<!–

–>

September 14, 2022

I’m a cultural pessimist. I think our nation is on a catastrophic moral path. But I must admit that despite my red-pilled perspective on our rotting culture, radical trans ideology has shocked me. Of course, there have always been people who wish they were what they are not, and that includes (in rare instances) men who wish they were women and women who wish they were men. These people are generally deeply unhappy and suffer greatly. They should be treated with understanding and compassion — each of us struggles in life and their struggle is particularly difficult. But the wide-spread acceptance of radical gender ideology is cultural insanity.

‘); googletag.cmd.push(function () { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1609268089992-0’); }); }

Radical gender ideology itself is nonsense at best and radical evil at worst. The best place to start with understanding radical gender ideology is to ask: does it even make sense?

On Dr. Phil’s television show, conservative commentator Matt Walsh asked of Dr. Phil’s “trans” guests a remarkably simple question: “what is a woman”? His interlocutors couldn’t answer the question, although it is at the heart of their claim to be women. A ‘trans-woman’ asserts that he (I insist on using real pronouns) is a woman. He doesn’t merely insist that he feels like a woman or wants to be a woman. Those are meaningful assertions and can be true. Instead, he insists that he is a woman, misplaced in a man’s body. That is not a meaningful assertion, nor can it be true. In order to assert ‘I am a woman,’ one must have a definition of ‘woman.’ An assertion must be pointed at something — being a woman, in this case. One must be able to define ‘woman’ to meaningfully assert that he is one.

However, all cogent definitions of ‘woman’ are inconsistent with the assertion that a man can be a woman. A woman is a human being with two X chromosomes and who has at least the potential to have secondary characteristics of womanhood, such as an actual uterus, ovaries, breasts, etc. This is simple biology, and you don’t need to be a biologist to know it.

‘); googletag.cmd.push(function () { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1609270365559-0’); }); }

A man who has had pharmacological or surgical alterations to mimic some aspects of womanhood is not a woman — he is a pharmacologically altered or surgically mutilated man.

So how can a trans-activist answer the question ‘what is a woman’? The only answer available to a trans-activist is for the activist to reply: ‘it is what I want to be’. But that is not an answer — it is merely circular:

I am a woman.

So, what is a woman?

 It is what I am.

The assertion ‘I am a trans-woman’ is literally nonsense. A person may be a man who wants to be a woman or be a man who believes he is a woman or be a man who feels like a woman. But he cannot be a woman, because ‘woman’ necessarily has meaning, and no man fits that definition.