The issue is not sex, it is power. Does a man who claims to be a woman have the power to force you to refer to him as a woman, the power to force officials to let him compete in women's athletics? Does a woman who claims to be a man have the power to make you refer to her as "him"? He, she or it claims to be asking for freedom to choose which sex to belong to, but what he, she or it really wants is the power to impose his, her or its sexual delusion on everybody else.
I'd argue there's a distinction between performative character types who get off on throwing their weight around and bullying others, who are extremely visible but not the majority, compared to many others who might genuinely feel that their identity doesn't line up with their default anatomy but don't make coercing others a priority. One of the most brilliant scientists I ever covered was a trans woman who was as pleasant a person as I've met, not at all into power plays. Certainly this person was far more talented than me, I can't really say they weren't the world's foremost expert on their personal identity.
Your distinction is apt. It is all too easy to conclude that the publicity hounds are the majority because they get all the publicity. Yet, if each of us is "the world's foremost expert on their personal identity", no one can deny that Senator Warren is a Cherokee.
I find your comment perceptive, but probably not for any reason you had in mind while writing it. You refer to transness as “sexual delusion” and claim that it’s all about power. Your comment demonstrates a belief that people who disagree with trans identities should have the authority to say “no, you’re not this, you’re that,” to effectively say “this is nonsense and I’m not going to participate in it.” This relies on a belief that gender is self-evident, and tied to sex, which is easily divided into two clear-cut categories, male and female.
Isn’t this also about power, about imposing a certain world-view?
It’s just one that you have taken as pre-given ground, independent of ideology, but it’s still a world-view. When unilateral rules are made about trans athletes and imposed by law, that’s power!
I hope that we are able to agree, on some level, that biological science on human sexuality & gender is woefully incomplete and partial. We don’t have all the answers, one way or another. As such, making any ultimate claims about “sex is real” or whatnot obscures the fact that this isn’t a conversation merely about biological reality, but about what we take biology to mean and the ethical discussions that arise when details slip outside of a particular frame we’ve placed on it.
I mean, as it stand now, how gender is discussed by the adherents of genderology is incompatible with and extremely resistant to observation, measurement, recording, and replication of results.
In this aspect, gender ideology, is no more scientific than astrology. Yet, we’d be aghast if the tenets of astrology were supplanting the findings of astronomy AND being codified into law.
frankly, that’s just not true, and I think you’re missing the point I’m making, while also proving it at the same time.
I’m putting aside the fact that there is a *significant* body of evidence, ranging from scientific & biomedical research to patient testimonies, that is rigorous in terms of it measurements, observation, recording, and replication of results. however, I know from multiple experiences on Substack that we will not come to any productive discussion about the data & research on gender identity.
notably, you ignore my central point which is that the strict use of the law to discipline trans people is *as much an imposition of power* as you claim “genderology” to be. if you think that the “genderologists” are making overblown, but ignore my focus on the ferocious conservative attempt to limit trans rights, I don’t take your concern about evidence as good faith - sorry!
Trans deserve all the rights that I have no more no less. They do not, nor do I, have the right to to impose onto anyone a demand for affirmation of their belief in their identity much like Christians can be damned if they think the can compel me to affirm their belief Jesus I the Lord God our savior.
Well written! I think we pretty much have the same position on this contentious issue.
Loved this point: "What exactly that means in terms of navigating pronoun practices and gender-exclusive spaces or might mean in another few decades is up in the air as etiquette evolves organically in all the millions of day-to-day interactions among various and sundry human beings."
I personally think there is a difference between biological sex and gender/gender roles and for some people there is such a mismatch between the two that transition makes sense. I also think sex is the more important variable in some instances (perhaps in sports) but that gender is more important in others (why not keep gender on passports? If you pass as a woman then it makes more sense to indicate that on IDs).
However, when we say something is socially constructed, we also acknowledge it’s socially agreed upon, and what’s socially agreed upon will, like you say, never come from forcing a top-down narrative on to others, but through an organic social process.
I don't expect activists on either side of the divide to be very happy with the "half a loaf" approach, but I don't think either camp is going away or will ever be able to score a definitive victory over the other. Better that we learn to live with and tolerate one another, along with a healthy dash of federalism so people of very different cultural mores can live according to their deeply held beliefs and values without unnecessarily antagonizing each other.
As I am a coastal Caifornia sophisticate, I cross paths with many of the children of our Gender Revolution.
I'm fine calling a natal male "She/her" (same for a female), esp in re personal etiquette and esp if they make some decent attempt at passing. I've even met a few Trans people that I didn't know were Trans until I was told later, bc the lights were low and the hormones were doing their job.
But then I'm informed by some brittle adult child that I must use "They/Them" bc they're something called "Non-Binary", which has absolutely no meaning outside of a narcissistic conformist needing attention, and this is where I bristle.
There are many actual Trans people who just want to live their lives and just want respect and kindness—and the Gender Revolution is often their worst enemy. They've been hijacked into becoming mascots for a political movement, and political movements are always quickly taken over by angry lost souls who are just looking for a pretext to feel important and a chance to attack others in the name of a good cause.
I'm sure John McWhorter knows this better than I do, as he is a black man who I'm sure has met many "allies" trying to save/help him, whether he wants them to or not.
Of course most of us are "deeply resistant to change by fiat”, not everyone is as neurotic as your average campus liberal, and most of us don't respond well to the emotional blackmail that lies at the root of modern identity Leftism.
Live and let live is big here at Chez Hillbilly. It's also something that is unfortunately moving beyond our ken in most of the world. I don’t have to love or even agree with everything anyone else does or thinks--I just have to acknowledge that in most cases it's simply their right and their business. But that's not good enough for true believers. It's not good enough that I once officiated a very non-traditional wedding and truly wished the happy couple well. I had to, years later, acknowledge their right, which does not exist, to indoctrinate my kids into their lifestyle behind my back. When you force me to let you in on what's behind live and let live, you might wish you had not.
Great write up. McWhorter is a brilliant writer and I'm not surprised he brought the "zestiness". It sounds like this is a book more about linguistics and not the culture war per se, but I'm curious to know where he stands on all that.
It's definitely a linguistics book first and foremost, but it builds inexorably to the "they/them" chapter and the culture wars are a constant elephant in the room. Well worth the read!
This is a wonderful description of how egregores, spiritual entities that are not beings, are crafted by humans! Lashing our sweet planet relentlessly, they are very annoying! The surest method to dissipate them is The Light of Consciousness! There is no such thing as a good egregore!
The issue is not sex, it is power. Does a man who claims to be a woman have the power to force you to refer to him as a woman, the power to force officials to let him compete in women's athletics? Does a woman who claims to be a man have the power to make you refer to her as "him"? He, she or it claims to be asking for freedom to choose which sex to belong to, but what he, she or it really wants is the power to impose his, her or its sexual delusion on everybody else.
I'd argue there's a distinction between performative character types who get off on throwing their weight around and bullying others, who are extremely visible but not the majority, compared to many others who might genuinely feel that their identity doesn't line up with their default anatomy but don't make coercing others a priority. One of the most brilliant scientists I ever covered was a trans woman who was as pleasant a person as I've met, not at all into power plays. Certainly this person was far more talented than me, I can't really say they weren't the world's foremost expert on their personal identity.
Your distinction is apt. It is all too easy to conclude that the publicity hounds are the majority because they get all the publicity. Yet, if each of us is "the world's foremost expert on their personal identity", no one can deny that Senator Warren is a Cherokee.
Ha, Liz doesn't count!
I find your comment perceptive, but probably not for any reason you had in mind while writing it. You refer to transness as “sexual delusion” and claim that it’s all about power. Your comment demonstrates a belief that people who disagree with trans identities should have the authority to say “no, you’re not this, you’re that,” to effectively say “this is nonsense and I’m not going to participate in it.” This relies on a belief that gender is self-evident, and tied to sex, which is easily divided into two clear-cut categories, male and female.
Isn’t this also about power, about imposing a certain world-view?
It’s just one that you have taken as pre-given ground, independent of ideology, but it’s still a world-view. When unilateral rules are made about trans athletes and imposed by law, that’s power!
I hope that we are able to agree, on some level, that biological science on human sexuality & gender is woefully incomplete and partial. We don’t have all the answers, one way or another. As such, making any ultimate claims about “sex is real” or whatnot obscures the fact that this isn’t a conversation merely about biological reality, but about what we take biology to mean and the ethical discussions that arise when details slip outside of a particular frame we’ve placed on it.
I mean, as it stand now, how gender is discussed by the adherents of genderology is incompatible with and extremely resistant to observation, measurement, recording, and replication of results.
In this aspect, gender ideology, is no more scientific than astrology. Yet, we’d be aghast if the tenets of astrology were supplanting the findings of astronomy AND being codified into law.
frankly, that’s just not true, and I think you’re missing the point I’m making, while also proving it at the same time.
I’m putting aside the fact that there is a *significant* body of evidence, ranging from scientific & biomedical research to patient testimonies, that is rigorous in terms of it measurements, observation, recording, and replication of results. however, I know from multiple experiences on Substack that we will not come to any productive discussion about the data & research on gender identity.
notably, you ignore my central point which is that the strict use of the law to discipline trans people is *as much an imposition of power* as you claim “genderology” to be. if you think that the “genderologists” are making overblown, but ignore my focus on the ferocious conservative attempt to limit trans rights, I don’t take your concern about evidence as good faith - sorry!
Trans deserve all the rights that I have no more no less. They do not, nor do I, have the right to to impose onto anyone a demand for affirmation of their belief in their identity much like Christians can be damned if they think the can compel me to affirm their belief Jesus I the Lord God our savior.
And I’ll just leave it at that.
Well written! I think we pretty much have the same position on this contentious issue.
Loved this point: "What exactly that means in terms of navigating pronoun practices and gender-exclusive spaces or might mean in another few decades is up in the air as etiquette evolves organically in all the millions of day-to-day interactions among various and sundry human beings."
I personally think there is a difference between biological sex and gender/gender roles and for some people there is such a mismatch between the two that transition makes sense. I also think sex is the more important variable in some instances (perhaps in sports) but that gender is more important in others (why not keep gender on passports? If you pass as a woman then it makes more sense to indicate that on IDs).
However, when we say something is socially constructed, we also acknowledge it’s socially agreed upon, and what’s socially agreed upon will, like you say, never come from forcing a top-down narrative on to others, but through an organic social process.
I don't expect activists on either side of the divide to be very happy with the "half a loaf" approach, but I don't think either camp is going away or will ever be able to score a definitive victory over the other. Better that we learn to live with and tolerate one another, along with a healthy dash of federalism so people of very different cultural mores can live according to their deeply held beliefs and values without unnecessarily antagonizing each other.
Agreed. I think when both sides hold shards of the truth, neither one will be able to fully dominate the other.
As I am a coastal Caifornia sophisticate, I cross paths with many of the children of our Gender Revolution.
I'm fine calling a natal male "She/her" (same for a female), esp in re personal etiquette and esp if they make some decent attempt at passing. I've even met a few Trans people that I didn't know were Trans until I was told later, bc the lights were low and the hormones were doing their job.
But then I'm informed by some brittle adult child that I must use "They/Them" bc they're something called "Non-Binary", which has absolutely no meaning outside of a narcissistic conformist needing attention, and this is where I bristle.
There are many actual Trans people who just want to live their lives and just want respect and kindness—and the Gender Revolution is often their worst enemy. They've been hijacked into becoming mascots for a political movement, and political movements are always quickly taken over by angry lost souls who are just looking for a pretext to feel important and a chance to attack others in the name of a good cause.
I'm sure John McWhorter knows this better than I do, as he is a black man who I'm sure has met many "allies" trying to save/help him, whether he wants them to or not.
Of course most of us are "deeply resistant to change by fiat”, not everyone is as neurotic as your average campus liberal, and most of us don't respond well to the emotional blackmail that lies at the root of modern identity Leftism.
Live and let live is big here at Chez Hillbilly. It's also something that is unfortunately moving beyond our ken in most of the world. I don’t have to love or even agree with everything anyone else does or thinks--I just have to acknowledge that in most cases it's simply their right and their business. But that's not good enough for true believers. It's not good enough that I once officiated a very non-traditional wedding and truly wished the happy couple well. I had to, years later, acknowledge their right, which does not exist, to indoctrinate my kids into their lifestyle behind my back. When you force me to let you in on what's behind live and let live, you might wish you had not.
Great write up. McWhorter is a brilliant writer and I'm not surprised he brought the "zestiness". It sounds like this is a book more about linguistics and not the culture war per se, but I'm curious to know where he stands on all that.
It's definitely a linguistics book first and foremost, but it builds inexorably to the "they/them" chapter and the culture wars are a constant elephant in the room. Well worth the read!
This is a wonderful description of how egregores, spiritual entities that are not beings, are crafted by humans! Lashing our sweet planet relentlessly, they are very annoying! The surest method to dissipate them is The Light of Consciousness! There is no such thing as a good egregore!
Love McWhorter — the guy is just brilliant.
I've got a number of his other books I've accrued over the years, will have to find the time to read further!
No. Fuck this shit.
Sex is biological.
There are two sexes. That is all
Nobody can change sex.
"Trans" does not exist.
There are no "trans women". There are only men in dresses. Mostly autogynophiles.
People who claim to be transgender are mentally ill, and need treatment not affirmation.