“..transitioning to a *gender* in society opposite to that of one’s biological *sex*…” - I know others have said what I’m about to say a thousand times before, and probably many times better, but I am compelled to respond.
In one phrase you have used both the terms gender and sex (thereby implying that they connote something different, or you mean to connote something different by then) yet talked of transitioning between the two despite their conceptual difference.
From the perspective of pure logic - if not biological sense or reality of which there is none - transitioning must mean moving from being biologically male to biologically female and vice versa, a bit like a light switch transitioning between its mutually exclusive and mutually exhaustive states of being either on or off. We all know that this is impossible. But logically, transitioning must mean going from State A to State Not A, which in the binary situation of sex means State B.
If gender purportedly means (for the sake of the argument, which of course I reject as guff) one’s inner sense of sexual identity, the “sex soul”, as opposed to its biological reality, there is no transitioning involved; it just is what it is, an ongoing aspect of one’s personality. One can’t transition from State A to State A because nothing has changed.
To conflate the two and speak of transitioning from the biological reality of sex A not to sex B but to sex soul B makes no sense at all. Transgenderists merrily use this conflation all the time to confuse; sceptics shouldn’t play their game!
That quibble apart, your article is as ever on the money and a pleasure to read!
The clue was 'transitioning to a gender *in society*'. Biological sex is in most cases determinate (with a few exceptions, eg. XXY individuals etc). Gender might well be descriptive of an inner sense of self, i.e. a perception of oneself as either male or female. But gender is also a social construct, which involves the perception of a person BY OTHERS as being either male or female. This is supposedly what transgender 'therapy' is all about - the social and/or medical transformation of a person perceived by society as one gender to the opposite SOCIAL gender, in order to remedy a perceived mismatch between outer and inner. It's not a chromosomal/anatomical biological sex change obviously but surgery and hormone treatment do physically alter the body. The impetus for such a transition supposedly is the individual's inner perception of their gender (often evident from a very early age), which you appear to reject as unreal ("guff"). But obviously PSYCHOSOCIAL gender identity must be a thing, otherwise men and women would not be able to function effectively in society minus a stable sense of self - which must per se involve some sense of being 'male' or 'female'. It's debatable what the relative contributions from Nature (biology) and Nurture (social learning) are in the formation of this inner sense of gender identity, whether one is more important than the other.
The credentialed classes will continue to virtue signal as long as they believe they are acting in a moral way. It's only when they realise that their actions have made them the objects of public scorn and derision that this will end.
I believe you have correctly interpreted the playbook of belief modification. The Christians cleverly built their churches on ancient burial mounds to show that their God was more powerful than the old ones, to capitalise on the visibility of those ancient sites and to say "there, we're so moral and forgiving that we have given your ancestors a decent burial on our holy ground". Of course, they also burned heretics at the stake - to save their immortal souls.
My beloved country, Scotland, has now reverted to a belief in witchcraft, something we thought had been debunked centuries ago. It's as if the Scottish Enlightenment had never happened. It's now known as hate speech and is solely in the ear of the listener. It's coming to a jurisdiction near you soon.
The Free Speech Union has started a crowd funder to fight cases brought under these new witchcraft laws so please make a donation if you can!
Yes, actually, you've got it exactly right, I never thought of it that way. Yousless's hate speech law is a revival of the belief in witchcraft: 'That nasty witch cast a spell on me with her hurty words and now I'm suffering as a result. She should be prosecuted.'
It's almost Shakespearean: 'Fear not, Till Salem do come to Holyrood'.
"This is a perfect example: just a couple of days ago, the moron in the White House (and his handlers) declared Easter Sunday to be “Transgender Day of Visibility.” Not the day before Easter. Not the day after. Not any of the other three hundred sixty-four days in the year. Nope. Easter Sunday, folks. The holiest day on our Christian calendar. And we have more than a few Christians in this country. Here is the communist’s Twitter post earlier today. He didn’t wish anyone Happy Easter, but he instead wrote:"
Well said Jaime!!! Biden has pulled the same shite in USA today!!! This craziness in the West is obviously coordinated by the elites and it’s should be obvious to anyone with who’s looking!!
This post could get McPlod round to see you in Scotland after the April Fools' Day introduction of Yousless's new Hate Law. I like the ambiguity of "men in frocks".
When Labour get in, they will surely follow Scotland. Then, we either silently comply with the totalitarian censorship 'laws' or we defy them and assert our inalienable God given rights to free speech as peaceful, free human beings whatever the consequences.
I can imagine getting embroiled in a climate change "hate crime" by disparaging the nonsense on stilts that is Net Zero and its fantasy solution. I hope I will have the fortitude (and family support) to argue it out in court.
I swear if I hear one more repetition of the mindless phrase 'clean energy transition' coming from a politician, journalist, political commentator or 'scientist', I'm going to explode! It's one thing to co-opt another person's religious symbolism and festivals in order to promote your own cult-like ideology, but quite another to torture and abuse the English language in order to hard sell your factually challenged, scientifically and technologically illiterate idiocy.
“..transitioning to a *gender* in society opposite to that of one’s biological *sex*…” - I know others have said what I’m about to say a thousand times before, and probably many times better, but I am compelled to respond.
In one phrase you have used both the terms gender and sex (thereby implying that they connote something different, or you mean to connote something different by then) yet talked of transitioning between the two despite their conceptual difference.
From the perspective of pure logic - if not biological sense or reality of which there is none - transitioning must mean moving from being biologically male to biologically female and vice versa, a bit like a light switch transitioning between its mutually exclusive and mutually exhaustive states of being either on or off. We all know that this is impossible. But logically, transitioning must mean going from State A to State Not A, which in the binary situation of sex means State B.
If gender purportedly means (for the sake of the argument, which of course I reject as guff) one’s inner sense of sexual identity, the “sex soul”, as opposed to its biological reality, there is no transitioning involved; it just is what it is, an ongoing aspect of one’s personality. One can’t transition from State A to State A because nothing has changed.
To conflate the two and speak of transitioning from the biological reality of sex A not to sex B but to sex soul B makes no sense at all. Transgenderists merrily use this conflation all the time to confuse; sceptics shouldn’t play their game!
That quibble apart, your article is as ever on the money and a pleasure to read!
The clue was 'transitioning to a gender *in society*'. Biological sex is in most cases determinate (with a few exceptions, eg. XXY individuals etc). Gender might well be descriptive of an inner sense of self, i.e. a perception of oneself as either male or female. But gender is also a social construct, which involves the perception of a person BY OTHERS as being either male or female. This is supposedly what transgender 'therapy' is all about - the social and/or medical transformation of a person perceived by society as one gender to the opposite SOCIAL gender, in order to remedy a perceived mismatch between outer and inner. It's not a chromosomal/anatomical biological sex change obviously but surgery and hormone treatment do physically alter the body. The impetus for such a transition supposedly is the individual's inner perception of their gender (often evident from a very early age), which you appear to reject as unreal ("guff"). But obviously PSYCHOSOCIAL gender identity must be a thing, otherwise men and women would not be able to function effectively in society minus a stable sense of self - which must per se involve some sense of being 'male' or 'female'. It's debatable what the relative contributions from Nature (biology) and Nurture (social learning) are in the formation of this inner sense of gender identity, whether one is more important than the other.
The credentialed classes will continue to virtue signal as long as they believe they are acting in a moral way. It's only when they realise that their actions have made them the objects of public scorn and derision that this will end.
I believe you have correctly interpreted the playbook of belief modification. The Christians cleverly built their churches on ancient burial mounds to show that their God was more powerful than the old ones, to capitalise on the visibility of those ancient sites and to say "there, we're so moral and forgiving that we have given your ancestors a decent burial on our holy ground". Of course, they also burned heretics at the stake - to save their immortal souls.
My beloved country, Scotland, has now reverted to a belief in witchcraft, something we thought had been debunked centuries ago. It's as if the Scottish Enlightenment had never happened. It's now known as hate speech and is solely in the ear of the listener. It's coming to a jurisdiction near you soon.
The Free Speech Union has started a crowd funder to fight cases brought under these new witchcraft laws so please make a donation if you can!
https://www.gofundme.com/f/the-free-speech-unions-scottish-fighting-fund
Yes, actually, you've got it exactly right, I never thought of it that way. Yousless's hate speech law is a revival of the belief in witchcraft: 'That nasty witch cast a spell on me with her hurty words and now I'm suffering as a result. She should be prosecuted.'
It's almost Shakespearean: 'Fear not, Till Salem do come to Holyrood'.
The Biden white house made Easter into Trans visibility Day here in the states as well.
They also banned religious themes at the Easter egg coloring contest.
I gather this Trans Day of Visibility was the Whitehouse's big idea in the first place, so Labour here are just aping Biden.
Attorney Bobbie Ann Cox has written a very pertinent post on this:
https://attorneycox.substack.com/p/wake-up-and-smell-the-communism
"This is a perfect example: just a couple of days ago, the moron in the White House (and his handlers) declared Easter Sunday to be “Transgender Day of Visibility.” Not the day before Easter. Not the day after. Not any of the other three hundred sixty-four days in the year. Nope. Easter Sunday, folks. The holiest day on our Christian calendar. And we have more than a few Christians in this country. Here is the communist’s Twitter post earlier today. He didn’t wish anyone Happy Easter, but he instead wrote:"
Well said Jaime!!! Biden has pulled the same shite in USA today!!! This craziness in the West is obviously coordinated by the elites and it’s should be obvious to anyone with who’s looking!!
Biden to transgender Americans:
"Today, on Transgender Day of Visibility, I have a simple message to all trans Americans:
I see you."
Next he'll be claiming he's smelling them too.
I'm fucking off out of this shit hole. Not sure where yet, Russia appeals but most likely somewhere with more sunshine and less trans/muslim/idiots
This post could get McPlod round to see you in Scotland after the April Fools' Day introduction of Yousless's new Hate Law. I like the ambiguity of "men in frocks".
When Labour get in, they will surely follow Scotland. Then, we either silently comply with the totalitarian censorship 'laws' or we defy them and assert our inalienable God given rights to free speech as peaceful, free human beings whatever the consequences.
I can imagine getting embroiled in a climate change "hate crime" by disparaging the nonsense on stilts that is Net Zero and its fantasy solution. I hope I will have the fortitude (and family support) to argue it out in court.
I swear if I hear one more repetition of the mindless phrase 'clean energy transition' coming from a politician, journalist, political commentator or 'scientist', I'm going to explode! It's one thing to co-opt another person's religious symbolism and festivals in order to promote your own cult-like ideology, but quite another to torture and abuse the English language in order to hard sell your factually challenged, scientifically and technologically illiterate idiocy.
I'm sure JK Rowlings is up for a fight!