as representatives of the actual feminist movement behind which they try to find cover from legitimate criticism… that their ideology is always totalitarian because it undermines the fundamental principle of shared individual legal rights in the name of something else. That is the line that is being crossed, a line we need to recognize this attack every time it is crossed no matter what the excuse is to give it the veneer of moral and ethical superiority.
Comment by tildeb — December 15, 2019 @ 1:52 pm |
Just a Merry Christmas well wish tildeb, with no other attending comment.
Comment by ColorStorm — December 22, 2019 @ 2:02 pm |
And the same to you, CS. I hope you get lots of enriching time with family and friends. I love this time of year.
Comment by tildeb — December 22, 2019 @ 2:08 pm |
Best time of year, eh? I agree! (Winter’s the best season!)
Comment by Carmen — December 22, 2019 @ 5:38 pm
And no wildfires or bugs!
Comment by tildeb — December 22, 2019 @ 5:58 pm
In the next few days I’m heading to where there are massive wildfires. .. egads. The things we do for our children/grandkids. .. ! Hope you have a lovely holiday!
Comment by Carmen — December 22, 2019 @ 7:42 pm |
Take care down there. It’s a ghastly situation.
Comment by john zande — December 22, 2019 @ 8:04 pm |
I knooooow – and we are headed to Merimbula in a week or so. ..
Comment by Carmen — December 22, 2019 @ 8:11 pm
Heard today there’s bad fires between Canberra and Batemans Bay. Hopefully it doesn’t travel south. I used to camp in that area, and can only imagine the hell unfolding deep inside those parks.
Comment by john zande — December 22, 2019 @ 8:48 pm
Thanks. You too Carmen.
Although the air quality may not be the best with all the fires, at least it will be relatively cool. I mean, an average of 48.3 degrees is pretty cool, am I right? Thank goodness Australia hasn’t switched to Celsius because if the government went along with something like that then that would really drive those same temperatures to be more than a little hot. Thank goodness Australian legislation based on denialism is such a powerful tool to keep unpleasant reality in check. Phew!
Comment by tildeb — December 23, 2019 @ 12:02 am |
Wow!!
You Stated — “That’s why this issue needs a much wider audience from those still able to rub two neurons together. ”
My Response — This is a very interesting and thought-provoking post! I must admit I have not thought of this angle of the debate and changes being made to society.
Comment by Lander7 — March 1, 2020 @ 10:11 am |
Those who seek sex-based evidence and those who research it are being targeted by transactivists (and their naive co-conspirators) and labeled as bigots and -phobes. This vaunted ignorance has a dramatic effect on children subject to what is called ‘sudden onset of gender dysphoria’ and how the schools are not allowed by policy to alert the parents that Maya feels she is more of a Mohammed every Friday or that Eric feels more of an Erica every second Tuesday on Hot Dog Day; instead, by policy, school administrators and teachers are to alert transactivist organizations who then advocate – on behalf of the potentially suicidal pre-teen – for chemical and physical alterations be done sooner than later. So, while parents are held legally responsible for their child, public policy ensures they cannot be when it comes to questions of sex-based concerns.
The gender push against sex-based knowledge is completely ideologically driven and it is leaving many victims in its wake to serve the privileged feelings of the few… always the transactivist – who are deplorably supported by the loud cheering of the virtuously duped people who make up the cohort known as as ‘The Woke’, a cohort that doesn’t yet realize they are in fact lacking that second neuron.
Comment by tildeb — March 1, 2020 @ 11:45 am |
I’m not fully acclimated with “The Woke” movement but I thought it was just a title for expanding ones understanding of the human condition.
Maybe this aspect of it is a separate agenda.
Comment by Lander7 — March 1, 2020 @ 4:37 pm
Like everything else about today’s ‘Woke’ movement, it absconds with the original intention of the term from the 60’s rising awareness of racial issues in the US and uses it for its own self-aggrandizement of ‘social justice’ in terms of identity politics. The identity politics of today is direct substitution for Marxism, the post-modern version of class struggle between groups but replaced with group identity of victim and victimizer. In other words, today’s ‘Woke’ movement is a far Left version of Marxism that does not measure the quality of one’s character as important (the centerpiece of King’s movement) but reverts (some would say inverts) the colour of one’s skin (or gender or ethnicity or religion) to be the centerpiece. One’s group-based identity in the woke movement of today defines one’s place in the hierarchy of social power, not between economic classes that Marxism frames the world but, between groups of victims and groups of victimizers so that every aspect of society is determined by one’s group placement in this hierarchy. The cross-over in victim grouping (say, if one is black and female and disabled) places one in the upper echelon of social placement and this determination is called ‘intersectionality’ where intersecting features of victimized groups add or subtract one’s group placement in this social hierarchy. Those who champion the most victimized (usually the most economically advantaged young people) are deemed to be ‘social justice warriors’ fighting on behalf of the oppressed victim groups. They do so (and say the appropriate words oozing imaginary empathy for these ‘poor, poor people’) in order to signal their virtue to like minded people. They are the ones banning and censoring and censuring anyone who does not agree with this framing of the world. They are the ones condemning all things Western, all things enlightened, and think highly of themselves for doing so. Just like it’s mother philosophy Marxism, it’s totalitarian to its core and just as grossly misguided.
Comment by tildeb — March 1, 2020 @ 5:21 pm |
Hi Tildeb. I wasn’t able to find a better location for this note/comment. It seems you haven’t posted here in quite awhile. 😉 So here goes…
Off subject for this post.
I am in the middle of drafting a blog-post about modern campaigns/attacks on long-standing, established methods of knowledge and expertise (intellectualism) widened and more lethal, for the most part, by technology and the internet. Today, far too many average, BUSY hectic, ill-educated (concentrated, specialized skilled) citizens presume themselves equal to scholars, doctors, veteran diplomats, etc, because of advancing, FAST technology and the double-edged sword: sweeping changes of news and social media. Consequently this is pushing democratic institutions and post-grad academia into populism or technocracy or both. Yikes! I am hoping to point these scary changes out by utilizing what was done in the same ways in the 19th-century to Karl Marx and Friedrich Nietzsche.
Would you be kind enough to keep an eye out for it and comment, share your thoughts please? 🙂
Comment by Professor Taboo — March 11, 2020 @ 8:31 pm |
You bet. I am subscribed to your blog so I should see it. I have noticed the same assumption being used successfully by advertisers and spin doctors alike.
Also, have you noticed the loss of melody in pop music (can you recall a tune you like in the last, say, 10 years and hum it right now? Compare that to music from the 60s, 70s, and even 80s. I’d be surprised because most people start chanting or speaking or making percussion sounds… not melody). I think much of this is because of streaming services… now that composers try to create a hook in the first 2 bars so that people don’t click away.
Technology – in the name of efficiency – means many people don’t know how to think independently well; they want their thoughts and knowledge streamed to them on demand, it seems.
A few weeks back a runner friend slipped and fell breaking is tibia. Across the road was a pile of university students waiting for their Uber rides. Most had heads looking down at their phones not seeing what was right in front of their eyes. Only one student made eye contact and then resumed the head down pose. The guy – who had forgotten to take his phone with him – actually hopped through this group without anyone offering to help. I find this turn of attention to the digital world at the expense of living fully in the real world quite interesting and disturbing… by what I can only presume to be by a majority of the next generation.
Comment by tildeb — March 11, 2020 @ 8:49 pm |
OH MY STARS & GALAXIES Tildeb, YES!!! You are spot on! Today, pleasure and psych/neurological reinforcement/affirmation is a “quick fix,” expected as an intravenous drip stuck straight into our vein for INSTANT relief, gratification, and NOW NOW, I WANT IT NOW! Not in 3-4 hours or a week or 6-months… RIGHT NOW!!! And technology and 24/7 data overload is the opiate I.V. 😔
Anyway, thank you kindly Tildeb. I hope I can finish this post soon enough, but as you may have noticed on my last blog-post, various life-forces have really consumed way too much of my valuable time and energy. I hope it passes. I’m not at all opposed to challenges, trials and tribulations, BUT when they keep occurring back to back, one after another, lasting several months or (with some of them) 19-years… it all begins to greatly affect one’s health with prolonged chronic Cortisol levels. I have already been diagnosed in 2010 with chronic hyper-tension when I was a Special Ed teacher at a campus for K-12 students that were wards of the state. 😦 I’ve never really been able to change my lifestyle, work-ethic, etc, like the doctors have ordered. HAH! 🙄
Thanks again!
Comment by Professor Taboo — March 11, 2020 @ 11:31 pm |
Take your time and do it at your convenience. We’re not going anywhere…
Comment by tildeb — March 12, 2020 @ 12:12 am |
Very interesting conversation you guys (and gals) have going here.
Comment by Tiribulus — March 12, 2020 @ 12:41 am |
For those who really don’t grasp the danger to real women in real life by the insertion of transactivism into our laws and legislation, JK Rowling offers this essay.
“When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman – and, as I’ve said, gender confirmation certificates may now be granted without any need for surgery or hormones – then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside. That is the simple truth.”
If you happen to be ‘a person who menstruates’ (once upon a time known before RightSpeak with the term ‘woman’), you know what this means. As Rowling says, “Huge numbers of women are justifiably terrified by the trans activists; I know this because so many have got in touch with me to tell their stories. They’re afraid of doxxing, of losing their jobs or their livelihoods, and of violence.”
All those negative results are due to people who presume supporting gender-based ideology over sex-based facts is ‘correct’. It’s not. It’s wrong by every measurement outside of bullying misogyny. It’s nothing more and nothing less than a re-imposition of misogynistic violence against women… with far too many women cheering them on and thinking this support is modern, virtuous, woke, progressive, and needed. It’s none of those things. It’s yet another unneccesary battle that must be fought through… for women to achieve equality in law, respect in social policy, and full personhood in society. Sides must be taken because silence is the ally only of the bully.
Comment by tildeb — June 11, 2020 @ 12:29 pm |
And now Merriam-Webster Dictionary has gone all Woke and changed the definition of transwoman from “an adult who was born male but whose gender identity is female” to “a woman who was identified as male at birth.” This pure ideology at work because what does the ‘trans’ mean but a transition from man to woman… a previous state to the current state. The previous state was not an ‘identity’ imported by others and applied to the baby but a biological FACT inherited by the baby.
This is the insanity of Woke culture hard at work… and winning, if any rational and sane people can wrap their heads around at justifying that idiocy.
Do we see a baby and decide whether or not to identify it as male or female based on some imported ideology? Seriously? I think if you’ve done that, if you are seriously confused at the sex of the baby you are holding, you’re batshit crazy because the biology is very clear: either XX or XY, either capable of producing sperm or eggs after natural development, either hardwired with primary sex characteristics as either male or female. (I am ignoring the extraordinarily rare outlier that is real but extremely rare versus this binary definition that is almost always clear. No identity is being used other than what the biology demonstrates, and that biology demonstrates EITHER male or female. Not man or woman, which are widely used as gender terms and usually are clearly related to either sex but the primary sex of male or female. THOSE are the terms that are being confused and conflated and exchanged to make room for the ideology that has trying to accept that up means down, that white means black, that males are really females if the person so chooses to identify as such. But that choice does not, cannot, alter the primary sex characteristics at birth; all it can do is alter secondary sex characteristics. Those changes do not change primary characteristics… no matter what Merriam-Webster pretends such identification can do.
The confusion becomes worse when we look at the further definitions. To this, I will quote a biologist, Jerry Coyne, who says it better than I:
“Yet the new definition is deeply problematic in itself, for it simply defines a transgender woman as a woman; but if you unpack the definition of “woman”, it turns out to be a female person, who then turns out to be a person who “typically bears young or produces eggs.” So according to the dictionary itself, a transgender woman is not a woman, for they can’t produce eggs or bear young. In other words, Merriam-Webster could be accused by some not just of confusion, but of transphobia. They contradict themselves.”
That’s to be expected from all things Woke: by presuming the faith-based belief is enough to force reality to play along. Contradiction is guaranteed. And that’s EXACTLY what we find going on here. That demonstrates ideology – not respect for reality and what’s true about it – hard at work.
Comment by tildeb — July 3, 2020 @ 12:21 pm |