We now live in a morality denying, reality denying, science denying world, brought about primarily, I have to say, by the left. It seems to be hopeless--society on the whole will never return to reason. I feel sorry for young people who will have to endure another forty, fifty, sixty years of this lunacy as it grows worse and worse. But they've been raised this way, so they probably won't even know the difference. Tragedy upon tragedy.
It's all so ridiculous. "Only women have cervixes" is a biological truth. The objection, of course, is that "transmen [as they are called now] also have cervixes," which is perfectly true. However, what that statement omits to acknowledge is the fact that "transmen" - women who wish they were men and sometimes go about trying to look like men - ARE women. Thus, "only women have cervixes" is a perfectly true statement. We needn't debate biological reality. We need to debate whether a person can be de-womaned - a new phrase I am making up just for the purpose of this debate. Can someone opt out of womanhood by merely stating that they don't "feel" like a woman, whatever that's supposed to mean? And why would you want to? If it's to avoid misogyny, difficult beauty standards, etc., then shouldn't we be working to change those things, rather than pretending we are not women and engaging in dangerous medical experiments to appear male? (Of course, all of the same comments apply to men who want to opt out of manhood, for different, but similarly societal reasons.) In any event, even if you say you aren't a woman and are now a man because you think you are, that is a new use of the words "woman" and "man" that ignores biology. Perhaps we need new language to account for people's desired gender. Oh wait, we have those words already. They used to be transsexual woman or transsexual man, and now we have been using the more confusing terms transgender man and transgender woman. We also use transman and transwoman as of late. We need to stick to those terms and not conflate an amorphous state of mind with a biological truth. At least then we can have debates while speaking the same language!
Oh wow! I had totally forgotten about the scene in Life of Brian . . . the is sooo much wisdom in finely-crafted comedy. How relevant that clip is to today!!! Thank you for spotlighting this latest example of the lunacy, and for picking such an excellent example to make it resonant to hopefully all those who have been slower to acknowledge the problems with all this language policing.
We now live in a morality denying, reality denying, science denying world, brought about primarily, I have to say, by the left. It seems to be hopeless--society on the whole will never return to reason. I feel sorry for young people who will have to endure another forty, fifty, sixty years of this lunacy as it grows worse and worse. But they've been raised this way, so they probably won't even know the difference. Tragedy upon tragedy.
It's all so ridiculous. "Only women have cervixes" is a biological truth. The objection, of course, is that "transmen [as they are called now] also have cervixes," which is perfectly true. However, what that statement omits to acknowledge is the fact that "transmen" - women who wish they were men and sometimes go about trying to look like men - ARE women. Thus, "only women have cervixes" is a perfectly true statement. We needn't debate biological reality. We need to debate whether a person can be de-womaned - a new phrase I am making up just for the purpose of this debate. Can someone opt out of womanhood by merely stating that they don't "feel" like a woman, whatever that's supposed to mean? And why would you want to? If it's to avoid misogyny, difficult beauty standards, etc., then shouldn't we be working to change those things, rather than pretending we are not women and engaging in dangerous medical experiments to appear male? (Of course, all of the same comments apply to men who want to opt out of manhood, for different, but similarly societal reasons.) In any event, even if you say you aren't a woman and are now a man because you think you are, that is a new use of the words "woman" and "man" that ignores biology. Perhaps we need new language to account for people's desired gender. Oh wait, we have those words already. They used to be transsexual woman or transsexual man, and now we have been using the more confusing terms transgender man and transgender woman. We also use transman and transwoman as of late. We need to stick to those terms and not conflate an amorphous state of mind with a biological truth. At least then we can have debates while speaking the same language!
Oh wow! I had totally forgotten about the scene in Life of Brian . . . the is sooo much wisdom in finely-crafted comedy. How relevant that clip is to today!!! Thank you for spotlighting this latest example of the lunacy, and for picking such an excellent example to make it resonant to hopefully all those who have been slower to acknowledge the problems with all this language policing.