I'd also add that WPATH seems to assume gender identity is fixed, if I read correctly...and it seems that as people grow, both their sense of self and their sense of what each gender implies can change (and for people who change cultures, I'm sure that is even more varied, as I've seen enormous diversity in what masculine and feminine are assumed to be in different cultures, which in part sounds like what led you to write this book).
One of the more bemusing contradictions of trans-activist dogma is that, while gender identity is assumed to be fixed, it's also perfectly acceptable to be "genderfluid," "nonbinary" and so on.
Meaning, apparently, that one's deepest, soul-like gender "identity" can more or less be no identity, or at least, an identity in constant flux.
Makes no sense.
While I'm at it: impact vs. intention.
We often hear from the vocal "woke" or progressives or whatever we should call them that "impact" trumps "intention." Thus, if somebody *feels* harmed by another's words, that's what matters, not the intention of the speaker.
But when it comes to trans identity, this seems to be flipped on its head. To wit:
A trans person wishes an observer to see them as they see themselves, i.e. intention. But if that observer does *not* see them as they see themselves (i.e. "impact"), that's somehow offensive. In this case, in other words, it seems that intention reigns supreme, and "impact" can go bugger off.
Congratulations! On the publication, and also on holding onto your own point of view — so hard to do! Thank you so much for taking the risks (and losses) you have taken to talk about this.
Cool cover photo 😄 Will your book be available on Kindle in the UK at some point?
My copy just arrived, so excited! THANK YOU!
I'd also add that WPATH seems to assume gender identity is fixed, if I read correctly...and it seems that as people grow, both their sense of self and their sense of what each gender implies can change (and for people who change cultures, I'm sure that is even more varied, as I've seen enormous diversity in what masculine and feminine are assumed to be in different cultures, which in part sounds like what led you to write this book).
One of the more bemusing contradictions of trans-activist dogma is that, while gender identity is assumed to be fixed, it's also perfectly acceptable to be "genderfluid," "nonbinary" and so on.
Meaning, apparently, that one's deepest, soul-like gender "identity" can more or less be no identity, or at least, an identity in constant flux.
Makes no sense.
While I'm at it: impact vs. intention.
We often hear from the vocal "woke" or progressives or whatever we should call them that "impact" trumps "intention." Thus, if somebody *feels* harmed by another's words, that's what matters, not the intention of the speaker.
But when it comes to trans identity, this seems to be flipped on its head. To wit:
A trans person wishes an observer to see them as they see themselves, i.e. intention. But if that observer does *not* see them as they see themselves (i.e. "impact"), that's somehow offensive. In this case, in other words, it seems that intention reigns supreme, and "impact" can go bugger off.
Yup....read coddling of the American mind....
There is nuance needed! Thank goodness for Lisa Selin Davis and this substack!
BTW, I found you after hearing you on Sasha and Stella's show.
I love that book.
Congratulations! On the publication, and also on holding onto your own point of view — so hard to do! Thank you so much for taking the risks (and losses) you have taken to talk about this.
ps this is on shelf at my local bookshop - will buy today!