Do Biological Facts No Longer Matter?

Loading

Nancy Pearcey:

The pushback has been swift and strong against Target’s unsafe bathroom policy, along with the Obama administration’s demandthat all public schools adopt pro-transgender policies for showers and locker rooms. But for long-term success against these impositions, the response must also be strategic.

That means drilling down to the source of transgender ideology.

The roots of moral issues always bring us to questions about human nature. Both classical Greek and Christian philosophy regarded the natural world as purpose driven or teleologicalfrom the Greek telos, meaning purpose or goal. To ordinary human observation, it is evident that eyes are for seeing and ears for hearing; fins are for swimming and wings for flying.

Because the human body is part of nature, it too was regarded as having a purpose. The delightful diversity of male and female was not some cosmic accident. Instead it showed that the human body is ordered to the purpose of opposite-sex pair-bonding and reproduction. Teleology is the basis for naturallaw ethics, which aims to tell us how to fulfill our true nature, how to become fully human.

Today it is popular among Western elites to deny teleology. The key turning point was Charles Darwin. He did not deny that nature appears to be designed for a purpose. But as an agnostic, he hoped to use science to demonstrate that the appearance of design was the result of purposeless material process – random variations sifted by the blind, automatic forces of natural selection.

As historian Jacques Barzun writes, “This denial of purpose is Darwin’s distinctive contention.”

The Darwinian worldview implies that the cosmos is merely a vast amoral machine. It reduces the human body to a lump of matter, a collection of atoms and molecules, not intrinsically different from any other chance configuration of matter. There can be no natural law ethic because humanity has no purpose to fulfill. Philosopher Charles Taylor explains, “The cosmos is no longer seen as the embodiment of meaningful order which can define the good for us.”

The implication is that our biological identity as male and female is a cosmic accident after all. The sexual differentiation of male and female has no special dignity or meaning. The body is reduced to raw material to be manipulated and controlled to serve human needs and preferences – like any other natural resource.

Suspicious of Sex

These are the assumptions lurking behind the language of the transgender movement. The Obama administration’s letter, sent out jointly by the Departments of Justice and Education, asserts, “A person’s gender identity may be different from … the person’s sex assigned at birth.” What’s the key word here? “Assigned” – as though a person’s sex at birth were purely arbitrary instead of a scientific, biological fact.

What does that language imply? That biological facts do not matter. Your biology gives no clue to your gender identity. It is irrelevant to the “authentic self.” The result is a fragmented, dualistic worldview that denigrates the physical body as inconsequential and insignificant – a worldview that alienates people from their own bodies.

Consider a recent case in the Fourth Circuit, in which a girl who identified as a boy named G.G. demanded the right to use the boys’ restroom. According to the majority opinion, “G.G.’s birth-assigned sex, or so-called ‘biological sex,’ is female, but G.G.’s gender identity is male.”

Her “so-called ‘biological sex’” – in sneer quotes? This is a judge writing a formal ruling for a federal court, and he treats the very existence of biological sex with suspicion and disdain. Apparently he thinks the girl’s physiology, anatomy, chromosomes, and DNA are less real or knowable than her subjective feelings about her gender.

The Lie of Liberation

Is this fragmented view of sexuality actually liberating? Many who have tried it say no. Jonah Mix, who writes for “Gender Detective,” spent years immersed in queer theory, wearing makeup and nail polish: “It was in those queer circles that I first heard the common admonition to never define a person by their body.”

Eventually, however, he realized the promise of liberation was a lie. To discover whether you “identify” as a man, you must define manhood. If you do not define yourself by your biological sex, then you must define yourself by your actions. Do you act stereotypically masculine? Then you are a man. Do you behave in ways that are stereotypically feminine? You must be a woman. Queer theory actually reinforces gender stereotypes.

By contrast, if you base your identity on your physical anatomy, you can engage in a range of diverse behaviors without threatening your identity as a man. Mix writes, “When we are defined by our bodies, the whole width of human experience remains open. … There is freedom in the body.”

On a trans website a commenter named Trish wrote, “As a little girl, I enjoyed both ballet lessons and playing in the mud. … I liked miniskirts and wanted to be an astronaut when I grew up. It looks to me like the trans movement is fighting very hard to force everyone to choose whether to live in the blue box or the pink box, and no playing mix-and-match. To me this is the opposite of freedom.”

Contrary to what progressives say, there is greater diversity when we anchor our gender identity in the objective, scientifically knowable reality of our biology as male or female.

In culture war rhetoric, the existence of intersex people (hermaphrodites) is often used to disrupt the male/female binary. But intersex conditions are a matter of biology, not gender identity. A report filed to the European Commission in 2011 says, “Intersex people differ from trans people as their status is not gender related but instead relates to their biological makeup (genetic, hormonal and physical features).”

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
27 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Non-binary what a crock another enabled mental defect.

Some people now are allowed to escape their own personal and physical responsibilities by just changing their mind about what they are. OK, fine… do whatever you want.

However, THEN, everyone else is EXPECTED to be instantly aware of their illogical choices and alter their own lives (sometimes sacrificing safety and privacy in the process) to “respect” these bizarre choices (aka, “whims”).

I’m afraid not.

How soon before someone says, “I identify as a unicorn, and it is a violation of my civil rights for anyone to deny how I choose to imagine myself, reality be damned!”

Insanity. Absolute insanity.

So, men want women who have the gender identity of men to be required to use their little girl’s bathrooms? This all gets very confusing. Maybe bathrooms should be unisex with one sink and toilet per bathroom, like a row of walk-in lockers along a hallway, then we could stop worrying about the whole damn issue and turn our attention to the national debt. Maybe we could solve that with pay toilets. ALL toilets could be nationalized by the State, so we could raise revenue very quickly. Of course, we’d need subsidized facilities for those too poor to pay to poop.

@Greg: Yeah, left wing stupidity makes everything confusing because nothing the left claims they stand for ever makes any sense. You say you respect women and want to protect them, then you make it a LAW that any man can walk into any women’s restroom or locker room anything they want to for whatever reason they might have.

Have all gender-confused people use the men’s room. Let’s see how long THAT lasts.

You should check your settings. Your sense of humor switch may have been accidentally turned to the “off” position.

@Greg: I dont find it very funny that none of this went through a congressional process, every one should give Obama the finger as congress alone has the power of the purse funding would not change and let the delusional king of the toilet go to wimper in a corner.
I love his legacy TOILET TYRANT

@Greg: Yeah, giving sexual predators lawful protection to ply their trade is hilarious.

Obama’s school directive pertains on to school children. Children whose gender identity mismatches their gender of record are likely relatively few. Their problem sometimes results from a physical abnormality at birth that was dealt with by gender assignment. It sometimes subsequently turns out that the assignment made is a mismatch with the individual’s psychological gender profile.

The reason a school directive became necessary is because such children were caught up in certain states’ reactionary legislation that sought to mandate that the gender assigned around the time of birth be the single determining factor. For most children this makes sense, but for some children it can be cruel and psychologically harmful.

Of course, some people aren’t smart enough to figure this out, or are ignorant of the facts, or do understand but can’t resist the opportunity to misrepresent what the Obama directive is actually about to pick up some cheap political points. In the process, they take the side that can actually be very unfair and harmful to certain children, while being helpful to nobody but small-minded ignoramuses and bigots.

@Greg: There are psychologists that say to encourage the gender confusion is tantamount to child abuse, its a mental disorder that requires corrective action not further encouragement.
Its known as Gender Dysphoria. In his directive the school does not have to notify the parent, how horrible to allow the child to go untreated the president is a monster.
Adolescents are particularly at risk for depression and suicidal ideation and suicide attempts.

The thing about children who have had gender assignment when the physiology was ambiguous is that an incorrect call has sometimes been made by someone shortly after their birth. This sort of error only becomes obvious later, as the child becomes older. People tend to be psychologically either male or female.

I can easily imagine depression and suicide risk resulting from being forced to take the role of a gender that you don’t consider to be your own. The incorrectly gender-assigned boy, for example, being forced to shower with the boys, or use the boys restroom. Kids at that age can be extremely cruel.

I think there needs to be flexibility in such situations. Mandating that gender of record be the deciding factor takes away any flexibility. “Biological facts” aren’t the entire gender picture. Those facts aren’t even as 100 percent straightforward as some people seem to think.

@Greg: Isn’t it nice of Obama to threaten to cut off funding for education and nutrition in order to create, out of thin air, a contentious issue and pander to an imbalanced minority? Now, THAT’S compassion.

This is THE fact, Greg… you support a law that makes it legally protected for a male to enter a women’s facility any time he wants for whatever motive he may have in order to pander to a minuscule segment of society that currently suffers no ill but self-induced hurt feelings.

The thing about children who have had gender assignment when the physiology was ambiguous is that an incorrect call has sometimes been made

Maybe unless an infant can claim their gender identity, they should be aborted?

People tend to be psychologically either male or female.

No, they ARE what they physically ARE. If they are mentally disturbed, the mental condition needs to be treated, not the security and privacy of every woman and girl sacrificed.

People tend to be psychologically either male or female.

No, they ARE what they physically ARE. If they are mentally disturbed, the mental condition needs to be treated, not the security and privacy of every woman and girl sacrificed.

You are truly clueless with regard to this topic. Not all babies are born being clearly male or female. Gender assignment in such cases is generally made very early. Sometimes they get it wrong.

@Greg: Not all babies are born being clearly male or female. Gender assignment in such cases is generally made very early. Sometimes they get it wrong.
Can you link to a medically oriented site for cases that the doctors delivering a child cant tell which sex the child is?
Or is this something you read on a liberal site and just taking their word for it.
I think its a plumbing issue, the doctor looks at the baby and says its a boy or its a girl, how long before they get sued for not just tossing it at you and say the child is not old enough to choose we will just wait and see. Dress it in yellow or green not pink or blue, if you do the child welfare nosebags will be at your door.

@Greg: I can guaran-damn-tee you that unless there is some physics malformation involved, I can tell you the sex of a newborn in less than a second. It ain’t that difficult.

The estimate of infsnts born with ambiguous genitalia range from 0.7 to 1.7% globally. In the US, whrn such a birth occurs, the standard of care is not to choose the infant’s sex untul after chromosomal testing is done, as well as ultrasound imaging to identity internal structures, looking for gonads, and for the presence or absence of a uterus. Thereafter, a mutlidisciplinary team, led usually by a pediatric endocrinologist, discusses the options with the family. The practice of assigning sex based on the ease of surgical intervention to make a specific type of genitalia which happened decades ago before chromosomal testing was available, is no longer accepted practice.

The aberrant logic used by the left, which is nothing more than enabling the mental illness of gender identity disorder, is akin to giving a towel to be used as a cape by a mental patient who believes he can fly.

The inherent disconnection from reality that exists in giving hormone blocking drugs to a child, who mistakenly believes they are the wrong gender should be self-evident. If this child has the tendency to produce a specific gender-related hormone related ro their chromosomally defined sex, then giving drugs to block their biological destiny is a clear denial of reality, and frankly is child abuse.

There are certain congenital conditions where it may be difficult to determine sex of a child, with todays medicine its a matter of tests, there are other serious hormonal issues that are associated with Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia. There is no known cure for this awful birth defect. 🙁

Obama’s directive does little more than keep options open for any child whose emerging gender identity is a mismatch with their physiology or gender of record. Such circumstances are rare, but they do arise. The directive is a reaction to legislation designed to take away that option. People have turned it into a political issue. It never should have been. Children with such problems shouldn’t become the center of political controversies. They have enough of a problem already.

@Greg: So if its so rare what is the point of his commandment?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3609320/Governor-Texas-suing-Obamas-transgender-directive.html How many times do the people have to shove him back within the constraints of the constitution he swore to uphold and defend?

His directive counters state legislation designed to eliminate any option for transgender children to use the facilities most suited to their own gender identity. It recognizes that the problem exists, and tries to make things a little easier for those having it. They’ve surely got enough to deal with already.

@Greg:

Obama’s directive does little more than keep options open for any child whose emerging gender identity is a mismatch with their physiology or gender of record.

Oh, no, it does much more than that. It provides legal cover for anyone that wants to go on a peeping/touching/raping spree in a woman’s restroom or locker room. If anyone confronts them, they can readily claim they felt all girlie that day and to stop harassing them.

Yeah, it accomplishes a lot. To hell with safety and privacy, let’s do some major pandering!

@Greg: You are correct it directly steps on States rights to protect children from sickos and perverts. Not within his constraints. But little he does with his pen does protect any citizen.

@Bill, #21:

Oh, no, it does much more than that. It provides legal cover for anyone that wants to go on a peeping/touching/raping spree in a woman’s restroom or locker room.

Presumably you’re aware that there are laws on the books against all of those things, that perverts who break those laws go to jail for it and are branded as sex offenders after their sentences are served, and that a presidential directive providing an option for transgender children to use the school restrooms they’re most comfortable with doesn’t change any of that.

Maybe you’ve forgotten that Obama’s two young daughters have grown up during his presidency? I think he has any good parent’s concern for the well-being of children.

@Greg: Do you simply not read? Where is the law against a non-transgendered man walking into a girls locker room for a look around? Before it was just common courtesy, a respect for privacy. If a man was found in a woman’s facility, it was KNOWN what he was up to and it only rarely happened on only for the reasons afore mentioned. Most would be more subtle about it.

Now what? What stops them now? Sure, if they get caught raping someone, that is a crime. But, what if they are just scouting the hunting ground and, if confronted, simply say, “Hey, can’t you see I’m a girl?”

All the left cares about is disruption of the status quo, regardless of who it harms.

@Bill: Me thinks you protest too much–What percentage of men are gonna go into women’s rest rooms for nefarious purposes? A bigger concern might be why the Catholic Church choses to protect it’s pedophile priests.

@Richard Wheeler: I would hazard a guess that the percentage would be several times more than the percentage of non-women who actually have legitimate need to enter.

Catholic priests or other gay pedophiles are bad enough; why in hell pass a LAW to legitimize perverse activity? (well, that is sort of a rhetorical question… I have already explained why).

@Richard Wheeler: Rich if you do a simple search on Pervs in womens restrooms I came up with 5940 results. A well dressed trans would not be noticed, they go about their business and leave. But most of these guys don’t even shave everyday, do not dress as women they are just sickos, some with cameras. At least before they could be prosecuted and designated as sexual predators not anymore, they just lie and walk away.
This one didn’t walk http://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/04/man_charged_after_10-year-old.html
I dont think my or your right to privacy should be so easily flushed.