Join the newsletter to receive the latest updates in your inbox.
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://quillette.com/2022/04/29/predators-dont-get-to-pick-their-pronouns/
Join the newsletter to receive the latest updates in your inbox.
I am generally an appreciative reader of the pieces by Mr. Stratton. In this case, there is a small issue - he does not really discuss “pronouns”, which is the purported subject of this piece. What he should have titled it is “Don’t let predators self-identify”.
Oh cut the nut picking. Literally nowhere are trans women claiming they are identical to biological women other than the odd crackpot. If they actually believed this they wouldn’t bother with the bodily modifications. The concept that trans women are real women is simply a claim of validity under the umbrella of womanhood. The skullduggery is from terf activists like JK Rowling who manipulate this concept into a literal interpretation in order to dog whistle the delusional/irrational trans narrative for the purposes of delegitimising their claims.
I’m utterly gob smacked that the author as a gay man would seriously advance the idea that one must not be true to one’s self 'cause ‘bad people’ might take advantage. Just about every human endeavour is open to exploitation that potentially causes harm so why should trans be the only ones to deny theirs because of this? Inconsistency much? By this logic men mustn’t be ‘allowed’ to be alone with women or children lest the ‘predators’ have their way.
The idea that humans are only able to “make sense of the terms “man” and “woman” when defined biologically” is preposterous & exceedingly patronising. The fact is we have already been making the distinction for decades. Trans woman/man is shorthand for gender identification/expression that even a child can discern. And why pray tell should only biology define an identity? Humans are much more than their sexual characteristics & to pretend otherwise is where the actual delusion lies.
The fact of the matter is there are no trends only anecdotal instances of predatory trans or men falsely identifying as women. It’s actually the anti trans activists who chronically hyperbolise every isolated occurrence & incessantly propagandise imaginary ones that have done the most damage to trans rights not a few pronouns…
Trans women aren’t women. If they were, I wouldn’t need the qualifier “trans”.
Women are women. Trans women are trans women.
Men are men. Trans men are trans men.
Statements/slogans of advocacy are often meant to be understood abstractly. They usually point to an idea that isn’t always able to be easily condensed into a few words. See ‘build that wall’ or ‘lock her up’…
I understand the nuance just fine. I simply don’t buy it. This isn’t the same as “all Catholics are Christians” or “all squares are rectangles” stuff… My point is a simple one. Trans women are not women. Women are women. Trans men are not men. Men are men. And, conversely, Men are not Trans men. Trans women and trans men are approximations of something, to be sure. But they are not it. They may identify as something, but that doesn’t make the act of self-identification valid.
You’ve heard of cultural appropriation right? This is like gender appropriation.
I am not opposed to advocacy of an idea if I am free to accept it or reject it without being attacked by a mob. If I am forced to accept it then it ceases to be advocacy and becomes bullying. As the author warns, bullying invites backlash.
Not the same at all. These are imperative statements. Both of them have an active verb not a verb of being. Build and lock are imperatives. These are not the same category at all.
But that’s just your opinion & ultimately it’s usage that get’s the final say.
Of course & this applies with anything like say religion or political views. But context matters where toleration isn’t a choice like say the workplace.
I think it’s also important to distinguish where most of this alleged ‘bullying’ occurs & that’s social media where often those claiming to be bullied are routinely employing provocations under the guise of ‘speaking truth’ so they can cry bully. Those making the most noise about being bullied are rarely acting in good faith. If they were they wouldn’t be using inflammatory language on twitter of all places. And to be fair threats on social media aren’t usually the real deal.
That’s irrelevant. The point is the depth of ideas can’t always be expressed economically. See #metoo
Man? Woman? Birthing-Person-Who’s-Gender-Is-Whatever-They-Want-And-You’d-Better-Get-It-Right?
I’m so confused…
Edit: Couldn’t resist.:
“Taught how to catheterize birthing people with penises.”
The test will be multiple-choice…
If this is true then gender is binary after all and trans ideology reduces the categories of man and woman to two sets of mutually exclusive simplistic trends, stereotypes and expectations.
No matter how you slice it the trans advocates are always the more strict gender essentialists in the end. What’s happening with the trans explosion in the western world is no better than places like Iran where they transition as a loophole to get around being gay.
You’re the one pretending that people are denying this. We know. We think boys can be as feminine as we want. But everything inches toward the changing of the “sex” label even as these gender heads say gender and sex is seperate, it is trans advocates who most act like they are the same. “Gender reassignment surgery” doesn’t even make sense going by their own terminology. They are not doing anything to the patient’s inner identity but rather tinkering with their outer biology. It used to be called a sex change but now they pay lip service to that difference. But don’t be fooled they still have their eyes on the sex prize.
Theyll never be happy even with descriptions that conform to their definitions and claims, like “male woman.” Start calling transwomen male women and see how people like it. It abides by gender theory and is accurate, but they won’t stand for it. That’s because taking sex is the ultimate goal. They’re buffering and stalling for time with the vacuous term ‘gender’ to get people on board first, but they don’t believe their own bullshit about sex and gender being seperate. That’s the bait and switch. Both “female” (sex) and “woman” (gender) now have circular dictionary definitions about being based on identity.
If it’s transgender then why is a transwoman known as M2F (male to female) instead of man to woman? Because they want the whole cake and then some.
Not only man/woman, but male/female has also been rendered meaningless by this navelgazing rot. I don’t know if we even have words to just describe simply one’s sex anymore. Perhaps adding “biological” male/female, but that describes transpeople too in empirical ways they won’t stand for. Their ultimate gripe always does come down to it being a mismatch between what they want the world to be vs the reality. There’s no getting away from it, gender and sex are the same thing.
That’s both delusional and objectively false. There are by now HUNDREDS of stories of trannies in jail raping woman. Those stories are verified, by pregnancy tests among other facts. And the grooming is the manner in which trannies recruit vulnerable confused kids.
Not at all. Gender identity is an internal sense of self as masculine, feminine, a blend of both, neither, or something else. Non-binary – is an umbrella term for gender identities that are not exclusively masculine or feminine. So the usage of gender identification is hardly signalling a binary understanding of gender in fact it’s just the opposite.
If you need to assume this motivation without any evidence that says more about your own biases than reality.
And literally no one is saying they must identify otherwise only that now a choice exists should one prefer it.
Of course. But how your body presents is part of gender expression. Women routinely have breast enhancements for this very reason.
They are impervious to understanding biology are they?
Because woman is an umbrella term that includes biological females & gender identifying females definitionally.
Um, it just makes more sense for the purposes of definition. You seem to be reading too much into this…
But biological sex (male/female) is used as the primary definition of male & female in the dictionary. The usages are in ascending order from most widely used to less with gender identification classified as a lower order usage. If trans people didn’t have any regard for biological sex or didn’t think it was ‘real’ they wouldn’t use the term ‘cis gender’ to describe humans whose biology matches their gender identity.
A more accurate interpretation is they are just tying to fit better into the way the world is.
And you call yourself a scientific statistician?
Wasn’t that you who routinely discredits all trans studies you don’t agree with because of small sample sizes?
This is where you are simple wrong. You’ve invented the notion of “umbrella term” for something that is not. “Primate” is an umbrella term. You want us to believe that woman is a word that is like the word car. If I see a car it might be many different types of car; like race-car, sedan, sports-car, etc. Car does not specify. But the word woman does specify the type of primate. It specifically identifies a female, human. Which is why we don’t use the term “a woman orangutan”, we say “a female orangutan.” Then female is a more flexible term. So try female-man and you’re halfway there.
Trans-women are not women.
You are just playing semantics now. What is it with conservatives & their hyper dependency on literal thinking? Do they not get it or more they don’t want to?
Trans women are real women…
Yes. And the majority still consider ‘man’ to refer to an adult male human, so by your own standard, that’s what the word means – just as it has since the beginnings of language. Thanks for conceding.
Except that we have ‘transman’ and ‘transwoman’ – one or the other. Why is not Pat a transgenderfuck? Somebody show me ‘trans’ that is not followed in strict binary fashion with either ‘man’ or ‘woman’. As Johnny has proven – yes, proven – trans ideology is exactly self-cancelling in the same way that the old logical lesson: “this statement is false” is self-cancelling. If you want ‘gender’ to refer to nothing but an internal feeling of which there an infinite number of possibilities, then that’s not useful but neither is it absurd in the correct use of that word – there I go again, wanting words to mean something so that we can use them to communicate – no not absurd, you’ve just created a form of language that communicates nothing but self-reference. But ‘trans’ is something else – trans is always a reference to one of two binary states – male or female which are biological realities. Thus ‘transman’ is an absurdity because it supposes that one can be what one’s biological reality is not. There is a reference to reality and a denial of reality at the same time.
I’d suggest that there is one meaningful question to be asked: ‘what is your sex?’, and apart from a tiny number of genetic defects, only two answers are possible: M/F. As to ‘what is your gender?’ the answer can be literally anything one wants to invent and thus no information is contained in the answer. Pat is a genderfuck. Good! Very Good! But what usable information do we gain? If Pat transitions to ‘racoon gender-vibe’ what has actually changed? Now, when it comes to surgery, note that no one is ever sliced up and put together again as a genderfuck or a racoon gender-vibe, no, the options are binary: a male is turned into a sterile mockery of a female, or visa versa, yes? So, to be charitable, one might have on one’s driver’s licence M, F, M>F and F>M which would communicate information: one’s sex, and the mutilations one has undergone. But leave ‘gender’ out of it. Unless we are to use the older, useful definition, the modern definition contains no information.
Progress! But note that you again default to the assumption that ‘gender’ says something real and it is proven again and again that as you use the word, it means nothing – it is an ‘identity’ and one can identify as Napoleon or as Zeus or as a woman or as an immortal. Thus, society should have zero concern for Gender (as you use the term) and should consider it entirely one’s internal, private affair. What is of concern is whether men should be able to use women’s safe spaces and compete with women in sports. The majority say ‘no’. End of issue.
Shocking isn’t it? We want words to mean something. For words to mean something, they must refer to something that is in the shared experience of both speaker and hearer. The internal fantasies of the gender tripper are not communicable and they refer to no shared reality. Now, if a man says: “From now on I want to be treated as a woman” we might discuss whether or not that should be compulsory. If so, what other fantasies might be compulsory? But for now, let’s be clear that it is a fantasy.
No, quite the opposite. You and your ilk play semantics, alter the definitions of terms to suit your political assertions and then, when logic stands in your way, you decide that “literal thinking” is the inverse of your “bad thinking”.
Trans women are not women.
I see. Well I guess this is the point where people will either choose to listen to me who can honestly say from my vantage point looks like a bunch of guys suddebnly (and coinciding chronologically with the trans boom) who may or may not be consciously self-aware penis-havers trying to fuck women in the penetrative traditional sense as in the dick in vagina. and encroach on their hallowed spaces and general domain. And get sports trophies on easy mode.
There just seems to be a whole lot more of that, these days. If ROGD doesn’t explain it (it’s never been debunked as you fraudulently claim, even by your Wikipedia link’s standard), I’d love to hear what does.
If a trans-woman does rape a woman, then it obviously has nothing to do with men. In your estimation, it then is a matter of inter-gender rape. No different than any garden variety prison rape. Furthermore, by lumping trans-women into the category of all women you will eventually degrade the definition of women to such a degree as to render the term meaningless. I hope you don’t work for the census bureau of your nation. If so, Australia may be populated by 100% women within a generation of this level of idiotic thinking.