In my view the censoriousness and authoritarianism which enforcers of gender orthodoxies have brought to (or, perhaps, revived within) the Left are a bigger problem than any specific policy position that is put forward under the rubric of "trans rights". A living political movement requires a culture of open debate and preparedness to question orthodoxies, the giving and receiving of constructive criticism, a capacity for self-analysis, and an ability to relate to the unconverted and to ordinary people who don't partake of all aspects of Left sub-cultures (e.g. they like football, keep cats, aren't vegans, etc.).
The problem is that gender identity ideology is intrinsically authoritarian and cannot exist without censorship. It cannot exist without forcing everyone to pretend that 1+1=0, which is what pretending that people can change sex amounts to. In that way, the "trans rights movement" is fundamentally different from the gay rights movement, which never required anyone to deny reality. Trans people cannot be trans without everyone around them willingly or unwillingly participating in their fiction. It can therefore never be a "living movement", because it cannot tolerate any dissent, as gender identity depends on external validation at all times.
Brilliantly put! Yes, we are suffering through an historical epoch where facts are subordinate to ideology. So of course gender ideology has to be authoritarian, there's no other way to force people to deny facts. And you're absolutely right that it can't be a living movement--that's precisely why authoritarian governments fail, because they can't grow. I used to be a serious lefty, but having seen how unbearably authoritarian the left can be, I have come to accept the profound insight of classical liberalism.
PS. I subscribed to your substack, your posts are really interesting.
I love the picture of the pink-blue mushroom cloud. It says it all.
One of the things that strikes me about this article is the critique of cultural/discursive form. For me, the questions aren't right vs left, but authoritarian vs liberal. We need to look at all forms of suffering and the causes of suffering (yes, Buddhist noble truths 1 & 2) and see them as they are, and not as they're distorted through ideological lenses. The really profound damage of identity politics--worse than gender ideology garbage, which is bad enough--is the legitimation of authoritarian approaches to empirical questions about suffering. Instead of triaging suffering in society according to 'blood loss', we respond to suffering on the basis of a person's identity category. The $65M the next mayor wants to direct to hormone blockers and dick chopping, where's it coming from? Homeless shelters? After school programs? Fire fighting? The sad thing is that no one asks that question because, gulp, it doesn't matter, because no one's suffering matters more than the pain a dude suffers when he's denied the opportunity to change into a bikini among the ladies.
And to link this back to Iran and its support of jihadist terrorism, this is the exact same mindset that enabled people, in the millions, to dance and throw candies the day after hearing of 1200 Jews being beheaded, immolated, etc. Because the joy experienced by Islamists killing Jews far outweighs the suffering of their victims.
Thanks for this sensible post! I agree that the Democrats have badly messed up with their gender ideoIogy nonsense. I think of Helen Joyce: "How gender Ideology breaks medicine, society, and science". Sorry to see that the apparent leading Democratic candidate in NYC is still determined to marginalize the Democrats.
On another topic that you have commented on, relevant only insofar as you have wondered that if the Biden administration was so deluded on gender, did they get SARS-CoV-2 wrong -- erosion of trust. As a scientist with decades-long involvement in the virology community -- and as someone who has read the extensive and difficult literature on the topic of SARS-CoV-2 biology, ecology, and molecular history (very dense, open access, collaborative, thoroughly researched papers, spanning many years of work -- do you know anyone who has read this, or attended symposia/lectures on the topic?) -- the vast preponderance of evidence and argument regarding origin of SARS-CoV-2 indicates an origin as a zoonotic spillover at the Wuhan market, via the notorious "gray market" wildlife trade. The science is fascinating. Biden administration was terribly wrong on gender, but they sort of had this virus right, but even then, my disappointment was that they did not make an overt, clear, summary of the science. they just folded up and let the lab-leak cranks seize the platform. They seemed to think that gender-woo had priority. But scientists in the community of virology, ecology, and medicine know that understanding zoonosis and potential pandemic threats is critical.
"Will New York City be part of the movement to reinvent the Democrats to appeal to a much larger sector of the population, and become the party that prizes truth and science over a sense of belonging? Or will we run back the greatest hits of Woke 101 with Zohran?"
Your answer is in: we will run back the greatest hits of Woke 101 with Zohran. In Zohran's words, "Queer liberation means defund the police." It's like politics by madlib.
Zohran seemed determined to throttle the golden goose. If he does everything he said he'd do, the city will go broke, businesses will close up in New York and move to other states, and "globalizing the intifada" in NYC will be praised instead of policed.
Trouble is most are just too damn busy to pay attention, not even those directly harmed by these historic events. Yesterday, I spent time with a Mom friend, whose children have also been influenced by all the "gender woo" (just one strand of the multiple mass hysterias running throughout culture, making all "good" people wear masks everywhere, contort their language, reject disposable straws, believe their having been born was a crime against the planet, etc., etc.) that's infiltrated just about every institution and profession that has touched their lives (3 kids all profoundly destabilized by a Father's death, immediately followed by the disruption of Covid, turned to therapy to navigate their teens. But most in the mental health profession were worse than useless, it turns out. The eldest is now in a wheelchair after survived a recent jump off a bridge that my friend is fairly positive was a reaction to the side-effects of all the various drugs that therapists prescribed her over the last several years).
Anyway my friend is just too damn busy struggling to work full time while fighting one medical bureaucracy after another, searching to find some "therapists" who won't treat her kids like NPCs and stuff them with multiple mood-altering drugs. She doesn't have the luxury I have to think about "semi-suspect classes" or the actual standards behind the term "evidence-based medicine," or medical ethics, etc. And yet, it's like she's under siege by legions of so-called health professionals who apparently aren't inclined to think critically about them either . . .
Well done, LSD, I resonate with your analysis. Mamdani won the primary. What happens in November? "What Will The City Make of All This?" in the general election? (Nod to NK Jemison for the "title." ) I'm grateful for your voice.
I consider this Mamdani character to be the embodiment of the classic hypocritical mixed metaphor, a uniquely strange combination of narcissistic self-proclaimed "queer" while an advocate of the movements demonstrating a consistent sideline of throwing "queers" off the roofs of buildings.
Other than skewering these types, who drape themselves in the trans flag and keffieh, with a not-very-effective face mask thrown in for good measure, I generally don't discuss international politics and trans excesses in the same paragraph.
Every event has its own history. I just finished rereading Dr. Zhivago, the epic historical novel spanning 1905 to 1943, in which Pasternak's main character describes acting out political deceits and pretenses, while missing the simple joys of everyday life. Like weeding in the garden when this heat turns.
Maybe I am paranoid, but when I read about politicians like Mamdani (or Walz), I wonder about their motivations. Maybe it's not that they are hopelessly woke, or even groveling to the party, or in someone's pocket. Maybe it's subversion and part of a plan to destroy the cities they pretend to care about.
>Number three on reasons not to choose Kamala: “too focused on cultural issues like transgender issues, rather than helping the middle class.”
It was number one for "all swing voters" (second dark-green column). That is, the people whose votes are actually crucial to winning the election.
In my view the censoriousness and authoritarianism which enforcers of gender orthodoxies have brought to (or, perhaps, revived within) the Left are a bigger problem than any specific policy position that is put forward under the rubric of "trans rights". A living political movement requires a culture of open debate and preparedness to question orthodoxies, the giving and receiving of constructive criticism, a capacity for self-analysis, and an ability to relate to the unconverted and to ordinary people who don't partake of all aspects of Left sub-cultures (e.g. they like football, keep cats, aren't vegans, etc.).
The problem is that gender identity ideology is intrinsically authoritarian and cannot exist without censorship. It cannot exist without forcing everyone to pretend that 1+1=0, which is what pretending that people can change sex amounts to. In that way, the "trans rights movement" is fundamentally different from the gay rights movement, which never required anyone to deny reality. Trans people cannot be trans without everyone around them willingly or unwillingly participating in their fiction. It can therefore never be a "living movement", because it cannot tolerate any dissent, as gender identity depends on external validation at all times.
Brilliantly put! Yes, we are suffering through an historical epoch where facts are subordinate to ideology. So of course gender ideology has to be authoritarian, there's no other way to force people to deny facts. And you're absolutely right that it can't be a living movement--that's precisely why authoritarian governments fail, because they can't grow. I used to be a serious lefty, but having seen how unbearably authoritarian the left can be, I have come to accept the profound insight of classical liberalism.
PS. I subscribed to your substack, your posts are really interesting.
I love the picture of the pink-blue mushroom cloud. It says it all.
One of the things that strikes me about this article is the critique of cultural/discursive form. For me, the questions aren't right vs left, but authoritarian vs liberal. We need to look at all forms of suffering and the causes of suffering (yes, Buddhist noble truths 1 & 2) and see them as they are, and not as they're distorted through ideological lenses. The really profound damage of identity politics--worse than gender ideology garbage, which is bad enough--is the legitimation of authoritarian approaches to empirical questions about suffering. Instead of triaging suffering in society according to 'blood loss', we respond to suffering on the basis of a person's identity category. The $65M the next mayor wants to direct to hormone blockers and dick chopping, where's it coming from? Homeless shelters? After school programs? Fire fighting? The sad thing is that no one asks that question because, gulp, it doesn't matter, because no one's suffering matters more than the pain a dude suffers when he's denied the opportunity to change into a bikini among the ladies.
And to link this back to Iran and its support of jihadist terrorism, this is the exact same mindset that enabled people, in the millions, to dance and throw candies the day after hearing of 1200 Jews being beheaded, immolated, etc. Because the joy experienced by Islamists killing Jews far outweighs the suffering of their victims.
That's such a good way of putting it.
Thanks for this sensible post! I agree that the Democrats have badly messed up with their gender ideoIogy nonsense. I think of Helen Joyce: "How gender Ideology breaks medicine, society, and science". Sorry to see that the apparent leading Democratic candidate in NYC is still determined to marginalize the Democrats.
On another topic that you have commented on, relevant only insofar as you have wondered that if the Biden administration was so deluded on gender, did they get SARS-CoV-2 wrong -- erosion of trust. As a scientist with decades-long involvement in the virology community -- and as someone who has read the extensive and difficult literature on the topic of SARS-CoV-2 biology, ecology, and molecular history (very dense, open access, collaborative, thoroughly researched papers, spanning many years of work -- do you know anyone who has read this, or attended symposia/lectures on the topic?) -- the vast preponderance of evidence and argument regarding origin of SARS-CoV-2 indicates an origin as a zoonotic spillover at the Wuhan market, via the notorious "gray market" wildlife trade. The science is fascinating. Biden administration was terribly wrong on gender, but they sort of had this virus right, but even then, my disappointment was that they did not make an overt, clear, summary of the science. they just folded up and let the lab-leak cranks seize the platform. They seemed to think that gender-woo had priority. But scientists in the community of virology, ecology, and medicine know that understanding zoonosis and potential pandemic threats is critical.
"Will New York City be part of the movement to reinvent the Democrats to appeal to a much larger sector of the population, and become the party that prizes truth and science over a sense of belonging? Or will we run back the greatest hits of Woke 101 with Zohran?"
Your answer is in: we will run back the greatest hits of Woke 101 with Zohran. In Zohran's words, "Queer liberation means defund the police." It's like politics by madlib.
Zohran seemed determined to throttle the golden goose. If he does everything he said he'd do, the city will go broke, businesses will close up in New York and move to other states, and "globalizing the intifada" in NYC will be praised instead of policed.
Well said. I agree and have restacked.
Trouble is most are just too damn busy to pay attention, not even those directly harmed by these historic events. Yesterday, I spent time with a Mom friend, whose children have also been influenced by all the "gender woo" (just one strand of the multiple mass hysterias running throughout culture, making all "good" people wear masks everywhere, contort their language, reject disposable straws, believe their having been born was a crime against the planet, etc., etc.) that's infiltrated just about every institution and profession that has touched their lives (3 kids all profoundly destabilized by a Father's death, immediately followed by the disruption of Covid, turned to therapy to navigate their teens. But most in the mental health profession were worse than useless, it turns out. The eldest is now in a wheelchair after survived a recent jump off a bridge that my friend is fairly positive was a reaction to the side-effects of all the various drugs that therapists prescribed her over the last several years).
Anyway my friend is just too damn busy struggling to work full time while fighting one medical bureaucracy after another, searching to find some "therapists" who won't treat her kids like NPCs and stuff them with multiple mood-altering drugs. She doesn't have the luxury I have to think about "semi-suspect classes" or the actual standards behind the term "evidence-based medicine," or medical ethics, etc. And yet, it's like she's under siege by legions of so-called health professionals who apparently aren't inclined to think critically about them either . . .
Well done, LSD, I resonate with your analysis. Mamdani won the primary. What happens in November? "What Will The City Make of All This?" in the general election? (Nod to NK Jemison for the "title." ) I'm grateful for your voice.
I consider this Mamdani character to be the embodiment of the classic hypocritical mixed metaphor, a uniquely strange combination of narcissistic self-proclaimed "queer" while an advocate of the movements demonstrating a consistent sideline of throwing "queers" off the roofs of buildings.
Other than skewering these types, who drape themselves in the trans flag and keffieh, with a not-very-effective face mask thrown in for good measure, I generally don't discuss international politics and trans excesses in the same paragraph.
Every event has its own history. I just finished rereading Dr. Zhivago, the epic historical novel spanning 1905 to 1943, in which Pasternak's main character describes acting out political deceits and pretenses, while missing the simple joys of everyday life. Like weeding in the garden when this heat turns.
Here's today's butterfly:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/7X6koFmTfFg
Maybe I am paranoid, but when I read about politicians like Mamdani (or Walz), I wonder about their motivations. Maybe it's not that they are hopelessly woke, or even groveling to the party, or in someone's pocket. Maybe it's subversion and part of a plan to destroy the cities they pretend to care about.