A review marred by the author’s desire to continue to receive cocktail party invitations.
General dysphoria is real, if rare. But men cannot become women nor women men, period. Most importantly the literature is not at all clear that dysphorics reach a better outcome by pretending they can.
No, don't leave. Stay and speak the truth. They labeled Slover's editorial as opinion, so FAIR shouldn't be blamed. If good people leave the fight when encountering difficulty, goodness will lose.
Nonsense. Those that stood with FAIR from the beginning, donated, and spread the word are supposed to stand with the ideological downward spiral of what is has become. Just one shit show for self-flagellating progressives. We got scammed
I would recommend going back and reviewing FAIRs launch material led by really good decent folks that I still respect. Barri Weiss, I believe was one of the founding leaders, https://youtu.be/clSykQd_WSA?t=17 . I still follow Barri and believe she is doing excellent stuff.
While FAIR was promoted (based on how I understood it) to be collaborative effort that would allow diversity of thought regardless of political affiliation to be included in the broader effort with civil liberties as one of its core principles. As time went it appeared to just morph into one more dumping ground for the progressive lite bunch. Way too much promoting the same tired bunch of public intellectuals that includes folks like Michael Shermer, Steven Pinker and others that already have massive platforms. Good people but firmly influenced by a similar ideology. Relative to action and results, I see very little. FAIR developed some obnoxious alternative to CRT and critical race studies which indicates they don't have the stomach for a real fight. Same toxic garbage just kinder and gentler. They trash folks like Chris Rufu who in fact does fight and has results. The FAIR bunch while pretending to be inclusive has nothing but disdain for conservatives. I don't say that easily and only speak for myself. FAIR did promote the launching of local chapters and when I contacted those that were establishing our regional chapter it was made very clear to me from day one that they will use the FAIR franchise, but they have the authority to interpret and develop an autonomous strategy. I live in the west so please imagine what that would look like if you are not a progressive. Please make you own decision. The fight for civil liberties is real but results matter. Thanks for asking and good lucK.
Leaving doesn’t stop another from speaking their opinion. Free speech means everyone has a platform to be heard without threats or cancelling from life, not that others have an obligation to listen.
My “opinion” is that this article completely distorts the actual movie, intentionally misquoting it until I pointed it out, and makes assertions that are demonstrably false about both the movie and child gender “transitions.”
The kind of baloney propoganda pushed in this article is free and abundant. While I’m not cancelling my subscription right now, the respect I once had for FAIR has mostly evaporated.
Absolutely! What is a Woman? actually highlights the absurdity of where we are today. Interesting to see no mention of the Canadian dad who has not been allowed to parent his child because the mother decided trans was the only way to go. The author wistfully says, "We can protect kids and families from unscrupulous doctors without prohibiting the responsible doctors from deciding what is best for their patients" is such BS because all who believe they are in the wrong body are affirmed immediately. My friend has been going through this with her biologically female child for several years, and doctors, like those exposed in the film, are happy to affirm, make loads of money, destroy families and most significantly ruin children's lives. This author's opinion is obviously tainted by a strong dislike for the filmmaker, or he would have included the adult trans man's (TRevoices) who knows he'll die young and forever need medical intervention.
Thanks for not leaving before writing the above. You have given me more to think about and as a result I will read the article again and look for a different perspective. This is a difficult issue for me. It seems so clear and yet so many have a very different view. I think our politics are probably similar, but I am trying to make sure I move beyond that to get a clear view of the opposing ideas. Thanks again for commenting.
Don't leave! We need to agree that we can all be here with differing opinions. We need your input just like his. I actually agree with Grayson that there are some who are "born in the wrong body" but this explosion of people with that idea is questionable, to me anyway.
As a chapter lead many of us are sick of these nonsensical “meet-in-the-middle” proposals. I’m not okay agreeing that child abuse and mutilation is okay in special circumstances.
To compare the removal of a small portion of foreskin to chemical castration, sterilization, and the complete surgical or medical destruction of genital function is intellectually lazy.
Please google the word "mutilation". I don't think it remotely qualifies. I am circumcised and I am not aware of any negative effects while it has provided religious and hygiene benefits. That said, neither of my two sons are circumcised.
Alison, to me, 'born in the wrong body' persay, requires help, not the knife, not drugs. Solution is Not a travesty that others are not aware of - lying in public, deceiving the vast majority, no. That is how it all started. No.
This is absolutely my reaction. Indeed has this author penned for and/ or collaborated with a female to male FAIR Advisor to publish this?
I am troubled by this article in FAIR yesterday as it clearly states (I read it as such) that transitioning children very young can be a good option, the best even, for some kids. I have formed the opinion that no bodies should be altered medically and never should have been, these past multiple decades. That's my current conviction and I own it. And it took me two years to form it.
I personally am trying to stop assuming bad faith or ulterior motives in people I disagree with online. That's what the woke do all the time. "Oh, you don't agree? Well that's cause you're a cis, het, white......blah blah blah"
You might be right. This guy may just want to stay on the safe side of "woke" line. Although, as a fellow 'un-woke' liberal I can tell you that just writing for an organization with Megan Kelly on the board is enough to kill those cocktail invites no matter what you actually say in the op-ed.
Regardless, I think it's better to argue the merits of people you disagree with and think are wrong instead of making assumptions about "why" they're saying things you disagree with.
Why they're wrong doesn't matter. All that matters is the truth.
1 - the estimated actual rate of gender dysphoria that is significant and persists into adulthood is 1/30,000 to 1/110,000 (per the doc discussed being interviewed in the movie)
2 - historically it’s mostly a natal male thing, but the vast majority of kids getting “gender affirming treatment” in this country are females with high rates of autistic and lesbian girls
3- at least 1.5% of the current k-12 age kids in this country “identify” as trans. That’s 1/75. That’s social contagion.
4 - There is no evidence that even those who don’t “regret” their child transitions are somehow better off for it. First, there aren’t any 40-year olds around who transitioned at 5,6,9,10. Second, suicide ideation remains elevated among those who go through with transition, but not among those who go through gender dysphoria stages as kids but ultimately don’t transition. Third, the guaranteed life of sexual dysfunction, chronic health problems, and sterility is one heck of a price for people to pay in exchange for possibly fleeting feelings as a child mostly resulting from TikTok and intentional gender confusion.
5 - The author of this article, while accusing Matt of overlooking a point he didn’t, decided to skim over major aspects of the movie including the fact modern gender ideology had its roots in debunked research performed by a pedophile that raped children and babies and promoted the ideas embraced across much of academia today that life should be about casual sex from cradle to grave, and the hugely negative impact of gender ideology on the bodily safety and access to fair competition for biological girls and women. There were others, I won’t list them all.
5 - The author misquoted the most important line in the whole darn movie, until I pointed it out (see below). That, to me, is an indication of bad intentions. The title of the documentary is “what is a woman?” And the author “accidentally” misquoted the answer? We can’t know the intent of others, but having watched the documentary, it strains credulity to believe this was a genuine critique of the film despite the misquotes and out of context assertions about the film. It seems to me this article is nothing more than a hit piece aimed at those who didn’t watch it, with the objective of keeping them from watching it. You could prove me wrong by watching it and forming your own conclusions.
We encourage everyone to watch the film for themselves and develop their own opinions. That is the only way to build true understanding.
This opinion piece reflects the author’s perspective. We believe that true understanding comes from being open-minded and considering diverse perspectives in the pursuit of objective truth.
If you would like to submit your own essay on this or another topic for our Substack, we would love to review it.
Wonderful suggestion! I hope NCMom takes you up on the offer as I find her comments that occur across Substack as informative and intellectually engaging.
Excellent summary--someone needs to be invited on the FAIR Board NCmom! To your point #3, I was on my FB page the other day (a rare occurrence lately) and saw an old group I no longer follow (but it popped up for some reason) called Grown and Flown. I had to leave that after the 2020 election -- these parents were NUTS! This post was a mom shouting out other moms of trans kids. One mother actually said she was the proud mom of THREE trans kids. WTF is wrong with these people?!
Attention seeking. At least the 3 families I know. They didn’t celebrate their kids until they, after much pressure from their families, declared they were trans. Then they got parties, legal name changes, and LOTS of Facebook posts. It’s part of why I deleted Facebook all together.
Truly insane. Wonder who this will all sort out in the courts (and these cases will go to court) as the law schools churn out even more woke attorneys. Should be an interesting shit show.
This! Thank you! Substance over Emotion. Someone once said, "True Compassion is doing a DIS- passionate analysis of a topic or a situation. NCMom did that w a little bit of " opinion" at the end. The Author of this Article clearly used a biased mindset and filter to interpret Matt's interview questions in the Documentary. Matt was almost the ONLY one that remained UNEMOTIONAL in the movie. The only exception I can recall was his 60 seconds in front of the school board.
As long as society insists that masculine girls and feminine boys are unusual or odd, gender dysphoria will persist. This used to come from the Right, now it's coming from the Left. But the Left has made it a fun and cool thing, so it's far more popular. Stop making it weird, and people will just be themselves.
Well, they kinda can. Men cannot become biological women and women cannot be become biological men. But there's a lot more to being a man or a woman than your plumbing. A lot of it has to do with how you are treated socially, which is the biggest thing transgender individuals wish to change. So they can change genders in all the ways that matter to them.
Explain how in a way that doesn’t mistake common cultural stereotype for actual sex. Confirm that tomboys and butch lesbians do not follow common tropes it are still unambiguously female. Because we had this all worked out 50 years ago.
Tomboys are not women who feel like men. Women with gender dysphoria are. Tomboys are still referred to as "she" and "mam." They still go into the women's restroom. And let's be honest, men and women are treated differently, they just are, even if they don't match the stereotypes.
First, a lot of Tom boys do think they should have been an actual boy as young children, something I can attest to first hand, which is one of the many reasons I find gender ideology overtly cruel.
“Trans women,” also go into women’s restrooms, locker rooms, school bathrooms, pool changing facilities, etc, but the response from the others in the restroom is entirely different than tomboys or butch lesbians or butch straight chics going in. In circumstances we are treated differently, it’s mostly based on our biological sex, not playing dress up or some delusional self-identity.
Chimps treat men and women differently, and they treat trans women exactly like every other actual man - a man before interaction with the chimp, and a eunuch afterwards.
In the end we are animals, mammals, primates. While the gender based stereotypes are a bit silly in every culture, and very few really fit into the stereotypes, the gender based treatment of others is mostly sex based, not “identity.”
Mammals have a sex. Nouns, particularly as it relates to living things and for some reason plumbing parts, have a gender. People who identify as trans have a mental disorder. People who think someone can actually become a different gender by virtue of big pharma subscriptions and clothing choices/ hair styles are delusional.
If a tomboy feels like a man, that sounds like gender dysphoria, not just being a tomboy. The difference is pretty stark in how they feel about themselves vs. how others see them.
I don't think people with gender dysphoria care much how chimps treat them.
You're free to call it a mental disorder if you find that helpful. The debate raging is whether this is, in fact, actually helpful to them. I think in some cases it might be, but I have doubts if that's true for all cases.
Honest people who are trying to grapple with the trans issue know that people can't biologically become a different gender via technology. The trans ideologues say they do, and if they're being truthful about this then I agree it's delusional. But, again, not sure how it helps matters to call people names like delusional.
First, I was a Tom boy and I would have absolutely been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. 100%. It took a long time to grow comfortable in my own skin.
Second, no, it’s not just about if it “helps them.” Women and girls are not second class citizens whose access to safe same bodied private spaces and fair athletic competitions should depend on the whims and wants of men and boys, regardless of how those men and boys self identify. Women in prison in CA shouldn’t be getting raped by “female cellmates with a penis.” Elementary school girls in GA shouldn’t be getting sexually assaulted by their male “gender fluid” classmates. The idea that women should have to give up their safety and access to opportunity to coddle the delusions of men is cruel and misogynistic.
Speaking truth is helpful in life. The entire trans mantra is “trans women are real women.” They call “transitioning” a “male to female” transition (or vice versus). There is a pregnant man emoji!! The ideology at its core teaches even little kids they can be born in the “wrong” body and can “transition” to actually become the other sex. Yes, it’s delusional, and yes, it helps to call it out for exactly what it is.
If adults want to mutilate themselves that’s one thing, but to mutilate the genitals of children, make them sterile and incapable of sexual sensation/ pleasure, is cruel. Humans have been coming up with excuses to castrate little boys and mutilate the genitals of little girls for thousands of years. ALL of those justifications are cruel, and this time is no different.
“You're free to call it a mental disorder if you find that helpful. The debate raging is whether this is, in fact, actually helpful to them.”
Okay, then insurance companies don’t have to pay for their treatments because there’s nothing physically wrong with them, just their feelings about their bodies. A double mastectomy for cancer is different than a double mastectomy for someone distressed at the idea of having breasts. It’s all cosmetic then if there’s no mental component. Got it.
Men and women are biological categories, sexes, reproductive states, how more humans are made. Men are men because of their biology; women are women because of their biology. There are no non-biological men or women. Sheesh, is Big Pharma creationism funding and corrupting all higher education now? "Transmisogyny" insists "women" are an outfit men wear or a feeling men have about themselves. So gross, regressive and suspect, this whole "trans" cash cow cult.
There are two sexes and only two sexes, male and female. Sex is determined at conception and is immutable. A woman is a human adult female, and a man is a human adult male. End of discussion.
I mean, I guess you could just say "end of discussion" and hope that actually ends the discussion, but if you look around you I think you'll see that there's nonetheless plenty of discussion. It's as if one person cannot unilaterally control the public dialogue. Thankfully.
At the end his wife says “adult human female” not “biological human female” as you quote here. It was an excellent documentary that also reveals many of our issues in society come from our severing reasoning from actual reality. I was pleasantly surprised by how impressed I was with this documentary and remain unmoved by the gender ideologists insistence that it’s necessary to placate the delusions of others. These same people openly advocate for the genital mutilation and sterilization of children. When in human history have those people ever been the “good guys”?
I am a woman. It’s a birth right I’ve earned by actually being one. Thank you DW for speaking up for actual women and girls being robbed of our bodily safety, natural born biological identity, and hard earned rights to fair competition by a destructive and cruel ideology being promoted by some of the cruelest human beings in society today.
Thank you for responding. Will you please explain how Matt was misleading about Loudon? I tried to clicking in to the source you gave, but it seemed to be behind a paywall.
Yes, good catch. Besides cry-bullying, a "trans" tactic is to pervert language. Females are a biological category, therefore the term "biological female" is redundant. This is "Trans" perversion of language to infer there is some other kind of female besides a female. I swear, this deliberate erasure of women and girls from our own distinct sex category, that of female, by progressives and democrats, will have me voting republican again! I am no republican. I am pro-choice, but alas, everything Woke turns to sh*t....
NCmom, wanted to share this with you in case you haven't seen it. Interesting question about what things might look like 5-10 years from now. Will Cain podcast interview with Matt Walsh https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gy8073sssI
And this OPINION piece is PRECISELY WHY the gender insanity is upon us at this time. The author wishes to retain the "liberal open mind" position. He is unsure if "trans" people are unwell.
Here's a clue, Sherlock: There are facts, and there are opinions. Men cannot become women. That is a fact. There is a sex binary. That is a fact. You can choose to not believe facts, or to believe them.
Those who have a complete faith and belief in falsehoods are either idiots or mentally ill. The "trans" delusion is based on false ideas, and the sooner that this is concluded, the better we will all be.
Basically, OP does not like the movie because he is not comfortable with either truth nor the confrontational style. It's going to take an effort to end this trans insanity, and "What is a woman?" certainly is a good start on that effort.
So you're gonna' bail on a good open minded organization because they have one opinion writer you disagree with? That's what the "woke" do. Don't do what the "woke" do. Debate! Change minds. Be open to having yours changed.
This! We can't stop the polorization in this country if the Woke call everyone they disagree with Nazi's while Conservatives and independents call everyone they disagree with Cucks.
My understanding from people who I know are involved in this organization, like Steven Pinker and Kmele Foster, that the organization is open to differences of opinion. That's why I like it. Some people prefer groupthink. Not me.
I am revising my thoughts. The author is a clueless cuck.
"On the other hand, puberty itself is irreversible in the same way, which means these gender transition treatments are the most effective the earlier they are given. It follows, then, that puberty blockers and hormone therapy can be incredibly positive for transgender kids who don’t go on to regret their transition later in life. "
By this logic, we should allow confused gender-dysphoric kids to have their breasts removed because this might be "incredibly positive". They won't regret it until later, and they can have the breasts removed at 13, and this might be incredibly positive.
The abject, undeniable, clear stupidity of this position should be obvious to even the dumbest person. Children of 13 should not be allowed to do whatever they want. They are not adults. They have ideas uninformed by facts, consequences, or a fully formed brain.
We need policies that are good in the LONG RUN. These policies may disappoint confused, deluded children, but they will be best in the long run.
Here are sensible policies:
1) Don't encourage children with delusions. Do not allow children to pretend that they are the other gender, unless they are clear in the notion of pretence. Bearded ladies are funny on Halloween, but not on Nov 1
2) Do not interrupt natural processes. Puberty is what happens between childhood and adulthood. It's the price we pay to become adults.
3) Hormones which are for the other sex should ONLY be used for actual problems. Gender dysphoria is not a problem. It's a delusion.
4) If a child becomes confused with gender dysphoria, that child needs more chores and responsibilities.
One of the main reasons why children get gender dysphoria and remain in the dysphoric delusion is that parents affirm and condone this delusion. That is a key act - PARENTS SHOULD NOT AFFIRM, CONDONE, NOR TOLERATE THE GENDER DYSPHORIA.
I often agree with the sentiments posted by authors in this Substack. But 99% of the transgender (broadly writ) conversation would not be enhanced by being nuanced as Mr. Slover wishes would happen. The actual gender dysphoria numbers are incredibly small even if one accepts the existence of the condition at face value (being in DSM does not make it real, but let us set that aside). Morphing all of society (William Briggs has an entertaining but pointed tongue-in-cheek piece on this today: https://www.wmbriggs.com/post/40280/) to support this fraction of one percent as if it is the most important thing in the world is the PROBLEM.
The movie, although clearly from a viewpoint, does an excellent job at exposing these charlatans for what they are. Biology is real. One cannot EVER change one's chromosome mix. Pretending it is a choice is guaranteed to lead to mostly bad outcomes -- as we are beginning to see -- not only for the patients but also for society.
I am all for adults being able to live as they wish as long as they do not make me do the same or force whatever they believe on me. When one starts permanently mutilating children or morphing things absurdly (see Briggs) to support some tiny fraction of people, this becomes a completely different conversation.
Finally, I believe most everyone has recognized over the past few years how captured and thus unreliable (yes, I am being kind here) the "experts" at anything are. Covid and climate come to mind as immediate prime examples. So the fact that some people are cleaning up by inventing most of this field and damaging people on the way (I feel the same about pediatric spikeshots, incidentally) is not to be lauded...nuanced or not.
It's not so much his conservative views creeping into his film as your desire to appear more understanding and tolerant than the great unwashed without your perspectives. You are pandering under the pretense of greater enlightenment- a common scam these days among the Literati. I'm out. No more from you guys.
Slover's editorial is prejudiced toward the political left's position. He soft-peddles the left's failings in this matter and makes unsound critiques of What Is A Woman?
Slover says the reason so many refuse to define 'woman' is because, "gender just is not worth expressing an opinion on for most people who wish to remain in the good graces of polite society."
This is incorrect. The correct statement is "gender just is not worth expressing an opinion on for ANYONE who wishes to remain in the good graces of THE PROGRESSIVE LEFT."
It is America's political left, not the right, that refuses to define terms. As shown at the end of What Is A Woman?, Walsh is happy to define 'woman' as "an adult, human female." This is the common definition found on the right and, likely, even within the minds of millions of left-leaning Americans. But this definition cannot be accepted by the progressive wing of the left, because it is anathema to the progressive left's ideological dogma of self-definition. Few precepts are so sacrosanct to the progressive left as the notion "you define who you are; let no one impinge upon your identity." This is logically followed by the moral command "Thou shalt not impinge upon the identity of another." The problem, of course, is that objective definitions impinge upon identities that contradict the definition. If an adult, human male identifies as a woman, but the definition of a woman is "an adult, human female," then the defintion disclaims his identity, impinging upon it. Since it is heresy within the progressive cult to impinge upon someone's identity (especially an alledgedly marginalized, transgender person), those who would remain in the good graces of progressive society must avoid making an objective definition of the word 'woman' at all costs. This is why those on the right are happy to state an objective definition of 'woman,' while only those on the left avoid the question like the plague.
This also explains What Is A Woman? receives virtually no engagement from critics. America's entertainment space is dominated by progressives, to whom Walsh's documentary is all but blasphemy. Walsh has expressed on his daily show that he has received vicious comments from critics who refuse to give press to the documentary, condemning it as transphobia and bigotry. There is an element of fear in this disengagement since any progressive who would give the documentary press would risk censure if not excommunication from the progressive cult. But, beyond fear, there is also anger and hostility. To the pious progressive, What Is A Woman? is a heretical film, fit only for curses and damnation. It is something to be fought against, not considered. This rationale for disengagement is not, as Slover claims, driven by fear of discussions of gender by the public at large, but by fear and anger that is uniquely created by the progressive cult.
Slover also slanders Walsh when he says, "another 'objective truth' that viewers are taught in the film is that nobody can legitimately be transgender." Slover later says, "Dr. Miriam Grossman, explains the importance of distinguishing between the people who genuinely have gender dysphoria and what is happening today, where kids with no history of discomfort with their biological sex seem to be getting swept up in a social contagion, in which transgender people are not merely accepted but lionized. This distinction, of course, doesn’t align with Walsh’s narrative that nobody actually has gender dysphoria, so he simply moves right along pretending that Dr. Grossman never mentioned it."
Slover is simply wrong here. Walsh knew what Grossman said, and he agrees with it. Walsh never states or establishes a "narrative" that no actual cases of gender dysphoria exist. What Walsh is stating is that if a man (a male) feels that he is a woman (a female), that feeling does not make him a woman. This is what Walsh means when he uses the phrases "men who think they are women" or "men pretending to be women." I myself am old enough to remember when transgenderism was described with the phrase "I feel like a woman trapped in a man's body." Today, the narrative has changed. Today, the body is no longer acknowledged to be a man's body. Today the phrase is "some women's bodies have penises." Walsh is pointing out the absurdity of this claim, made tenable only by keeping the definition of 'woman' amorphous and disconnected from the traditional definition of 'adult, human female.' Walsh agrees a man might have a cognitive disorder in which he feels like a woman (gender dysmorphia), but Walsh contests the modern claim that such a feeling means the individual is a woman.
Slover makes additional slanderous ad hominem attacks on Walsh by saying Walsh reveals "himself as a provocateur by inserting some silly and offensive non-sequitur" when Walsh "compares transgenderism to trans-ableism...where an able-bodied person identifies as disabled." Far from being non-sequitur, there is a known cognitive disorder in which people feel that certain body parts do not actually belong on their body. Some have gone so far as to cut off parts of their bodies in order to be rid of the intrusive-feeling parts. Transableism is an incredibly relevant subject since it raises questions that are parallel to those of transgenderism. At a minimum, for a person to feel his hand does not actually belong on his body reveals that it's possible for there to be a severe disconnect between the human mind and an otherwise healthy and normal body. Furthermore, if we agree that the right treatment for such a disconnect is treatment of the mind rather than amputation of the hand, then we agree that, in such cases of disconnect, we should seek alteration of the feeling rather than the body. Now map those questions and answers onto the subject of transgenderism. Is it possible for there to be a disconnect between a man's mind and his body such that he feels like he's a woman even though he's not? In such a case, is it then also proper to seek treatment of the mind rather than alteration of the body, as in the case of transableism? Comparing transgenderism with tranableism in such a way reveals the self-contradiction in modern America's psychological prescriptions. America's psychological medical authorities do not approve of a man cutting off his hand in order to affirm his identity as a "one-handed individual." But they do approve of a man cutting his penis into a faux vagina in order to affirm his transgender identity. Why? Walsh compares the two to highlight the contradiction of logic on the part of America's medical establishment.
Sadly, this seems lost on Slover, who instead claims these thoughts are merely those of a "provocateur" invoking "some silly and offensive non-sequitur." Asking relevant questions does not a provocateur make, the implications of the questions are deeply sobering, not silly, and the logical consistency is anything but non-sequitur." And offensive? Come on, Slover, now you're just talking like one of the cultists.
Slover is right when he says America needs discussion about transgenderism. But we need honest discussion. Soft-peddling the progressive left's abiding failures on the subject of transgenderism and falsely slandering critics who ask appropriate questions isn't honest discussion. Sadly, that's what Slover has here given us.
I found this passage in your comment very apt. (Sorry for not fixing the quotation marks, too hard with my thumbs.)
“" I myself am old enough to remember when transgenderism was described with the phrase "I feel like a woman trapped in a man's body." Today, the narrative has changed. Today, the body is no longer acknowledged to be a man's body. Today the phrase is "some women's bodies have penises."”
Exactly. You know, I think this is the best possible steelman argument for the idea that trans women are women. It’s not only genitals and hip width and mammaries that vary between male and female. It’s also brains. If this were not true, stereotypical gender roles would either be entirely socially determined, and would vary wildly from one society to the next rather than having at least some commonalities across the globe, or they wouldn’t exist. I could imagine theorizing that treating an individual with such a brain as if they were a woman might produce a happier individual. That would depend on outcome data, which at present are not terribly favorable to this position but who knows, new studies might demonstrate otherwise. And if this were the ask for the minuscule number of actual persistent dysphorics, most people would be fine going along.
But this isn’t about that anymore. It’s about proclaiming all of reality is socially determined and thus up for radical, revolutionary change.
Everyone should see this film. I appreciate that FAIR is putting forth an opinion on this important topic of gender ideology, thank you. I agree we need a more nuanced, evidence-based approach than is often presented from most sources on the right. I agree that the film has flaws, but not the flaws you present.
#1: It’s unclear to me if Matt Walsh has the vision you say he does, of a world where all surgeries and drugs for altering one’s body to look like the opposite sex are illegal. He is examining the issue about kids, which should be a five-star alarm for everyone.
Many gender critical people do not share that vision, even as we believe the propaganda from this ideology to be harmful for adults as well. I have a friend who is a detransitioner who transitioned in her late 20s. She really thought she could become a man by undergoing this process, and it was a cruel lie. It did not make her happy. She now must live with the consequences of testosterone for the rest of her life. This is the story we will be hearing more and more.
What should be illegal is presenting such false narratives of salvation, that even adults believe. In a tolerant society, adults can make these choices, but they should not be lied to. The best part of the film was Scott (Kellie) Neugent speaking of the terrible personal cost of this lie. Scott has a passionate and moving mission to keep kids from being harmed in this way.
#2: As many feminists have pointed out, there are some sex-role stereotypes in the movie that do not celebrate gender non-conforming kids or adults. The pink and blue at the beginning. Matt Walsh’s boys may be into bb guns, and most boys may be that way, but there are boys who like to spin around in a tutu. His girls may be into wearing pink, but there are some girls who really dig dinosaurs and hate dresses. Many of those gender non-conforming kids turn out to be gay. Homosexuality is a different and very real and very measurable human state from “being trans.” For many of us in the gender critical community, we see the harms presented quite accurately in the movie as also being bad or these kids. I would have liked that perspective included.
The film tackles only one aspect of the harms of gender ideology being encoded in our laws and institutions: drugging and sterilizing and permanently altering children with surgeries they cannot consent to. For me, the faults in the film are minor. The viewer has a chance to hear from these “experts” themselves. Watch the film, listen to them, make up your own mind.
I misspoke about the film only covering this one issue of kids. It also goes into women's sports. The kids are on my mind right now, and that is what stood out for me.
As a person who works in a social services nonprofit in SF that is fairly trans-friendly, I know a number of fully transitioned adults who are healthy and happy (or as happy as any human in these divisive times can be). Their suicidal, self-loathing teen years are long behind them; most are partnered up and some have kids. They transitioned after years of therapy. The effectiveness of drugs & surgery has made some of them genuinely appear to be the opposite gender of their biological sex. I consider these success stories. Walsh would prefer that they not exist as they do today.
Good to know about Walsh's perspective, thanks Mark. Unfortunately, those of us on the gender critical left who don't share that view rarely get our voices heard. Libertarian-leaning conservatives would not share Walsh's perspective either.
I politely disagree on a point of fact and note your sophistry. You’re employing the same hyperbolic fallacy so loved by trans activists. Walsh doesn’t wish the adults you describe dead - those who have had years of therapy and apparently went through their teens without getting amputations. He wants informed consent along with an age of majority rule, the same as your friends experienced as adults. He wants safeguards put into mental health system to surgery pipeline free of ideological undue influence and bully tactics.
Gender dysphoria is a diagnosis. “Give me what I want or I’ll kill myself” is a symptom of many pathologies, including drug addiction. Why on earth is immediate capitulation to an illness the recommended treatment? We could save a fortune in Narcan and drug treatment programs with that line of thinking.
LOL you are attempting to disagree with a person who actually shares your perspective on informed consent, is against immediate capitulation by both parents & medical establishments, and who also sees "Give me what I want or I'll kill myself" as a symptom of a pathology.
I actually did not say he wants trans folks dead; it is sophistry on your part to put words in my mouth. Try not to do that in the future, it is an ineffective tactic. Although certainly a popular one, at least on Twitter.
I wrote that he "would prefer that they not exist as they do today" which does not have the same meaning as DEAD. I personally don't believe that Walsh wants them dead either.
My comment is not hyperbole because, if you followed the links, you'd see that Walsh wants surgical options to be illegal FOR ALL AGES, not just children. Please read his words for yourself, they are pretty straightforward. If Walsh called the shots, my friends & colleagues would not - as I specifically wrote - "exist as they do today." They would not be the same people physically because they would have been unable to have surgery. They would be in the same bodies that caused them so much suffering earlier in their lives... "not exist as they do today" does not equal "dead".
The next time you consider posting a rebuttal, I advise that you read the post you are attempting to bash a bit more closely. Also, perhaps follow links that include a person's exact words. And finally, accusing someone of "sophistry" is not polite disagreement, it is a deep insult and therefore an attack.
Absolutely. Not a cost to either society or to the individuals who find out just by being alive that they are gay. It's been a long road, but I think this is why society has largely finally accepted gay people: many conservatives finally saw that being gay, at least for most gay people, is not something they have a choice about. You cannot pray away the gay. Most people are not gay, but a tolerant and open society celebrates everyone. I am very glad my gay and lesbian friends can get married if they want to, avail themselves of the legal protections and the social celebration that entails. I believe more gay, lesbian, and bisexual people need to detach themselves from the "T," both for the sake of children and for their own sakes. The backlash people fear is very real. The problem with transgender ideology is that the laws and norms and policies being entrenched are trampling on women's rights and gay people's rights, and these policy shifts are damaging children, sometimes irreversibly. Gender dysphoria is real and painful for people and we need to understand it better. That is what science is for, if we could just get it funded!! But an ideology that preaches that people can be born in the wrong body is wreaking great harm on all of us.
Also how could you write this review without mentioning Scott Newgent? Matt’s bias is no secret, but he certainly presented many sides of the issue. Your ignoring Scott seems convenient. Matt and Scott are unlikely allies joined together by the common goal of saving children from a life of complications, pain, regret, medical dependence, sterilization and no sexual function/pleasure.
I agree Brenda, and mentioned Scott in my comment. It's the most powerful moment in the entire film. Even Matt Walsh said that Scott was the highlight of the movie. There are many other trans-identified people such as Scott who are fighting this terrible ideology with us.
I find it unfortunate that the author left without comment the two defenses of Judge Jackson's demurral. The notion "that a competent biologist would not be able to offer a definitive answer either" is pure balderdash. Competent biologists know, though many keep their lips zipped for reasons the author cites in the fourth paragraph. And the assertion "that scientists agree there is no sufficient way to clearly define what makes someone a women" begs the question "Which scientists?" Social scientists perhaps, but evolutionary biologists know better. Ask Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein, EB's who have had many trans students and treated them respectfully and affectionately, but they brook no nonsense about sexual binary.
This article jumps the shark for what was a promising FAIR movement. I am leaving FAIR as a result of this article, and here is why. |Slover assumes that Matt Walsh must be wrong in some way because he is conservative, and Slover works hard in this article to present himself as the middle ground forward, presumably so that he can continue to be held in esteem by folks. For example, Grayson Slover writes:
" It follows, then, that puberty blockers and hormone therapy can be incredibly positive for transgender kids who don’t go on to regret their transition later in life."
Bye, I'm unsubscribing and no longer recommending FAIR to people.
Exactly. There is no evidence that those who “don’t regret” their transition are genuinely better off for it, tons of evidence that suicide ideation grows that letter of 7-10 years post transition or reaching the age of 30. No child transitioners have reached even 40 years old yet.
What we do know is that one child famous from early childhood transition, “Jazz,” is impotent and regularly in the hospital for constant surgeries to address the “complications” from the initial child genital mutilation surgery. We also know “Jazz” is actually strait as “Jazz” wants to find a nice “trans boy” to date.............
The author also fails to mention the actual gender therapist Dr on the movie points out the actual rate of true gender dysphoria that persists is 1/30,000 to 1/120,000 and impacts natal males while those getting medical treatment for “gender dysphoria” in the US are a majority female.
Yes, that line in particularly really rankled me as well. Because a small minority MAY (this is still unclear, i mean the article he links to is by The Atlantic a well known propaganda outlet). benefit from puberty blockers then its OK for them to be used even if they harm a large majority that they're given to and completely upend a normal biological process.
This whole concept relies on us "knowing" what is best for someone in their future and then upending the whole normal course of events based on that "knowing". That's just not possible, for instance there are many, many young females who are what we'd traditional call tom boys who grow up to be perfectly happy being Women. Imagine how many of these lives would be upended by a Doctor "knowing" that girl is better off as a man?!
Also comparing a natural process we all have to go through and is an accepted part of life to a new, still experimental medical procedure and saying well they're both permanent so that makes the other acceptable is incredibly dishonest and a false equivalence.
I am one of those. From when I was tiny until 8 or 9 I said all the time “I should have been a boy” or “God should have made me a boy.” My first grade teacher thought I WAS a boy for the first week. But this was the late 1980’s and the sane response I got was “you’re a kid, just be you, if you feel that way at 25 we’ll talk.” While I am still very much a Tom boy in personality, I look like a soccer mom with long blonde hair and blue eyes who works out a lot (because I do). Being a mommy is the most amazing and meaningful aspect of my life, second time being a wife to a man I’m still crazy about after 14 years of marriage and lots of growing up together.
Even my parents have admitted I would have transitioned in today’s world, and they would have been powerless to stop it in today’s legal landscape. And I at least exhibited signs from a young age. And if that had happened, 100% I would have killed myself as an adult once I realized what had happened. This gender crap is cruel. Distilling Barbie and yea parties while liking sports and WWF is not a crime punishable by lifetime health issues and child sterilization EXCEPT to the woke left. It is cruel!!!!
1 Grossman’s description of non social contagion gender dysphoria is there in the movie, regardless of Matt’s non reaction. I actually think he agrees with her definition.
2 He used that Santa analogy to show that CHILDREN (4 year olds) have an active imagination and certainly cannot declare themselves transgender.
3 No, children, their parents, doctors or CPS or the courts should NOT be allowed to choose the irreversible destruction of blockers, cross hormones and experimental surgeries for a child/patient rather than the natural process of puberty. That by definition is irresponsible, barbaric.
4 As a separate issue they should not be able to do these experimental things, for profit, to vulnerable young adults. At the very least, these adults should be allowed to sue their doctors when they suffer the horrific complications that were misrepresented to them.
There appears to be a false statement made in the article: "about a transgender girl who sexually assaulted two girls in the women’s bathroom at two different high schools". The student in question sexually assaulted one student in one school in a bathroom, AND according to court proceedings abducted another girl in another school and forced her into a classroom (not a bathroom) where he forcibly touched her (either on or under her shirt). From an online report: "Loudoun County Juvenile and Domestic Relations Judge Pamela Brooks accepted the plea for abduction, which is a felony, and sexual battery, which is a misdemeanor" (https://wtop.com/loudoun-county/2021/11/loudoun-county-teen-found-responsible-in-2nd-sexual-assault/
No he didn’t. The kid used claims of gender fluidity to gain access to the bathroom in the first case (and he was wearing a skirt) where he raped a girl. The school system covered it up because their new policy gave him a legal right to go into the girls’ bathroom. They moved him to another school quietly and another girl was assaulted there - something that should never have happened, and wouldn’t have, if they acknowledged the case and booted the rapist from regular high schools as they do other rapist.
Moreover, the judge in that case has overseen the cases hundreds of children accused of sexual assault and rape. She said in sentencing that this boy had the “most disturbing” physiological report she’d ever read. It made her “terrified for society.”
I think a careful comparison of Walsh's transcript with the facts of the case, as you've correctly summarized them, would reveal that he at least downplays some of the facts that don't entirely support the conclusion that the crime was sexual assault, committed by an adolescent who apparently took advantage of a rather ill-defined bathroom policy to have a pre-arranged consensual liaison with a female student, rather than a clear case of a trans-identified male using the policy to further a pattern of transgender predatory practice. And clearly the school system was at fault. The case is egregious enough based on the actual facts. I don't think the GC cause (which I wholeheartedly embrace) is furthered by misrepresenting facts to slant a story for the sake of generating outrage.
But there IS a pattern of rapists and sexual assaults being committed by people using those policies and claiming trans status, or gender fluidity. Look at the CA spa scandal, the “gender fluid” kindergartener assaulting a little girl in the GA school bathroom, or the number of “pro-trans” YouTube stars arrested for pedophilia (or just the number of US teachers this year). A lot of the argument on was he trans or did he use the policy inappropriately is semantics gymnastics.
If it’s not behind a paywall I highly recommend reading Matt Taibbi’s last few articles. He is NOT a right winger and yet, pointing out the assaults happening in CA women’s prisons by “female inmates with a penis” ends up at the same place. Can you tell the difference between a boy who claims to be gender fluid wearing a skirt to rape a girl in the bathroom, and a “transgender” boy with a penis in a skirt using the girls’ bathroom? Is there actually any difference? Or is the dispute semantics gymnastics?
I agree there is such a pattern. I just don't think the facts of that particular case support the allegation that it is actually an example of that pattern. When I first read the rather breathless accounts, I immediately assumed that it was an obvious instance of the pattern you cite. But as I looked into the details, it became clear that (although related in some ways), the motivations and actions involved in the adolescent male's crimes were unlikely to have more than an incidental relationship with the opportunities for abuse that are opened by the many badly misguided policies and laws allowing males access to women's spaces. I think it's unfortunate that this case was misinterpreted because of its appearance of being a poster child for the opposition to such policies. Legal experts who are actively engaged in examining the laws and policies and in advising politicians will quickly discover that this "example" is more rhetoric than substance. That has the negative impact of branding our legitimate, well-grounded examples as mere right-wing ideology, lacking basis in fact, which, I hasten to emphasize, is NOT the case.
BTW, I loved Taibbi's recent pieces on this issue. I don't think political axes belong in this battle at all. The fact that it's increasingly becoming a right-wing platform just alienates those on the left and makes the conversation about politics, not policies.
My understanding, with the first incident, is that they had *previously* engaged in arranged sexual encounters in the bathroom, but that for the incident in question, sex had not been planned, and the girl did not consent. That is rape, regardless of any prior sexual relationship.
I've been reading this discussion. It's difficult to find the words to respond. I am the parent of an adult transgender male. He and I have had many discussions about what is happening around trans discourse. We also have a lot of concerns about what is happening with youth and the possible "trending" going on. Yes, believe it or not, even though we are "in that world" we are concerned about narratives. And we are also terrified. I am terrified for my son. He isn't out recruiting or proselytizing. He wants to live a simple life and be left alone. In fact, this new focus on the transgender community has caused him to isolate even more. I am terrified by the hatred, some of it being perpetuated by progressive actions that actually do more harm than good, but also by flattened conversations that do not recognize individual experiences and seek to objectify people rather than see them as humans. I am terrified for my son's life (his physical life and his emotional well-being). Regardless of your understanding, belief system, or definition of what defines a woman or a man, there is a human being with a story. I ask you to keep this in mind. I understand the fear, I do. I don't trust anyone these days and I don't want policies in schools or medical facilities that determine a minor's trajectory about medical procedures, identity, etc. This is very personal and I'm glad there are resources for people who find themselves in this position. Trust me, when my son came to me 13 years ago about his identity (as a legal adult), I was filled with some dread. Mostly because I lived in fear of his safety and well-being. But my love as a mother determined that I would always stand by him. That doesn't mean I want to push an agenda on anyone, but we do need to have the right kind of dialogue about these issues and one that doesn't keep polarizing us more and more. This movie scares me because it is very biased, even if it does have good points. It galvanizes people in their sense of outrage and superiority. This is especially so because we are distanced from one another through social media and sound bites. When you have a relationship with someone who falls into the outcast category, it's a very different experience.
So I ramble. My heart aches. I suspect I will receive some vitriol. I do hope we can continue good dialogue around this issue and others.
If you would be interested in contributing a piece to our Substack expanding on these thoughts (as anonymously as you'd like), we would be happy to receive it. Good dialogue around this issue and others, as you put it, is precisely our goal.
Anyone who would like to submit an essay in response to this piece can email it to submissions@fairforall.org, and we will happily review it for potential publication.
Thank you for sharing your story Faith. It's so important to share real stories. I'm strongly against this ideology being carved into law (like in prisons) and shoved into schools. I'm against transitioning kids. It sounds like you are too. I am also against ill-thought out bills that penalize parents for simply following what the American Pediatrics Society, the AMA, and the rest says is right. How can they know what to do? As you say, it's hard to trust anyone! As a lifelong liberal from the left, I want a tolerant and inclusive society. I share your fear of backlash against trans-identified people, including a precious and beloved member of your own family. You and your kid have the right to your beliefs, whatever they are. The fight is happening because the belief that a person can be trapped in the wrong body, that "trans women are women" and "trans men are men" is being encoded in these harmful laws. Rapes really are happening in women's prisons, and that is nothing about belief, it is just a fact. People have all kinds of non-scientific beliefs, religious beliefs, spiritual beliefs. But we are supposed to have separation of church and state, and I see this as the crux of the issue, that these faith-based beliefs about sex are getting encoded into laws and policies. None of that is the fault of your kid, or you, who just want to be left in peace. But I can sure understand your worries. Thanks again for sharing your feelings, in the spirit of FAIR.
Thank you so much, Elizabeth. We are very much aligned in our thinking! I've spent a lot of time these past several years looking at our Bill of Rights, something that , unfortunately, seems to be viewed by some as antiquated. We need to look to it now more than ever. What is happening in our government - especially in the 4th estate - is part of what is driving much of this madness. I also believe that groups sometimes plant ideas to instill fear and to quash movements (sometimes under the guise of being supportive). The government (through agencies and big tech) is inserting itself in ways that are completely unethical and a violation of our rights. The trans situation is so tragic because there are scary proposals out there, but there are also long tall tales about who trans people are. They often choose the most outlandish individuals to represent the whole when in reality most people just want to live in peace and be left alone. Through my son's experience I spent time in support groups and the predominant portrayal out there about trans identity is not accurate for most. Nor is there a "trans-agenda," or at least there is no agenda being lead by the actual trans community. It's all become so convoluted and the truth gets buried under layers of deception and partial truth.
Faith--I would really love to know how you both respond to the podcast link I shared, if you resonate, find it supportive and helpful--or not. If you feel comfortable, you can contact me via email: First name, last name at yahoo.
My heart aches with you, Faith. I also have friends and colleagues who are trans (and non-binary). I may be "gender critical" in many ways, but so much of this dialogue veers into erasure and other sorts of ugliness. It's grueling to read opinions with which I strongly agree (e.g. those that oppose medical transitions for minors/trans women in women's sports or prisons, etc.)... side by side opinions that appear to scorn, condemn, vilify, and refuse to give even the most basic form of respect to people who are trans. And I mean genuinely trans, like your son. My God, othering an entire community because of the nonsense put out by a few! And a lot of that nonsense put out by non-trans folks as well. The trans folks I know aren't agitating on Twitter or creating public policy, let alone grooming kids. They are just living their lives like everyone else, some married, all working, some with kids and one with grandkids.
I have been getting such a sickening feeling of deja vu of how it sometimes felt being a bi man in the 90s, that bad faith assumption of what I must be doing with my life, and how I must be a danger to folks because of that bisexuality (danger due to weird assumptions about STDs/inability to commit/homewrecking/being a fake gay or a scared one). And now a similar but far worse thing is happening to trans folks, generalizations and demonization from people who have probably never had a trans person in their lives. Most of whom are just minding their business like most of us do. Ugh.
And again, this is coming from someone who agrees with so much of gender critical thinking, especially the idea of social contagion among teens, and who came to this dialogue via one of my heroes, J.K. Rowling. But I don't think Rowling herself would appreciate a lot of what is said these days about trans people.
Thank you, Mark. You are spot on. My son and I are also concerned about "social contagion among teens." We witnessed this first hand with a distant family member. We knew that the person was on a bandwagon. And my son especially felt badly for feeling that way because he felt it was not his right to question a person's identity. But still, based on several factors, we felt the situation was part of the social movement going on. And in fact, a year later the person decided they were not transgender after all. Something dangerous is happening, but I feel it is fueled by hysteria and misinformation (I've come to hate that word, but it applies here). First the percentage of transgender individuals is very small. And as you said, they just want to live their lives in peace. They are definitely not "recruiting." As my son said, "I wouldn't wish this on anyone."
And thank you for sharing your story. I can understand the deja vu you are experiencing because it is similar. Very brave of you to share it on a public platform. Thank you, again.
I'm glad we are having these conversations. I spoke at length with my son last night about this conversation. He is so wise and articulate. I asked him if he would be interested in collaborating on an essay with me, but he said he doesn't have the emotional energy for it right now. I ended up writing last night and may submit something. It's just a story really. But that is what is important, hearing each other's stories so we add humanity to the picture, rather than objectifying and demonizing groups of people.
I am so glad you are working on submitting a piece! I think it is important to hear your perspective on this topic. I think the most genuine way to push back on dehumanizing rhetoric is to provide humanizing stories and experiences. Especially important given that many transitioned folks and long-timers in the trans community don't agree with the agitation that is coming from the far left, but of course could never agree with voices from the right that literally refuse to recognize their existence. They are stuck in a way. And the ones I know are far from woke, we literally laugh about things together, like the mono-focus on pronoun-sharing from many millennials etc.
Social contagion is very real, as we both have seen. It has been incredibly frustrating seeing professionals handwave something so common aside. I mean, we've all been teens so we all know how important peer opinions can be. My friends who are parents in Berkeley are seeing a wave of their children now identifying as trans. All but one are trying to be "good liberal straight people" with their reactions, but I think they need to not be afraid of recognizing that something that may feel incredibly important & life-changing for a teen right now could literally shift in a year. Because teens are shifting their identities all the time.
It's naïve to think otherwise. And the one who differs has gone over the deep end, and now doesn't think any trans identities are real.
You're right, something dangerous is happening. This always happens when children are involved. I'm old enough to remember all of the hysteria and misinformation that happened during the pervasive satanic daycare sex abuse scares of the late 80s & early 90s. I feel like I'm hearing similar rhetoric these days, whether it's about Disney or about drag queens.
Wow, Mark. Great insights! This has been a great conversation. I ended up calling my son and sharing much of it with him because it is so refreshing to talk about this in a non-polarizing way with someone other than him. I especially liked your comments, "Especially important given that many transitioned folks and long-timers in the trans community don't agree with the agitation that is coming from the far left, but of course could never agree with voices from the right that literally refuse to recognize their existence." You described my son's position perfectly. We have always been left-leaning, but this topic and many of the other movements of the past several years have felt threatening and I find myself (as a commentator that I like and follow says) politically marooned. My son has said to me that as frustrated as he is with left ideologies, at least they don't want to see him without any rights (or dead), like some on the far right do. One of the reasons he decided to pursue his master's degree in a more conservative state was because he wanted a different experience than his California undergraduate one. Of course both experiences have had disappointments, but that is life. It's also challenging because my extended family is pretty conservative. And while they love my son, they have been bringing up the "trans agenda," so then I become a little defensive. I still contend that something is going on, but it is not from the actual trans community, although they will suffer the brunt of it. Thanks again for the thoughtful and engaging conversation.
Hello again Faith...if you haven't come across, you both might be interested in taking a listen to this podcast called Transparency hosted by two trans-identified people (both of them named Aaron!)
Thank you for this suggestion. I will take a look and I will also ask my son if he is familiar with her. He follows a lot of people. He is pretty scared about some of the stuff out there. He is in a very conservative state finishing graduate school. He actually chose to do that because he wanted to get away from some of the very left leaning experiences he had as an undergraduate in California. He doesn't identify as conservative either, but like me he is in a state of disillusionment with both sides (we always considered ourselves to be on the left, but nothing makes sense these days). We need to find some balance but with the polarizing narratives going on, it's hard to do that. Thanks again.
I don't always agree with her politics, but she's fantastic. I don't need to agree with her politics to see how emotionally healthy she is. I really appreciate her perspective.
I’ve watched it twice. Matt Walsh didn’t do anything except ask them to explain themselves. It is no one’s doing but their own that they sounded like fools. The plain and simple fact is that you cannot pick your gender. And telling even a gender dysphoric child anything other than that truth is flat out wrong. And allowing a child to do experimental medical treatments that have life altering health consequences is child abuse. I’ve raised 4 children and seen the mental capacities as they grow up- they are not capable of understanding what’s happening. And even if transitioned, they are never truly their chosen gender and you who told them otherwise have deceived them. I disagree with your assessment.
And by the way discounting what happened to those teen girls in VA at the hands of the trans kid is extremely out of line. My heart aches for them and their families. You have no idea how scary it can be to be a woman or have daughters and the damage that sexual assault does to a person. Shame on you for that one.
I loved the movie and am happy someone had the guts to stand up against the lunacy of this movement. I disagree with the premise of your review that this movie is a “flawed attempt at a necessary conversation” I think Matt did an exceptional job with his interviews and questioning and in showing the dangers behind this movement- pointing out the financial gains to big pharma at the expense of young lives.
A review marred by the author’s desire to continue to receive cocktail party invitations.
General dysphoria is real, if rare. But men cannot become women nor women men, period. Most importantly the literature is not at all clear that dysphorics reach a better outcome by pretending they can.
I agree--he is trying to be accepted and not focusing on truth. I'm leaving FAIR.
No, don't leave. Stay and speak the truth. They labeled Slover's editorial as opinion, so FAIR shouldn't be blamed. If good people leave the fight when encountering difficulty, goodness will lose.
Nonsense. Those that stood with FAIR from the beginning, donated, and spread the word are supposed to stand with the ideological downward spiral of what is has become. Just one shit show for self-flagellating progressives. We got scammed
I desire to know more, BORDERLAND, as I am a new arrival. Please tell more. I have no time to waste.
I would recommend going back and reviewing FAIRs launch material led by really good decent folks that I still respect. Barri Weiss, I believe was one of the founding leaders, https://youtu.be/clSykQd_WSA?t=17 . I still follow Barri and believe she is doing excellent stuff.
While FAIR was promoted (based on how I understood it) to be collaborative effort that would allow diversity of thought regardless of political affiliation to be included in the broader effort with civil liberties as one of its core principles. As time went it appeared to just morph into one more dumping ground for the progressive lite bunch. Way too much promoting the same tired bunch of public intellectuals that includes folks like Michael Shermer, Steven Pinker and others that already have massive platforms. Good people but firmly influenced by a similar ideology. Relative to action and results, I see very little. FAIR developed some obnoxious alternative to CRT and critical race studies which indicates they don't have the stomach for a real fight. Same toxic garbage just kinder and gentler. They trash folks like Chris Rufu who in fact does fight and has results. The FAIR bunch while pretending to be inclusive has nothing but disdain for conservatives. I don't say that easily and only speak for myself. FAIR did promote the launching of local chapters and when I contacted those that were establishing our regional chapter it was made very clear to me from day one that they will use the FAIR franchise, but they have the authority to interpret and develop an autonomous strategy. I live in the west so please imagine what that would look like if you are not a progressive. Please make you own decision. The fight for civil liberties is real but results matter. Thanks for asking and good lucK.
If you don’t know that this isn’t the organization’s position, maybe you should ask them what their stance is.
Leaving? Allowing someone to speak their opinion and you the opportunity to disagree all without personal attacks. That is why I am in FAIR.
Leaving doesn’t stop another from speaking their opinion. Free speech means everyone has a platform to be heard without threats or cancelling from life, not that others have an obligation to listen.
My “opinion” is that this article completely distorts the actual movie, intentionally misquoting it until I pointed it out, and makes assertions that are demonstrably false about both the movie and child gender “transitions.”
The kind of baloney propoganda pushed in this article is free and abundant. While I’m not cancelling my subscription right now, the respect I once had for FAIR has mostly evaporated.
Yes. The article was filled with baloney. I can't understand why FAIR published it.
Precisely, why published, why?
Absolutely! What is a Woman? actually highlights the absurdity of where we are today. Interesting to see no mention of the Canadian dad who has not been allowed to parent his child because the mother decided trans was the only way to go. The author wistfully says, "We can protect kids and families from unscrupulous doctors without prohibiting the responsible doctors from deciding what is best for their patients" is such BS because all who believe they are in the wrong body are affirmed immediately. My friend has been going through this with her biologically female child for several years, and doctors, like those exposed in the film, are happy to affirm, make loads of money, destroy families and most significantly ruin children's lives. This author's opinion is obviously tainted by a strong dislike for the filmmaker, or he would have included the adult trans man's (TRevoices) who knows he'll die young and forever need medical intervention.
Agreed!
Ditto, thanks.
Thanks for not leaving before writing the above. You have given me more to think about and as a result I will read the article again and look for a different perspective. This is a difficult issue for me. It seems so clear and yet so many have a very different view. I think our politics are probably similar, but I am trying to make sure I move beyond that to get a clear view of the opposing ideas. Thanks again for commenting.
Don't leave! We need to agree that we can all be here with differing opinions. We need your input just like his. I actually agree with Grayson that there are some who are "born in the wrong body" but this explosion of people with that idea is questionable, to me anyway.
As a chapter lead many of us are sick of these nonsensical “meet-in-the-middle” proposals. I’m not okay agreeing that child abuse and mutilation is okay in special circumstances.
Thank you
To compare the removal of a small portion of foreskin to chemical castration, sterilization, and the complete surgical or medical destruction of genital function is intellectually lazy.
You articulated much better than I. You got directly to the point. Am sick of leftist platitudes.
I think it is butchery, circumcision, as is female genital mutilation, fgm
Please google the word "mutilation". I don't think it remotely qualifies. I am circumcised and I am not aware of any negative effects while it has provided religious and hygiene benefits. That said, neither of my two sons are circumcised.
Alison, to me, 'born in the wrong body' persay, requires help, not the knife, not drugs. Solution is Not a travesty that others are not aware of - lying in public, deceiving the vast majority, no. That is how it all started. No.
This is absolutely my reaction. Indeed has this author penned for and/ or collaborated with a female to male FAIR Advisor to publish this?
I am troubled by this article in FAIR yesterday as it clearly states (I read it as such) that transitioning children very young can be a good option, the best even, for some kids. I have formed the opinion that no bodies should be altered medically and never should have been, these past multiple decades. That's my current conviction and I own it. And it took me two years to form it.
I gave up on FAIR months ago. It is very disappointing and to be honest I feel scammed.
I personally am trying to stop assuming bad faith or ulterior motives in people I disagree with online. That's what the woke do all the time. "Oh, you don't agree? Well that's cause you're a cis, het, white......blah blah blah"
You might be right. This guy may just want to stay on the safe side of "woke" line. Although, as a fellow 'un-woke' liberal I can tell you that just writing for an organization with Megan Kelly on the board is enough to kill those cocktail invites no matter what you actually say in the op-ed.
Regardless, I think it's better to argue the merits of people you disagree with and think are wrong instead of making assumptions about "why" they're saying things you disagree with.
Why they're wrong doesn't matter. All that matters is the truth.
Ok, I’ll offer some actual facts.
1 - the estimated actual rate of gender dysphoria that is significant and persists into adulthood is 1/30,000 to 1/110,000 (per the doc discussed being interviewed in the movie)
2 - historically it’s mostly a natal male thing, but the vast majority of kids getting “gender affirming treatment” in this country are females with high rates of autistic and lesbian girls
3- at least 1.5% of the current k-12 age kids in this country “identify” as trans. That’s 1/75. That’s social contagion.
4 - There is no evidence that even those who don’t “regret” their child transitions are somehow better off for it. First, there aren’t any 40-year olds around who transitioned at 5,6,9,10. Second, suicide ideation remains elevated among those who go through with transition, but not among those who go through gender dysphoria stages as kids but ultimately don’t transition. Third, the guaranteed life of sexual dysfunction, chronic health problems, and sterility is one heck of a price for people to pay in exchange for possibly fleeting feelings as a child mostly resulting from TikTok and intentional gender confusion.
5 - The author of this article, while accusing Matt of overlooking a point he didn’t, decided to skim over major aspects of the movie including the fact modern gender ideology had its roots in debunked research performed by a pedophile that raped children and babies and promoted the ideas embraced across much of academia today that life should be about casual sex from cradle to grave, and the hugely negative impact of gender ideology on the bodily safety and access to fair competition for biological girls and women. There were others, I won’t list them all.
5 - The author misquoted the most important line in the whole darn movie, until I pointed it out (see below). That, to me, is an indication of bad intentions. The title of the documentary is “what is a woman?” And the author “accidentally” misquoted the answer? We can’t know the intent of others, but having watched the documentary, it strains credulity to believe this was a genuine critique of the film despite the misquotes and out of context assertions about the film. It seems to me this article is nothing more than a hit piece aimed at those who didn’t watch it, with the objective of keeping them from watching it. You could prove me wrong by watching it and forming your own conclusions.
Hi NCmom,
We encourage everyone to watch the film for themselves and develop their own opinions. That is the only way to build true understanding.
This opinion piece reflects the author’s perspective. We believe that true understanding comes from being open-minded and considering diverse perspectives in the pursuit of objective truth.
If you would like to submit your own essay on this or another topic for our Substack, we would love to review it.
Feel free to send your draft to submissions@fairforall.org.
Wonderful suggestion! I hope NCMom takes you up on the offer as I find her comments that occur across Substack as informative and intellectually engaging.
Thank you for the very kind compliment. 😊
Excellent summary--someone needs to be invited on the FAIR Board NCmom! To your point #3, I was on my FB page the other day (a rare occurrence lately) and saw an old group I no longer follow (but it popped up for some reason) called Grown and Flown. I had to leave that after the 2020 election -- these parents were NUTS! This post was a mom shouting out other moms of trans kids. One mother actually said she was the proud mom of THREE trans kids. WTF is wrong with these people?!
Attention seeking. At least the 3 families I know. They didn’t celebrate their kids until they, after much pressure from their families, declared they were trans. Then they got parties, legal name changes, and LOTS of Facebook posts. It’s part of why I deleted Facebook all together.
Truly insane. Wonder who this will all sort out in the courts (and these cases will go to court) as the law schools churn out even more woke attorneys. Should be an interesting shit show.
A whole lot of people are being medically mutilated and made impotent....... really sad.
It is important to acknowledge who is funding this nonsense and why:
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/billionaire-family-pushing-synthetic-sex-identities-ssi-pritzkers
ABSOLUTELY! What a heinous use of billions on the back of your hard working parents! I left that awful state and asshat of a governor!
Thank you 🙏
This! Thank you! Substance over Emotion. Someone once said, "True Compassion is doing a DIS- passionate analysis of a topic or a situation. NCMom did that w a little bit of " opinion" at the end. The Author of this Article clearly used a biased mindset and filter to interpret Matt's interview questions in the Documentary. Matt was almost the ONLY one that remained UNEMOTIONAL in the movie. The only exception I can recall was his 60 seconds in front of the school board.
Couldn't agree more! Well said!
Well said!
NCMom, have you got a Substack, are you writing....
I do have a Substack newsletter, but I’m not writing on it right now.
And well done. And thank you.
Thanks, I just saw that - subscribed - maybe I can access there what you have written
As long as society insists that masculine girls and feminine boys are unusual or odd, gender dysphoria will persist. This used to come from the Right, now it's coming from the Left. But the Left has made it a fun and cool thing, so it's far more popular. Stop making it weird, and people will just be themselves.
Well, they kinda can. Men cannot become biological women and women cannot be become biological men. But there's a lot more to being a man or a woman than your plumbing. A lot of it has to do with how you are treated socially, which is the biggest thing transgender individuals wish to change. So they can change genders in all the ways that matter to them.
Explain how in a way that doesn’t mistake common cultural stereotype for actual sex. Confirm that tomboys and butch lesbians do not follow common tropes it are still unambiguously female. Because we had this all worked out 50 years ago.
Tomboys are not women who feel like men. Women with gender dysphoria are. Tomboys are still referred to as "she" and "mam." They still go into the women's restroom. And let's be honest, men and women are treated differently, they just are, even if they don't match the stereotypes.
First, a lot of Tom boys do think they should have been an actual boy as young children, something I can attest to first hand, which is one of the many reasons I find gender ideology overtly cruel.
“Trans women,” also go into women’s restrooms, locker rooms, school bathrooms, pool changing facilities, etc, but the response from the others in the restroom is entirely different than tomboys or butch lesbians or butch straight chics going in. In circumstances we are treated differently, it’s mostly based on our biological sex, not playing dress up or some delusional self-identity.
Chimps treat men and women differently, and they treat trans women exactly like every other actual man - a man before interaction with the chimp, and a eunuch afterwards.
In the end we are animals, mammals, primates. While the gender based stereotypes are a bit silly in every culture, and very few really fit into the stereotypes, the gender based treatment of others is mostly sex based, not “identity.”
Mammals have a sex. Nouns, particularly as it relates to living things and for some reason plumbing parts, have a gender. People who identify as trans have a mental disorder. People who think someone can actually become a different gender by virtue of big pharma subscriptions and clothing choices/ hair styles are delusional.
If a tomboy feels like a man, that sounds like gender dysphoria, not just being a tomboy. The difference is pretty stark in how they feel about themselves vs. how others see them.
I don't think people with gender dysphoria care much how chimps treat them.
You're free to call it a mental disorder if you find that helpful. The debate raging is whether this is, in fact, actually helpful to them. I think in some cases it might be, but I have doubts if that's true for all cases.
Honest people who are trying to grapple with the trans issue know that people can't biologically become a different gender via technology. The trans ideologues say they do, and if they're being truthful about this then I agree it's delusional. But, again, not sure how it helps matters to call people names like delusional.
First, I was a Tom boy and I would have absolutely been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. 100%. It took a long time to grow comfortable in my own skin.
Second, no, it’s not just about if it “helps them.” Women and girls are not second class citizens whose access to safe same bodied private spaces and fair athletic competitions should depend on the whims and wants of men and boys, regardless of how those men and boys self identify. Women in prison in CA shouldn’t be getting raped by “female cellmates with a penis.” Elementary school girls in GA shouldn’t be getting sexually assaulted by their male “gender fluid” classmates. The idea that women should have to give up their safety and access to opportunity to coddle the delusions of men is cruel and misogynistic.
Speaking truth is helpful in life. The entire trans mantra is “trans women are real women.” They call “transitioning” a “male to female” transition (or vice versus). There is a pregnant man emoji!! The ideology at its core teaches even little kids they can be born in the “wrong” body and can “transition” to actually become the other sex. Yes, it’s delusional, and yes, it helps to call it out for exactly what it is.
If adults want to mutilate themselves that’s one thing, but to mutilate the genitals of children, make them sterile and incapable of sexual sensation/ pleasure, is cruel. Humans have been coming up with excuses to castrate little boys and mutilate the genitals of little girls for thousands of years. ALL of those justifications are cruel, and this time is no different.
“You're free to call it a mental disorder if you find that helpful. The debate raging is whether this is, in fact, actually helpful to them.”
Okay, then insurance companies don’t have to pay for their treatments because there’s nothing physically wrong with them, just their feelings about their bodies. A double mastectomy for cancer is different than a double mastectomy for someone distressed at the idea of having breasts. It’s all cosmetic then if there’s no mental component. Got it.
Men and women are biological categories, sexes, reproductive states, how more humans are made. Men are men because of their biology; women are women because of their biology. There are no non-biological men or women. Sheesh, is Big Pharma creationism funding and corrupting all higher education now? "Transmisogyny" insists "women" are an outfit men wear or a feeling men have about themselves. So gross, regressive and suspect, this whole "trans" cash cow cult.
Truer words were never spoken.
Could you provide some concrete examples of these “ways that matter” where social treatment is different that aren’t based in biology?
There are two sexes and only two sexes, male and female. Sex is determined at conception and is immutable. A woman is a human adult female, and a man is a human adult male. End of discussion.
I mean, I guess you could just say "end of discussion" and hope that actually ends the discussion, but if you look around you I think you'll see that there's nonetheless plenty of discussion. It's as if one person cannot unilaterally control the public dialogue. Thankfully.
Those are the only facts that matter. End of my discussion.
At the end his wife says “adult human female” not “biological human female” as you quote here. It was an excellent documentary that also reveals many of our issues in society come from our severing reasoning from actual reality. I was pleasantly surprised by how impressed I was with this documentary and remain unmoved by the gender ideologists insistence that it’s necessary to placate the delusions of others. These same people openly advocate for the genital mutilation and sterilization of children. When in human history have those people ever been the “good guys”?
I am a woman. It’s a birth right I’ve earned by actually being one. Thank you DW for speaking up for actual women and girls being robbed of our bodily safety, natural born biological identity, and hard earned rights to fair competition by a destructive and cruel ideology being promoted by some of the cruelest human beings in society today.
Thank you very much for pointing out the error. The misquote has been corrected.
Thank you for responding. Will you please explain how Matt was misleading about Loudon? I tried to clicking in to the source you gave, but it seemed to be behind a paywall.
Yes, good catch. Besides cry-bullying, a "trans" tactic is to pervert language. Females are a biological category, therefore the term "biological female" is redundant. This is "Trans" perversion of language to infer there is some other kind of female besides a female. I swear, this deliberate erasure of women and girls from our own distinct sex category, that of female, by progressives and democrats, will have me voting republican again! I am no republican. I am pro-choice, but alas, everything Woke turns to sh*t....
NCmom, wanted to share this with you in case you haven't seen it. Interesting question about what things might look like 5-10 years from now. Will Cain podcast interview with Matt Walsh https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gy8073sssI
Thank you. I haven’t seen that yet. Watching now
And this OPINION piece is PRECISELY WHY the gender insanity is upon us at this time. The author wishes to retain the "liberal open mind" position. He is unsure if "trans" people are unwell.
Here's a clue, Sherlock: There are facts, and there are opinions. Men cannot become women. That is a fact. There is a sex binary. That is a fact. You can choose to not believe facts, or to believe them.
Those who have a complete faith and belief in falsehoods are either idiots or mentally ill. The "trans" delusion is based on false ideas, and the sooner that this is concluded, the better we will all be.
Basically, OP does not like the movie because he is not comfortable with either truth nor the confrontational style. It's going to take an effort to end this trans insanity, and "What is a woman?" certainly is a good start on that effort.
I agree, and I am leaving FAIR.
So you're gonna' bail on a good open minded organization because they have one opinion writer you disagree with? That's what the "woke" do. Don't do what the "woke" do. Debate! Change minds. Be open to having yours changed.
I agree. Although I believe this opinion piece is ignorant and uninformed, FAIR is a good organization.
This! We can't stop the polorization in this country if the Woke call everyone they disagree with Nazi's while Conservatives and independents call everyone they disagree with Cucks.
If you don’t think this is the organization’s opinion, maybe you should ask them what their stance on gender ideology is.
My understanding from people who I know are involved in this organization, like Steven Pinker and Kmele Foster, that the organization is open to differences of opinion. That's why I like it. Some people prefer groupthink. Not me.
What involvement do they actually have other than displaying their picture up on the website to attract people to the org?
I don't know. But they're both people I trust and I don't think they'd put their name on it if it wasn't an honestly run organization.
I am revising my thoughts. The author is a clueless cuck.
"On the other hand, puberty itself is irreversible in the same way, which means these gender transition treatments are the most effective the earlier they are given. It follows, then, that puberty blockers and hormone therapy can be incredibly positive for transgender kids who don’t go on to regret their transition later in life. "
By this logic, we should allow confused gender-dysphoric kids to have their breasts removed because this might be "incredibly positive". They won't regret it until later, and they can have the breasts removed at 13, and this might be incredibly positive.
The abject, undeniable, clear stupidity of this position should be obvious to even the dumbest person. Children of 13 should not be allowed to do whatever they want. They are not adults. They have ideas uninformed by facts, consequences, or a fully formed brain.
We need policies that are good in the LONG RUN. These policies may disappoint confused, deluded children, but they will be best in the long run.
Here are sensible policies:
1) Don't encourage children with delusions. Do not allow children to pretend that they are the other gender, unless they are clear in the notion of pretence. Bearded ladies are funny on Halloween, but not on Nov 1
2) Do not interrupt natural processes. Puberty is what happens between childhood and adulthood. It's the price we pay to become adults.
3) Hormones which are for the other sex should ONLY be used for actual problems. Gender dysphoria is not a problem. It's a delusion.
4) If a child becomes confused with gender dysphoria, that child needs more chores and responsibilities.
One of the main reasons why children get gender dysphoria and remain in the dysphoric delusion is that parents affirm and condone this delusion. That is a key act - PARENTS SHOULD NOT AFFIRM, CONDONE, NOR TOLERATE THE GENDER DYSPHORIA.
“They are not adults. They have ideas uninformed by facts, consequences, or a fully formed brain. “
This ⬆️
I often agree with the sentiments posted by authors in this Substack. But 99% of the transgender (broadly writ) conversation would not be enhanced by being nuanced as Mr. Slover wishes would happen. The actual gender dysphoria numbers are incredibly small even if one accepts the existence of the condition at face value (being in DSM does not make it real, but let us set that aside). Morphing all of society (William Briggs has an entertaining but pointed tongue-in-cheek piece on this today: https://www.wmbriggs.com/post/40280/) to support this fraction of one percent as if it is the most important thing in the world is the PROBLEM.
The movie, although clearly from a viewpoint, does an excellent job at exposing these charlatans for what they are. Biology is real. One cannot EVER change one's chromosome mix. Pretending it is a choice is guaranteed to lead to mostly bad outcomes -- as we are beginning to see -- not only for the patients but also for society.
I am all for adults being able to live as they wish as long as they do not make me do the same or force whatever they believe on me. When one starts permanently mutilating children or morphing things absurdly (see Briggs) to support some tiny fraction of people, this becomes a completely different conversation.
Finally, I believe most everyone has recognized over the past few years how captured and thus unreliable (yes, I am being kind here) the "experts" at anything are. Covid and climate come to mind as immediate prime examples. So the fact that some people are cleaning up by inventing most of this field and damaging people on the way (I feel the same about pediatric spikeshots, incidentally) is not to be lauded...nuanced or not.
Excellent!
It's not so much his conservative views creeping into his film as your desire to appear more understanding and tolerant than the great unwashed without your perspectives. You are pandering under the pretense of greater enlightenment- a common scam these days among the Literati. I'm out. No more from you guys.
I'm out too. I'm unsubsribing to FAIR.
Slover's editorial is prejudiced toward the political left's position. He soft-peddles the left's failings in this matter and makes unsound critiques of What Is A Woman?
Slover says the reason so many refuse to define 'woman' is because, "gender just is not worth expressing an opinion on for most people who wish to remain in the good graces of polite society."
This is incorrect. The correct statement is "gender just is not worth expressing an opinion on for ANYONE who wishes to remain in the good graces of THE PROGRESSIVE LEFT."
It is America's political left, not the right, that refuses to define terms. As shown at the end of What Is A Woman?, Walsh is happy to define 'woman' as "an adult, human female." This is the common definition found on the right and, likely, even within the minds of millions of left-leaning Americans. But this definition cannot be accepted by the progressive wing of the left, because it is anathema to the progressive left's ideological dogma of self-definition. Few precepts are so sacrosanct to the progressive left as the notion "you define who you are; let no one impinge upon your identity." This is logically followed by the moral command "Thou shalt not impinge upon the identity of another." The problem, of course, is that objective definitions impinge upon identities that contradict the definition. If an adult, human male identifies as a woman, but the definition of a woman is "an adult, human female," then the defintion disclaims his identity, impinging upon it. Since it is heresy within the progressive cult to impinge upon someone's identity (especially an alledgedly marginalized, transgender person), those who would remain in the good graces of progressive society must avoid making an objective definition of the word 'woman' at all costs. This is why those on the right are happy to state an objective definition of 'woman,' while only those on the left avoid the question like the plague.
This also explains What Is A Woman? receives virtually no engagement from critics. America's entertainment space is dominated by progressives, to whom Walsh's documentary is all but blasphemy. Walsh has expressed on his daily show that he has received vicious comments from critics who refuse to give press to the documentary, condemning it as transphobia and bigotry. There is an element of fear in this disengagement since any progressive who would give the documentary press would risk censure if not excommunication from the progressive cult. But, beyond fear, there is also anger and hostility. To the pious progressive, What Is A Woman? is a heretical film, fit only for curses and damnation. It is something to be fought against, not considered. This rationale for disengagement is not, as Slover claims, driven by fear of discussions of gender by the public at large, but by fear and anger that is uniquely created by the progressive cult.
Slover also slanders Walsh when he says, "another 'objective truth' that viewers are taught in the film is that nobody can legitimately be transgender." Slover later says, "Dr. Miriam Grossman, explains the importance of distinguishing between the people who genuinely have gender dysphoria and what is happening today, where kids with no history of discomfort with their biological sex seem to be getting swept up in a social contagion, in which transgender people are not merely accepted but lionized. This distinction, of course, doesn’t align with Walsh’s narrative that nobody actually has gender dysphoria, so he simply moves right along pretending that Dr. Grossman never mentioned it."
Slover is simply wrong here. Walsh knew what Grossman said, and he agrees with it. Walsh never states or establishes a "narrative" that no actual cases of gender dysphoria exist. What Walsh is stating is that if a man (a male) feels that he is a woman (a female), that feeling does not make him a woman. This is what Walsh means when he uses the phrases "men who think they are women" or "men pretending to be women." I myself am old enough to remember when transgenderism was described with the phrase "I feel like a woman trapped in a man's body." Today, the narrative has changed. Today, the body is no longer acknowledged to be a man's body. Today the phrase is "some women's bodies have penises." Walsh is pointing out the absurdity of this claim, made tenable only by keeping the definition of 'woman' amorphous and disconnected from the traditional definition of 'adult, human female.' Walsh agrees a man might have a cognitive disorder in which he feels like a woman (gender dysmorphia), but Walsh contests the modern claim that such a feeling means the individual is a woman.
Slover makes additional slanderous ad hominem attacks on Walsh by saying Walsh reveals "himself as a provocateur by inserting some silly and offensive non-sequitur" when Walsh "compares transgenderism to trans-ableism...where an able-bodied person identifies as disabled." Far from being non-sequitur, there is a known cognitive disorder in which people feel that certain body parts do not actually belong on their body. Some have gone so far as to cut off parts of their bodies in order to be rid of the intrusive-feeling parts. Transableism is an incredibly relevant subject since it raises questions that are parallel to those of transgenderism. At a minimum, for a person to feel his hand does not actually belong on his body reveals that it's possible for there to be a severe disconnect between the human mind and an otherwise healthy and normal body. Furthermore, if we agree that the right treatment for such a disconnect is treatment of the mind rather than amputation of the hand, then we agree that, in such cases of disconnect, we should seek alteration of the feeling rather than the body. Now map those questions and answers onto the subject of transgenderism. Is it possible for there to be a disconnect between a man's mind and his body such that he feels like he's a woman even though he's not? In such a case, is it then also proper to seek treatment of the mind rather than alteration of the body, as in the case of transableism? Comparing transgenderism with tranableism in such a way reveals the self-contradiction in modern America's psychological prescriptions. America's psychological medical authorities do not approve of a man cutting off his hand in order to affirm his identity as a "one-handed individual." But they do approve of a man cutting his penis into a faux vagina in order to affirm his transgender identity. Why? Walsh compares the two to highlight the contradiction of logic on the part of America's medical establishment.
Sadly, this seems lost on Slover, who instead claims these thoughts are merely those of a "provocateur" invoking "some silly and offensive non-sequitur." Asking relevant questions does not a provocateur make, the implications of the questions are deeply sobering, not silly, and the logical consistency is anything but non-sequitur." And offensive? Come on, Slover, now you're just talking like one of the cultists.
Slover is right when he says America needs discussion about transgenderism. But we need honest discussion. Soft-peddling the progressive left's abiding failures on the subject of transgenderism and falsely slandering critics who ask appropriate questions isn't honest discussion. Sadly, that's what Slover has here given us.
I found this passage in your comment very apt. (Sorry for not fixing the quotation marks, too hard with my thumbs.)
“" I myself am old enough to remember when transgenderism was described with the phrase "I feel like a woman trapped in a man's body." Today, the narrative has changed. Today, the body is no longer acknowledged to be a man's body. Today the phrase is "some women's bodies have penises."”
Exactly. You know, I think this is the best possible steelman argument for the idea that trans women are women. It’s not only genitals and hip width and mammaries that vary between male and female. It’s also brains. If this were not true, stereotypical gender roles would either be entirely socially determined, and would vary wildly from one society to the next rather than having at least some commonalities across the globe, or they wouldn’t exist. I could imagine theorizing that treating an individual with such a brain as if they were a woman might produce a happier individual. That would depend on outcome data, which at present are not terribly favorable to this position but who knows, new studies might demonstrate otherwise. And if this were the ask for the minuscule number of actual persistent dysphorics, most people would be fine going along.
But this isn’t about that anymore. It’s about proclaiming all of reality is socially determined and thus up for radical, revolutionary change.
This is a better critique than Slover's. Better written, and more incisive.
Everyone should see this film. I appreciate that FAIR is putting forth an opinion on this important topic of gender ideology, thank you. I agree we need a more nuanced, evidence-based approach than is often presented from most sources on the right. I agree that the film has flaws, but not the flaws you present.
#1: It’s unclear to me if Matt Walsh has the vision you say he does, of a world where all surgeries and drugs for altering one’s body to look like the opposite sex are illegal. He is examining the issue about kids, which should be a five-star alarm for everyone.
Many gender critical people do not share that vision, even as we believe the propaganda from this ideology to be harmful for adults as well. I have a friend who is a detransitioner who transitioned in her late 20s. She really thought she could become a man by undergoing this process, and it was a cruel lie. It did not make her happy. She now must live with the consequences of testosterone for the rest of her life. This is the story we will be hearing more and more.
What should be illegal is presenting such false narratives of salvation, that even adults believe. In a tolerant society, adults can make these choices, but they should not be lied to. The best part of the film was Scott (Kellie) Neugent speaking of the terrible personal cost of this lie. Scott has a passionate and moving mission to keep kids from being harmed in this way.
#2: As many feminists have pointed out, there are some sex-role stereotypes in the movie that do not celebrate gender non-conforming kids or adults. The pink and blue at the beginning. Matt Walsh’s boys may be into bb guns, and most boys may be that way, but there are boys who like to spin around in a tutu. His girls may be into wearing pink, but there are some girls who really dig dinosaurs and hate dresses. Many of those gender non-conforming kids turn out to be gay. Homosexuality is a different and very real and very measurable human state from “being trans.” For many of us in the gender critical community, we see the harms presented quite accurately in the movie as also being bad or these kids. I would have liked that perspective included.
The film tackles only one aspect of the harms of gender ideology being encoded in our laws and institutions: drugging and sterilizing and permanently altering children with surgeries they cannot consent to. For me, the faults in the film are minor. The viewer has a chance to hear from these “experts” themselves. Watch the film, listen to them, make up your own mind.
I misspoke about the film only covering this one issue of kids. It also goes into women's sports. The kids are on my mind right now, and that is what stood out for me.
It may not be clear in the film (it wasn't to me either), but Walsh has actually said that these procedures should be illegal for all ages.
https://twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1533611776763371520
https://twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1533612406525546497
As a person who works in a social services nonprofit in SF that is fairly trans-friendly, I know a number of fully transitioned adults who are healthy and happy (or as happy as any human in these divisive times can be). Their suicidal, self-loathing teen years are long behind them; most are partnered up and some have kids. They transitioned after years of therapy. The effectiveness of drugs & surgery has made some of them genuinely appear to be the opposite gender of their biological sex. I consider these success stories. Walsh would prefer that they not exist as they do today.
Good to know about Walsh's perspective, thanks Mark. Unfortunately, those of us on the gender critical left who don't share that view rarely get our voices heard. Libertarian-leaning conservatives would not share Walsh's perspective either.
I politely disagree on a point of fact and note your sophistry. You’re employing the same hyperbolic fallacy so loved by trans activists. Walsh doesn’t wish the adults you describe dead - those who have had years of therapy and apparently went through their teens without getting amputations. He wants informed consent along with an age of majority rule, the same as your friends experienced as adults. He wants safeguards put into mental health system to surgery pipeline free of ideological undue influence and bully tactics.
Gender dysphoria is a diagnosis. “Give me what I want or I’ll kill myself” is a symptom of many pathologies, including drug addiction. Why on earth is immediate capitulation to an illness the recommended treatment? We could save a fortune in Narcan and drug treatment programs with that line of thinking.
LOL you are attempting to disagree with a person who actually shares your perspective on informed consent, is against immediate capitulation by both parents & medical establishments, and who also sees "Give me what I want or I'll kill myself" as a symptom of a pathology.
I actually did not say he wants trans folks dead; it is sophistry on your part to put words in my mouth. Try not to do that in the future, it is an ineffective tactic. Although certainly a popular one, at least on Twitter.
I wrote that he "would prefer that they not exist as they do today" which does not have the same meaning as DEAD. I personally don't believe that Walsh wants them dead either.
My comment is not hyperbole because, if you followed the links, you'd see that Walsh wants surgical options to be illegal FOR ALL AGES, not just children. Please read his words for yourself, they are pretty straightforward. If Walsh called the shots, my friends & colleagues would not - as I specifically wrote - "exist as they do today." They would not be the same people physically because they would have been unable to have surgery. They would be in the same bodies that caused them so much suffering earlier in their lives... "not exist as they do today" does not equal "dead".
The next time you consider posting a rebuttal, I advise that you read the post you are attempting to bash a bit more closely. Also, perhaps follow links that include a person's exact words. And finally, accusing someone of "sophistry" is not polite disagreement, it is a deep insult and therefore an attack.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/sophistry
Cheers!
Such a scold...your blandishments about my behavior are disregarded in light of the fact that you edited your post so you could make this point.
Absolutely. Not a cost to either society or to the individuals who find out just by being alive that they are gay. It's been a long road, but I think this is why society has largely finally accepted gay people: many conservatives finally saw that being gay, at least for most gay people, is not something they have a choice about. You cannot pray away the gay. Most people are not gay, but a tolerant and open society celebrates everyone. I am very glad my gay and lesbian friends can get married if they want to, avail themselves of the legal protections and the social celebration that entails. I believe more gay, lesbian, and bisexual people need to detach themselves from the "T," both for the sake of children and for their own sakes. The backlash people fear is very real. The problem with transgender ideology is that the laws and norms and policies being entrenched are trampling on women's rights and gay people's rights, and these policy shifts are damaging children, sometimes irreversibly. Gender dysphoria is real and painful for people and we need to understand it better. That is what science is for, if we could just get it funded!! But an ideology that preaches that people can be born in the wrong body is wreaking great harm on all of us.
Also how could you write this review without mentioning Scott Newgent? Matt’s bias is no secret, but he certainly presented many sides of the issue. Your ignoring Scott seems convenient. Matt and Scott are unlikely allies joined together by the common goal of saving children from a life of complications, pain, regret, medical dependence, sterilization and no sexual function/pleasure.
I agree Brenda, and mentioned Scott in my comment. It's the most powerful moment in the entire film. Even Matt Walsh said that Scott was the highlight of the movie. There are many other trans-identified people such as Scott who are fighting this terrible ideology with us.
I find it unfortunate that the author left without comment the two defenses of Judge Jackson's demurral. The notion "that a competent biologist would not be able to offer a definitive answer either" is pure balderdash. Competent biologists know, though many keep their lips zipped for reasons the author cites in the fourth paragraph. And the assertion "that scientists agree there is no sufficient way to clearly define what makes someone a women" begs the question "Which scientists?" Social scientists perhaps, but evolutionary biologists know better. Ask Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein, EB's who have had many trans students and treated them respectfully and affectionately, but they brook no nonsense about sexual binary.
This article jumps the shark for what was a promising FAIR movement. I am leaving FAIR as a result of this article, and here is why. |Slover assumes that Matt Walsh must be wrong in some way because he is conservative, and Slover works hard in this article to present himself as the middle ground forward, presumably so that he can continue to be held in esteem by folks. For example, Grayson Slover writes:
" It follows, then, that puberty blockers and hormone therapy can be incredibly positive for transgender kids who don’t go on to regret their transition later in life."
Bye, I'm unsubscribing and no longer recommending FAIR to people.
Exactly. There is no evidence that those who “don’t regret” their transition are genuinely better off for it, tons of evidence that suicide ideation grows that letter of 7-10 years post transition or reaching the age of 30. No child transitioners have reached even 40 years old yet.
What we do know is that one child famous from early childhood transition, “Jazz,” is impotent and regularly in the hospital for constant surgeries to address the “complications” from the initial child genital mutilation surgery. We also know “Jazz” is actually strait as “Jazz” wants to find a nice “trans boy” to date.............
The author also fails to mention the actual gender therapist Dr on the movie points out the actual rate of true gender dysphoria that persists is 1/30,000 to 1/120,000 and impacts natal males while those getting medical treatment for “gender dysphoria” in the US are a majority female.
I have no idea why Jazz wants a nice "trans boy" to date. He's got nothing left to do the deed with.
Jazz is a eunuch, and like most eunuchs, will have a lonely and sad life. His parents have destroyed him.
Maybe point the author towards Jesse Singals article looking into the research... I’ll see if I can.
Yes, that line in particularly really rankled me as well. Because a small minority MAY (this is still unclear, i mean the article he links to is by The Atlantic a well known propaganda outlet). benefit from puberty blockers then its OK for them to be used even if they harm a large majority that they're given to and completely upend a normal biological process.
This whole concept relies on us "knowing" what is best for someone in their future and then upending the whole normal course of events based on that "knowing". That's just not possible, for instance there are many, many young females who are what we'd traditional call tom boys who grow up to be perfectly happy being Women. Imagine how many of these lives would be upended by a Doctor "knowing" that girl is better off as a man?!
Also comparing a natural process we all have to go through and is an accepted part of life to a new, still experimental medical procedure and saying well they're both permanent so that makes the other acceptable is incredibly dishonest and a false equivalence.
I am one of those. From when I was tiny until 8 or 9 I said all the time “I should have been a boy” or “God should have made me a boy.” My first grade teacher thought I WAS a boy for the first week. But this was the late 1980’s and the sane response I got was “you’re a kid, just be you, if you feel that way at 25 we’ll talk.” While I am still very much a Tom boy in personality, I look like a soccer mom with long blonde hair and blue eyes who works out a lot (because I do). Being a mommy is the most amazing and meaningful aspect of my life, second time being a wife to a man I’m still crazy about after 14 years of marriage and lots of growing up together.
Even my parents have admitted I would have transitioned in today’s world, and they would have been powerless to stop it in today’s legal landscape. And I at least exhibited signs from a young age. And if that had happened, 100% I would have killed myself as an adult once I realized what had happened. This gender crap is cruel. Distilling Barbie and yea parties while liking sports and WWF is not a crime punishable by lifetime health issues and child sterilization EXCEPT to the woke left. It is cruel!!!!
Sorry “second is” I meant to right. Still on hubby #1 with no plans to change that. 😂
1 Grossman’s description of non social contagion gender dysphoria is there in the movie, regardless of Matt’s non reaction. I actually think he agrees with her definition.
2 He used that Santa analogy to show that CHILDREN (4 year olds) have an active imagination and certainly cannot declare themselves transgender.
3 No, children, their parents, doctors or CPS or the courts should NOT be allowed to choose the irreversible destruction of blockers, cross hormones and experimental surgeries for a child/patient rather than the natural process of puberty. That by definition is irresponsible, barbaric.
4 As a separate issue they should not be able to do these experimental things, for profit, to vulnerable young adults. At the very least, these adults should be allowed to sue their doctors when they suffer the horrific complications that were misrepresented to them.
There appears to be a false statement made in the article: "about a transgender girl who sexually assaulted two girls in the women’s bathroom at two different high schools". The student in question sexually assaulted one student in one school in a bathroom, AND according to court proceedings abducted another girl in another school and forced her into a classroom (not a bathroom) where he forcibly touched her (either on or under her shirt). From an online report: "Loudoun County Juvenile and Domestic Relations Judge Pamela Brooks accepted the plea for abduction, which is a felony, and sexual battery, which is a misdemeanor" (https://wtop.com/loudoun-county/2021/11/loudoun-county-teen-found-responsible-in-2nd-sexual-assault/
)
And a careful examination of the facts of the case leaves little question that Walsh misrepresents them.
No he didn’t. The kid used claims of gender fluidity to gain access to the bathroom in the first case (and he was wearing a skirt) where he raped a girl. The school system covered it up because their new policy gave him a legal right to go into the girls’ bathroom. They moved him to another school quietly and another girl was assaulted there - something that should never have happened, and wouldn’t have, if they acknowledged the case and booted the rapist from regular high schools as they do other rapist.
Moreover, the judge in that case has overseen the cases hundreds of children accused of sexual assault and rape. She said in sentencing that this boy had the “most disturbing” physiological report she’d ever read. It made her “terrified for society.”
I think a careful comparison of Walsh's transcript with the facts of the case, as you've correctly summarized them, would reveal that he at least downplays some of the facts that don't entirely support the conclusion that the crime was sexual assault, committed by an adolescent who apparently took advantage of a rather ill-defined bathroom policy to have a pre-arranged consensual liaison with a female student, rather than a clear case of a trans-identified male using the policy to further a pattern of transgender predatory practice. And clearly the school system was at fault. The case is egregious enough based on the actual facts. I don't think the GC cause (which I wholeheartedly embrace) is furthered by misrepresenting facts to slant a story for the sake of generating outrage.
But there IS a pattern of rapists and sexual assaults being committed by people using those policies and claiming trans status, or gender fluidity. Look at the CA spa scandal, the “gender fluid” kindergartener assaulting a little girl in the GA school bathroom, or the number of “pro-trans” YouTube stars arrested for pedophilia (or just the number of US teachers this year). A lot of the argument on was he trans or did he use the policy inappropriately is semantics gymnastics.
If it’s not behind a paywall I highly recommend reading Matt Taibbi’s last few articles. He is NOT a right winger and yet, pointing out the assaults happening in CA women’s prisons by “female inmates with a penis” ends up at the same place. Can you tell the difference between a boy who claims to be gender fluid wearing a skirt to rape a girl in the bathroom, and a “transgender” boy with a penis in a skirt using the girls’ bathroom? Is there actually any difference? Or is the dispute semantics gymnastics?
I agree there is such a pattern. I just don't think the facts of that particular case support the allegation that it is actually an example of that pattern. When I first read the rather breathless accounts, I immediately assumed that it was an obvious instance of the pattern you cite. But as I looked into the details, it became clear that (although related in some ways), the motivations and actions involved in the adolescent male's crimes were unlikely to have more than an incidental relationship with the opportunities for abuse that are opened by the many badly misguided policies and laws allowing males access to women's spaces. I think it's unfortunate that this case was misinterpreted because of its appearance of being a poster child for the opposition to such policies. Legal experts who are actively engaged in examining the laws and policies and in advising politicians will quickly discover that this "example" is more rhetoric than substance. That has the negative impact of branding our legitimate, well-grounded examples as mere right-wing ideology, lacking basis in fact, which, I hasten to emphasize, is NOT the case.
BTW, I loved Taibbi's recent pieces on this issue. I don't think political axes belong in this battle at all. The fact that it's increasingly becoming a right-wing platform just alienates those on the left and makes the conversation about politics, not policies.
My understanding, with the first incident, is that they had *previously* engaged in arranged sexual encounters in the bathroom, but that for the incident in question, sex had not been planned, and the girl did not consent. That is rape, regardless of any prior sexual relationship.
I've been reading this discussion. It's difficult to find the words to respond. I am the parent of an adult transgender male. He and I have had many discussions about what is happening around trans discourse. We also have a lot of concerns about what is happening with youth and the possible "trending" going on. Yes, believe it or not, even though we are "in that world" we are concerned about narratives. And we are also terrified. I am terrified for my son. He isn't out recruiting or proselytizing. He wants to live a simple life and be left alone. In fact, this new focus on the transgender community has caused him to isolate even more. I am terrified by the hatred, some of it being perpetuated by progressive actions that actually do more harm than good, but also by flattened conversations that do not recognize individual experiences and seek to objectify people rather than see them as humans. I am terrified for my son's life (his physical life and his emotional well-being). Regardless of your understanding, belief system, or definition of what defines a woman or a man, there is a human being with a story. I ask you to keep this in mind. I understand the fear, I do. I don't trust anyone these days and I don't want policies in schools or medical facilities that determine a minor's trajectory about medical procedures, identity, etc. This is very personal and I'm glad there are resources for people who find themselves in this position. Trust me, when my son came to me 13 years ago about his identity (as a legal adult), I was filled with some dread. Mostly because I lived in fear of his safety and well-being. But my love as a mother determined that I would always stand by him. That doesn't mean I want to push an agenda on anyone, but we do need to have the right kind of dialogue about these issues and one that doesn't keep polarizing us more and more. This movie scares me because it is very biased, even if it does have good points. It galvanizes people in their sense of outrage and superiority. This is especially so because we are distanced from one another through social media and sound bites. When you have a relationship with someone who falls into the outcast category, it's a very different experience.
So I ramble. My heart aches. I suspect I will receive some vitriol. I do hope we can continue good dialogue around this issue and others.
Hi Faith,
If you would be interested in contributing a piece to our Substack expanding on these thoughts (as anonymously as you'd like), we would be happy to receive it. Good dialogue around this issue and others, as you put it, is precisely our goal.
Anyone who would like to submit an essay in response to this piece can email it to submissions@fairforall.org, and we will happily review it for potential publication.
Thank you for sharing your story Faith. It's so important to share real stories. I'm strongly against this ideology being carved into law (like in prisons) and shoved into schools. I'm against transitioning kids. It sounds like you are too. I am also against ill-thought out bills that penalize parents for simply following what the American Pediatrics Society, the AMA, and the rest says is right. How can they know what to do? As you say, it's hard to trust anyone! As a lifelong liberal from the left, I want a tolerant and inclusive society. I share your fear of backlash against trans-identified people, including a precious and beloved member of your own family. You and your kid have the right to your beliefs, whatever they are. The fight is happening because the belief that a person can be trapped in the wrong body, that "trans women are women" and "trans men are men" is being encoded in these harmful laws. Rapes really are happening in women's prisons, and that is nothing about belief, it is just a fact. People have all kinds of non-scientific beliefs, religious beliefs, spiritual beliefs. But we are supposed to have separation of church and state, and I see this as the crux of the issue, that these faith-based beliefs about sex are getting encoded into laws and policies. None of that is the fault of your kid, or you, who just want to be left in peace. But I can sure understand your worries. Thanks again for sharing your feelings, in the spirit of FAIR.
Thank you so much, Elizabeth. We are very much aligned in our thinking! I've spent a lot of time these past several years looking at our Bill of Rights, something that , unfortunately, seems to be viewed by some as antiquated. We need to look to it now more than ever. What is happening in our government - especially in the 4th estate - is part of what is driving much of this madness. I also believe that groups sometimes plant ideas to instill fear and to quash movements (sometimes under the guise of being supportive). The government (through agencies and big tech) is inserting itself in ways that are completely unethical and a violation of our rights. The trans situation is so tragic because there are scary proposals out there, but there are also long tall tales about who trans people are. They often choose the most outlandish individuals to represent the whole when in reality most people just want to live in peace and be left alone. Through my son's experience I spent time in support groups and the predominant portrayal out there about trans identity is not accurate for most. Nor is there a "trans-agenda," or at least there is no agenda being lead by the actual trans community. It's all become so convoluted and the truth gets buried under layers of deception and partial truth.
Thank you again for your kind words.
Faith--I would really love to know how you both respond to the podcast link I shared, if you resonate, find it supportive and helpful--or not. If you feel comfortable, you can contact me via email: First name, last name at yahoo.
Thank you, Elizabeth. I haven't had a chance to listen yet, but I will. And I will reach out to you by email to continue the conversation.
My heart aches with you, Faith. I also have friends and colleagues who are trans (and non-binary). I may be "gender critical" in many ways, but so much of this dialogue veers into erasure and other sorts of ugliness. It's grueling to read opinions with which I strongly agree (e.g. those that oppose medical transitions for minors/trans women in women's sports or prisons, etc.)... side by side opinions that appear to scorn, condemn, vilify, and refuse to give even the most basic form of respect to people who are trans. And I mean genuinely trans, like your son. My God, othering an entire community because of the nonsense put out by a few! And a lot of that nonsense put out by non-trans folks as well. The trans folks I know aren't agitating on Twitter or creating public policy, let alone grooming kids. They are just living their lives like everyone else, some married, all working, some with kids and one with grandkids.
I have been getting such a sickening feeling of deja vu of how it sometimes felt being a bi man in the 90s, that bad faith assumption of what I must be doing with my life, and how I must be a danger to folks because of that bisexuality (danger due to weird assumptions about STDs/inability to commit/homewrecking/being a fake gay or a scared one). And now a similar but far worse thing is happening to trans folks, generalizations and demonization from people who have probably never had a trans person in their lives. Most of whom are just minding their business like most of us do. Ugh.
And again, this is coming from someone who agrees with so much of gender critical thinking, especially the idea of social contagion among teens, and who came to this dialogue via one of my heroes, J.K. Rowling. But I don't think Rowling herself would appreciate a lot of what is said these days about trans people.
Thank you, Mark. You are spot on. My son and I are also concerned about "social contagion among teens." We witnessed this first hand with a distant family member. We knew that the person was on a bandwagon. And my son especially felt badly for feeling that way because he felt it was not his right to question a person's identity. But still, based on several factors, we felt the situation was part of the social movement going on. And in fact, a year later the person decided they were not transgender after all. Something dangerous is happening, but I feel it is fueled by hysteria and misinformation (I've come to hate that word, but it applies here). First the percentage of transgender individuals is very small. And as you said, they just want to live their lives in peace. They are definitely not "recruiting." As my son said, "I wouldn't wish this on anyone."
And thank you for sharing your story. I can understand the deja vu you are experiencing because it is similar. Very brave of you to share it on a public platform. Thank you, again.
I'm glad we are having these conversations. I spoke at length with my son last night about this conversation. He is so wise and articulate. I asked him if he would be interested in collaborating on an essay with me, but he said he doesn't have the emotional energy for it right now. I ended up writing last night and may submit something. It's just a story really. But that is what is important, hearing each other's stories so we add humanity to the picture, rather than objectifying and demonizing groups of people.
I am so glad you are working on submitting a piece! I think it is important to hear your perspective on this topic. I think the most genuine way to push back on dehumanizing rhetoric is to provide humanizing stories and experiences. Especially important given that many transitioned folks and long-timers in the trans community don't agree with the agitation that is coming from the far left, but of course could never agree with voices from the right that literally refuse to recognize their existence. They are stuck in a way. And the ones I know are far from woke, we literally laugh about things together, like the mono-focus on pronoun-sharing from many millennials etc.
Social contagion is very real, as we both have seen. It has been incredibly frustrating seeing professionals handwave something so common aside. I mean, we've all been teens so we all know how important peer opinions can be. My friends who are parents in Berkeley are seeing a wave of their children now identifying as trans. All but one are trying to be "good liberal straight people" with their reactions, but I think they need to not be afraid of recognizing that something that may feel incredibly important & life-changing for a teen right now could literally shift in a year. Because teens are shifting their identities all the time.
It's naïve to think otherwise. And the one who differs has gone over the deep end, and now doesn't think any trans identities are real.
You're right, something dangerous is happening. This always happens when children are involved. I'm old enough to remember all of the hysteria and misinformation that happened during the pervasive satanic daycare sex abuse scares of the late 80s & early 90s. I feel like I'm hearing similar rhetoric these days, whether it's about Disney or about drag queens.
Wow, Mark. Great insights! This has been a great conversation. I ended up calling my son and sharing much of it with him because it is so refreshing to talk about this in a non-polarizing way with someone other than him. I especially liked your comments, "Especially important given that many transitioned folks and long-timers in the trans community don't agree with the agitation that is coming from the far left, but of course could never agree with voices from the right that literally refuse to recognize their existence." You described my son's position perfectly. We have always been left-leaning, but this topic and many of the other movements of the past several years have felt threatening and I find myself (as a commentator that I like and follow says) politically marooned. My son has said to me that as frustrated as he is with left ideologies, at least they don't want to see him without any rights (or dead), like some on the far right do. One of the reasons he decided to pursue his master's degree in a more conservative state was because he wanted a different experience than his California undergraduate one. Of course both experiences have had disappointments, but that is life. It's also challenging because my extended family is pretty conservative. And while they love my son, they have been bringing up the "trans agenda," so then I become a little defensive. I still contend that something is going on, but it is not from the actual trans community, although they will suffer the brunt of it. Thanks again for the thoughtful and engaging conversation.
Hello again Faith...if you haven't come across, you both might be interested in taking a listen to this podcast called Transparency hosted by two trans-identified people (both of them named Aaron!)
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/transparency/id1583333120
Thank you, Elizabeth. We will check into it for sure.
Thank you for this suggestion. I will take a look and I will also ask my son if he is familiar with her. He follows a lot of people. He is pretty scared about some of the stuff out there. He is in a very conservative state finishing graduate school. He actually chose to do that because he wanted to get away from some of the very left leaning experiences he had as an undergraduate in California. He doesn't identify as conservative either, but like me he is in a state of disillusionment with both sides (we always considered ourselves to be on the left, but nothing makes sense these days). We need to find some balance but with the polarizing narratives going on, it's hard to do that. Thanks again.
I don't always agree with her politics, but she's fantastic. I don't need to agree with her politics to see how emotionally healthy she is. I really appreciate her perspective.
I’ve watched it twice. Matt Walsh didn’t do anything except ask them to explain themselves. It is no one’s doing but their own that they sounded like fools. The plain and simple fact is that you cannot pick your gender. And telling even a gender dysphoric child anything other than that truth is flat out wrong. And allowing a child to do experimental medical treatments that have life altering health consequences is child abuse. I’ve raised 4 children and seen the mental capacities as they grow up- they are not capable of understanding what’s happening. And even if transitioned, they are never truly their chosen gender and you who told them otherwise have deceived them. I disagree with your assessment.
And by the way discounting what happened to those teen girls in VA at the hands of the trans kid is extremely out of line. My heart aches for them and their families. You have no idea how scary it can be to be a woman or have daughters and the damage that sexual assault does to a person. Shame on you for that one.
I loved the movie and am happy someone had the guts to stand up against the lunacy of this movement. I disagree with the premise of your review that this movie is a “flawed attempt at a necessary conversation” I think Matt did an exceptional job with his interviews and questioning and in showing the dangers behind this movement- pointing out the financial gains to big pharma at the expense of young lives.