This subject reminds me a bit of the arguments against giving money to panhandlers. Many of them are grifters. Many are mentally ill or substance addicts or both. And some - a few - are just once-productive people way down on their luck, and hoping to return to a dignified life. There are people who never give, because it encourages stasis, some who always give, because "be kind" and some who give if the panhandler has a dog (blackmail), and some who give on a cold day but not a warm one, and so forth. There's no perfect solution but the one point I hold on to is that if it is a private transaction, being kind in the same way we tell white lies ("Do I look fat in these jeans?"), it is a whole different ball game from a public transaction, because it is not consequential in any significant way. Public dissenting consistency is where there are gains to be made, and where our energies should be directed.
I find this entire discussion unbearable because it reminds me how privileged we are in the west to even be having this conversation. As we speak, little girls bodies are being repeatedly raped by men who think they're entitled to shove their penis into her tiny little vagina because they've paid a couple of dollars to her pimp/torturer/slave owner.
The fact that we spend so much time, energy and resources accommodating fetishists and freaks leaves me quaking with righteous rage. Meanwhile, that little girl endures unfathomable suffering because we have abandoned her. As this patriarchal culture continues to centre men's fetishes, and feeds its obsession with controlling women's bodies, we're collectively losing our minds. Now these men have the ultimate power to redefine reality. It's unspeakable in its sociopathy.
The saddest thing of all is that women's socialization as nurturers has been weaponized against us. Our desire to 'be kind' has effectively decapitated the women's liberation movement. Andrea Dworkin would be absolutely stunned by what women are agreeing to in trans ideology.
I despair for my daughter and my 16 year old grandaughter.
Dawn Ennis, also trans, brings up the biblical Golden Rule, “Treat others how you would want to be treated.” <-- Well, if that’s the case, I shouldn’t use a “preferred pronoun” at all because it promotes a lie and this is not how I wish to be treated.
Most of the adult men who want us to believe that they are women are heterosexual with the sexual fetish of autogynephilia. They get sexual arousal when people “validate” their insistence that they are women. So to be polite, we are supposed to join in playing along with their sexual fetish?! Why? Why do we have to be involved in their sexual fetish?
Homo sapiens are a dimorphic species and everyone of us is born either male or female and our conscious selves can exist only within our physical sexed bodies until we die. Cosmetic surgeries and wrong sex hormones cannot actually change the biological sex each individual has been born as.
Nobody can change sex and there are no convincing arguments that there is any benefit for the law and all of society to be compelled to pretend that it is possible. Not only should trans genderism be dismissed as a fantasy but there are many more convincing arguments why the premise harms the rights, safety and dignity of a very large proportion of society and should be rejected on that basis.
Endorsing the use of preferred pronouns harms more people than it benefits. So my strategy is stick to reality and let the individuals who are confused take responsibility for getting appropriate therapy.
This was a pleasure to read and echoes my own positions very closely. It was interesting reading about the thoughts of someone else doing precisely what I was doing as I read the initial essays.
So if a guy looks really feminine, he gets a “she”, but if his makeup/hair etc. leave something to be desired, then it’s “he”. That approach is just acceptance of the trans ideology. Interestingly, you don’t find trans-identified males trying to look like Angela Merkel, for example (or Nicola Sturgeon 🤣)
No. Sorry. I did not hit the heart button for this article.
Pronouns are the gateway drug to "trans"madness. And if this hurts the tender feelings of the mythological creature, the so-called "true trans," let them book an appointment with a psychiatrist. A non-affirming psychiatrist.
I will not participate in the pronoun stupidity. I don't care who is offended. Luckily, I am retired so no one can coerce me into lying with my speech.
No one owns the language. So, no one can unilaterally redefine the "plural pronoun they" to refer to a single person. Nor can a woman force me to use "he" in referring to her.
It is not "kind" to use a person's "preferred pronouns." Engaging in that delusion only perpetuates and spreads a contagious psychiatric disorder. Children are often the victims of this contagion and it inflicts psychological and physical suffering on them. Causing that suffering is cruelty, not kindness. The rights of society and its most vulnerable people are more important than the wounded feelings of a narcissist. I will use the pronouns that are consistent with observable reality, which in some instances may include calling a man "she" and a woman "he" but I will not be compelled to use "preferred pronouns" by an unreasonable request from a narcissist.
So often I will read an essay on this topic, where I agree with most of it. This is the first, where I agree with all of it, for exactly the same reasons.
Thank you for writing the essay I would have written if I had a way with words.
Well, maybe if asked, Buechner would happily say he is a biological man. How do I know? All I can say is that if I did not know he was trans, I would say I am looking at a woman. The presentation is accurate and not at all exaggerated. I won't rehearse my reasons for referring to Buechner as "she" but I am at peace with that decision.
Re pronouns as a sign of “genuine respect for the truly dysphoric (rare, often lost in the shuffle amongst the LARPers, the contagion-infected and the kinky).”
1. Dysphoric just means they are truly unhappy with the sex of their body. Lots and lots of people, including the contagion-infected and the kinky, really truly meet the criteria for “gender dysphoria.” That’s a problem with this very slippery and vague diagnosis: all sorts of people truly fall under it. So I don’t think “truly dysphoric” is a useful criterion.
2. Some people think there’s some sort of “real and rare” condition of “being trans” separate from the categories (like the large wave of teens, and the kinksters) they view as being “less real.” But truly, this thing we call “being trans” in the 21st century West, which evolved from and is quite different from what we called “being trans” in the 20th century West, is a pure _cultural creation_ and not a “real” physical condition in any way. Trans as a concept is truly something we made up. Other cultures have made up much better (and more functional!) narratives and niches for their gender nonconforming people:
3. Even if there were some sort of “true” gender dysphoric (there’s not-- if they fall under the diagnosis, they fall under the diagnosis--which indicates a problem with the diagnosis) -- but if there WERE an “ideal” and “real” example of someone who was gender-nonconforming from earliest childhood, really simply wishes he or she were the opposite sex, and gives it their earnest best shot, I’m not sure going along with their pronouns is necessarily a sign of respect and kindness.
I’m less sure on this point than the other two points, but I’m...fairly sure that’s what I think.
Do we call anorexic people Fatty because it fits their beliefs? Do we agree with people with body dysmorphia (who have a false belief that they are deformed), that yes, they are unbearable to look at? Do we agree with a psychotic person that yes, the CIA is after them, so barricading themselves at home is an excellent idea?
Or would we view those things as unkind, counterproductive, condescending, ultimately harmful to a person who is truly struggling and deserves care and compassion but maybe not our “agreement”?
This subject reminds me a bit of the arguments against giving money to panhandlers. Many of them are grifters. Many are mentally ill or substance addicts or both. And some - a few - are just once-productive people way down on their luck, and hoping to return to a dignified life. There are people who never give, because it encourages stasis, some who always give, because "be kind" and some who give if the panhandler has a dog (blackmail), and some who give on a cold day but not a warm one, and so forth. There's no perfect solution but the one point I hold on to is that if it is a private transaction, being kind in the same way we tell white lies ("Do I look fat in these jeans?"), it is a whole different ball game from a public transaction, because it is not consequential in any significant way. Public dissenting consistency is where there are gains to be made, and where our energies should be directed.
I find this entire discussion unbearable because it reminds me how privileged we are in the west to even be having this conversation. As we speak, little girls bodies are being repeatedly raped by men who think they're entitled to shove their penis into her tiny little vagina because they've paid a couple of dollars to her pimp/torturer/slave owner.
The fact that we spend so much time, energy and resources accommodating fetishists and freaks leaves me quaking with righteous rage. Meanwhile, that little girl endures unfathomable suffering because we have abandoned her. As this patriarchal culture continues to centre men's fetishes, and feeds its obsession with controlling women's bodies, we're collectively losing our minds. Now these men have the ultimate power to redefine reality. It's unspeakable in its sociopathy.
The saddest thing of all is that women's socialization as nurturers has been weaponized against us. Our desire to 'be kind' has effectively decapitated the women's liberation movement. Andrea Dworkin would be absolutely stunned by what women are agreeing to in trans ideology.
I despair for my daughter and my 16 year old grandaughter.
Dawn Ennis, also trans, brings up the biblical Golden Rule, “Treat others how you would want to be treated.” <-- Well, if that’s the case, I shouldn’t use a “preferred pronoun” at all because it promotes a lie and this is not how I wish to be treated.
Most of the adult men who want us to believe that they are women are heterosexual with the sexual fetish of autogynephilia. They get sexual arousal when people “validate” their insistence that they are women. So to be polite, we are supposed to join in playing along with their sexual fetish?! Why? Why do we have to be involved in their sexual fetish?
Homo sapiens are a dimorphic species and everyone of us is born either male or female and our conscious selves can exist only within our physical sexed bodies until we die. Cosmetic surgeries and wrong sex hormones cannot actually change the biological sex each individual has been born as.
Nobody can change sex and there are no convincing arguments that there is any benefit for the law and all of society to be compelled to pretend that it is possible. Not only should trans genderism be dismissed as a fantasy but there are many more convincing arguments why the premise harms the rights, safety and dignity of a very large proportion of society and should be rejected on that basis.
Endorsing the use of preferred pronouns harms more people than it benefits. So my strategy is stick to reality and let the individuals who are confused take responsibility for getting appropriate therapy.
My goodness you have a gift with words, Barbara.
This was a pleasure to read and echoes my own positions very closely. It was interesting reading about the thoughts of someone else doing precisely what I was doing as I read the initial essays.
So if a guy looks really feminine, he gets a “she”, but if his makeup/hair etc. leave something to be desired, then it’s “he”. That approach is just acceptance of the trans ideology. Interestingly, you don’t find trans-identified males trying to look like Angela Merkel, for example (or Nicola Sturgeon 🤣)
I disagree with the friendship point, a friend should be honest more than dishonestly kind.
No. Sorry. I did not hit the heart button for this article.
Pronouns are the gateway drug to "trans"madness. And if this hurts the tender feelings of the mythological creature, the so-called "true trans," let them book an appointment with a psychiatrist. A non-affirming psychiatrist.
Well-written.
I will not participate in the pronoun stupidity. I don't care who is offended. Luckily, I am retired so no one can coerce me into lying with my speech.
No one owns the language. So, no one can unilaterally redefine the "plural pronoun they" to refer to a single person. Nor can a woman force me to use "he" in referring to her.
It is not "kind" to use a person's "preferred pronouns." Engaging in that delusion only perpetuates and spreads a contagious psychiatric disorder. Children are often the victims of this contagion and it inflicts psychological and physical suffering on them. Causing that suffering is cruelty, not kindness. The rights of society and its most vulnerable people are more important than the wounded feelings of a narcissist. I will use the pronouns that are consistent with observable reality, which in some instances may include calling a man "she" and a woman "he" but I will not be compelled to use "preferred pronouns" by an unreasonable request from a narcissist.
So often I will read an essay on this topic, where I agree with most of it. This is the first, where I agree with all of it, for exactly the same reasons.
Thank you for writing the essay I would have written if I had a way with words.
Well, maybe if asked, Buechner would happily say he is a biological man. How do I know? All I can say is that if I did not know he was trans, I would say I am looking at a woman. The presentation is accurate and not at all exaggerated. I won't rehearse my reasons for referring to Buechner as "she" but I am at peace with that decision.
Re pronouns as a sign of “genuine respect for the truly dysphoric (rare, often lost in the shuffle amongst the LARPers, the contagion-infected and the kinky).”
1. Dysphoric just means they are truly unhappy with the sex of their body. Lots and lots of people, including the contagion-infected and the kinky, really truly meet the criteria for “gender dysphoria.” That’s a problem with this very slippery and vague diagnosis: all sorts of people truly fall under it. So I don’t think “truly dysphoric” is a useful criterion.
https://bprice.substack.com/p/lots-of-kids-have-real-and-diagnosable
2. Some people think there’s some sort of “real and rare” condition of “being trans” separate from the categories (like the large wave of teens, and the kinksters) they view as being “less real.” But truly, this thing we call “being trans” in the 21st century West, which evolved from and is quite different from what we called “being trans” in the 20th century West, is a pure _cultural creation_ and not a “real” physical condition in any way. Trans as a concept is truly something we made up. Other cultures have made up much better (and more functional!) narratives and niches for their gender nonconforming people:
https://bprice.substack.com/p/trans-is-something-we-made-up
3. Even if there were some sort of “true” gender dysphoric (there’s not-- if they fall under the diagnosis, they fall under the diagnosis--which indicates a problem with the diagnosis) -- but if there WERE an “ideal” and “real” example of someone who was gender-nonconforming from earliest childhood, really simply wishes he or she were the opposite sex, and gives it their earnest best shot, I’m not sure going along with their pronouns is necessarily a sign of respect and kindness.
I’m less sure on this point than the other two points, but I’m...fairly sure that’s what I think.
Do we call anorexic people Fatty because it fits their beliefs? Do we agree with people with body dysmorphia (who have a false belief that they are deformed), that yes, they are unbearable to look at? Do we agree with a psychotic person that yes, the CIA is after them, so barricading themselves at home is an excellent idea?
Or would we view those things as unkind, counterproductive, condescending, ultimately harmful to a person who is truly struggling and deserves care and compassion but maybe not our “agreement”?
Just some stuff to think about.
men are men and women are women. am absolutely not going to be part of any bullshit that says otherwise. there is nothing to discuss.
The phrase "trans woman" doesn't seem so bad, if one interprets it to mean "fake woman".