How the Left argues: fantasy and abuse

Pregnant manKevin Williamson wrote an interesting article about transsexuals, the core point of which was that, while they are welcome to believe what they want about themselves and should be treated with respect, they should not be able to force society as a whole to deny biological reality. I agree.

For example, the picture on the Left is of Thomas Beatie, who the media joyously announced was a “pregnant man.”  In fact, Beatie is not a man.  She is a woman who had her breasts surgically removed and a penis surgically installed.  She also takes  hormones to deepen her voice and give her male pattern body hair.

The DemProgs disagree with my and Williamson’s take, claiming that if she says she’s a man then she’s a man.  However, rather than debate the issue, they have a different plan for dealing with Williamson and his ilk:

The content of the responses on Twitter and elsewhere was a useful reminder that the Left, including its sexual-liberationist faction, is inarguably totalitarian. Critics suggested not only that I be fired for my views but that I should be prosecuted for them, and that the government should ensure that such views are not published. Live-and-let-live is not the Left’s way, never has been, and never will be. It is not sufficient that transsexuals should be free to act on their delusions — the rest of us are expected to participate in them with unreserved enthusiasm, and the Left is willing to use the state to compel us to do so. To simply believe otherwise and to share those views in print is in the minds of many on the Left not only a social transgression but something that should be a crime. The belief that members of minority political tendencies should be jailed for their views is very much in vogue for the Left at the moment. Democrats in the Senate are seeking to repeal the First Amendment. All of us — conservatives and whatever traditional liberals there still may be on the left side of the spectrum — should fully appreciate the sobering fact that there is a nascent, popular, authoritarian movement among members of the Left that supports everything from censorship to literal, non-metaphorical gulags in which to imprison people for their political beliefs.

Transsexuals and their self-identity are a red herring. The real issue is freedom of speech and thought.  You’re free to think of yourself as someone who’s gender identity is the opposite of the body nature gave you.  And I’m free to treat you with the respect all humans deserving, while refusing to let you play the Humpty-Dumpty game of deciding what words mean.

 

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Caped Crusader

    Should be “treated with respect”. Afraid not here, when this is so bizarre and mocks natural law. The best i can do is tolerate grudgingly, if it is the law; otherwise the word RESPECT ceases to have any worthwhile meaning, joining such perversions of words such as Clinton’s “it depends on what the meaning of is, is”. Stop the world I want to get off!

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    The Japanese already exposed me to gender bending norms. I’ve been vaccinated, the Left cannot shock me into “obeying” them. But they can shock a bunch of Americans into obeying the Left, just look outside.
     
    Also, on the same subject, a woman in Japan is considered to require certain other traits. For example, certain direct ways of speaking aren’t feminine. Certain clothing aren’t feminine, but masculine. Those “gender roles” is much more hardline and hardcore than most Americans are used to, and thus “bending” them is only of worth when there’s an actual standard.
     
    Americans have no “standards”, however, so there’s little gained by “bending” genders. What they are bending is your will and conscience. The Left likes that.

  • lee

    That comment I wrote recently on the wrong entry talked about the PoMo world of literary theory and criticism that’s infected the world: there is no objective truth and gender is an artificial construct are two biggies. Not to mention words/language have/has no intrinsic meaning–an identity or meaning can be constructed suit generis. See Humpty Dumpty…