Conservatives and Gender Nonsense Tolerance

 

The whole gender identity movement, the so-called “trans” thing, the idea that sex is not biologically determined, the idea that it’s really more complicated than two overlapping bell curves of masculine and feminine traits — all of that seems pretty absurd to me. It also seems important, in that it’s the first time we Americans have been told that we have to profess belief in something patently absurd or face censure in the workplace and society — and possible prosecution in New York City.

I comment on it more often than something as ridiculous as the “trans” movement would seem to deserve. I usually comment about it on Facebook, rather than here, because I assume most people here are broadly in agreement that the whole thing is silly.

I have about 875 “friends” on Facebook. Almost all of them chose to “friend” me because of my politics and cultural criticism, since that’s about all I post there. They’re a self-selected lot, overwhelmingly conservative, and I can count on them for a decent number of “shares” (re-postings) of what I write, and a reasonable number of “likes”: most posts will get 20 or 30 likes, and a popular post might get 80 or 100 likes, with a couple of dozen shares.

Earlier today I posted the following, after reading some ridiculous article about a “trans-man” complaining about the “pain of menstruation.”

Birds and Bees 101

As far as human reproduction goes, people come in two varieties: male, and female.

Healthy males produce sperm and are capable of fertilizing eggs. Only people born male are capable of doing this.

Healthy females produce eggs and are capable of becoming pregnant and giving birth. Only people born female are capable of doing this.

No one born male is capable of giving birth. No one born female is capable of fertilizing eggs.

People can choose to affect whatever kinds of sexual identities they like. Transvestites, people who like to dress like and pass themselves off as members of the opposite sex, have always been with us. This has nothing to do with their ability to fertilize eggs or give birth. In other words, it has nothing to do with their biological sex. It is matter of style and presentation, of how they choose to act.

So-called “trans-women” are not women, but rather male transvestites dressing as women. There’s nothing wrong with that, in my opinion. But it is a mistake to think that they are in any sense biologically female, simply because they dress and make themselves up, and sometimes modify their bodies, so as to appear female.

Similarly, so-called “trans-men” are not men, but rather female transvestites dressing as men. Again, there’s nothing wrong with that, in my opinion. But it would be a mistake to believe that these women are, in any sense, biologically male.

It shouldn’t be necessary to say this, but I keep reading about people who think “trans-man gives birth” is an extraordinary event. Women — and only women — have been giving birth for millennia, at the very least. While a woman giving birth is beautiful and wonderful, it’s nothing new.

I found the response — or lack of response — interesting. My Facebook posts about the trans movement get far fewer likes or shares than any other topic on which I post, other than the occasional obscure post about quantum computing or the like. I don’t know if the topic is just not interesting to most people, if my particular take on it is somehow off-putting, or if people have a reluctance to express an opinion about it. It doesn’t seem likely to me that hundreds of reliably conservative Facebook friends would shy away from the subject. On the other hand, I know that I’m far removed from popular culture, since I don’t watch television or listen to the radio or work in an office and mix with a lot of people. Maybe this stuff is more accepted than I want to believe.

I’d like to believe that most people simply find the topic boring or irrelevant, rather than think that people have grown to accept the nonsense and are reluctant to question it. Either way, I’ll keep commenting on it, because I think it matters. But it perplexes me just a little.

Published in Culture
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 90 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    Hartmann von Aue (View Comment):

    For your further reading: https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/06/15145/?fbclid=IwAR3oebUkdJPNpWLF0KBvezzBclS0WgyV3HbqwbpOk1Lze3iWUMX0rCcoSf8

    Although they may be encouraged by his public reception, these children generally come to their ideas about their sex not through erotic interests but through a variety of youthful psychosocial conflicts and concerns.

    It makes me weep with dismay and seethe with quiet anger and gnashing of teeth that these adults are so self-absorbed they have no care for their affects on culture and society.

    They should be exiled from polite society, and yes – for the damned children.

    • #31
  2. Paul Erickson Inactive
    Paul Erickson
    @PaulErickson

    Someone in our family came out recently as a trans-woman.  It’s hard  for me to think of him as confused – a successful engineer, age 32.  I am sure he has no illusions of bearing children.  In fact he has frozen his sperm and hopes to find the right woman to start a family with.  Yes, you read that right.

    I was talking with his grandmother about it and asked the questions that Matt Walsh often poses.  He feels like he is a woman.  What does he mean by that?   And how does he know what that feels like?

    Anyhow, our family is pretty cool and everyone is treating him pretty much as they always did.  I guess that’s a good thing.

    • #32
  3. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    I’ve tried identifying as a billionaire.  Trust me, it doesn’t work any more than a man identifying as a woman . . .

    • #33
  4. Eridemus Coolidge
    Eridemus
    @Eridemus

    I think the original article might be this one, or something like it. It does make hard reading, not so much for the biological details as the head-spinning biological denial:

    https://everydayfeminism.com/2014/11/trans-guys-guide-menstruation/

    In other words, it’s not about a person having period jealousy (other articles by trans women cover that) but periods being re-defined into a mere body phenomenon that falls within the self chosen embrace of trans-maleness.

    • #34
  5. Unsk Member
    Unsk
    @Unsk

    Henry, great post.

    Healthy males produce sperm and are capable of fertilizing eggs. Only people born male are capable of doing this.

    Healthy females produce eggs and are capable of becoming pregnant and giving birth. Only people born female are capable of doing this.”

    Pretty much says it all.

    I don’t care how people dress or how they mutilate their bodies as long as they don’t hurt others, but no matter how much they mutilate themselves or what they call themselves, men are still men and women are still women.  Those attributes are determined before birth and cannot be changed.  Ever.  Medical advances will never change that.

    The transsexual  movement  has gathered traction because the courts have granted people who assert themselves as transexual as having rights to demand  conformity to their views in the public square and to assert these new absurd “rights’   must now  be respected by the rest of us under the force of law.  That is the crux of the issue. Without this legal oppression of our rights to determine what we believe to be true, the transexual movement would be a non-entity. A nothing burger because  without these new “rights” people like RushBabe or FullSize Tabby would not have to worry how they treat these new trans people.  People could then ignore these demands of the Trans.

    That legal oppression in the courts is a great cause for worry, but also a cause for hope.  If we can just get one more strict constructionist on the court, ( which may soon happen)  we may be able to turn the tide and return to the rightful interpretation of what our inalienable rights really mean.

    On the more compassionate side, as Danok1 alludes to, most Trans have emotional problems. They are hoping if they can identify as something else, their pain will go away and their emotional problems will be ameliorated.

    I know of a young man who when he was like 6 or 7 was a normal, healthy young boy.  But then his parents divorced and his Dad, who had made a ton of money in the entertainment business, went off to pursue his fantasies. The boy’s life spiraled out of control and now I hear he is going to have the operation.

    The sad thing is the Left is promoting this transition to another sex as somehow fixing a screw up of nature, and a way to solving an emotional identity crisis of people who are really hurting. . You are what you are no matter what. The emotional damage  done to these vulnerable people is just monstrously sick, because often times once the transition is done for real, one can never go back to who you really are. The Left is again trying to destroy societal norms and institutions as a way to destabilizing society and paving the way to their glorious Authoritarian Marxist Revolution Nirvana where all of life’s ills will magically go away.

    • #35
  6. Zach H. Inactive
    Zach H.
    @ZachHunter

    As to the silence of your Facebookers, I think a few things might be going on: 1) On LGBT matters, after Obergefell, the public is either supportive, cowed or converted. Or put it this way: You’re either a true believer, a sympathizer, a libertarian or you know to keep your mouth shut. 2) Our institutions and businesses are, for the most part, fully on board with the LGBT lobbies. Some activist LGBs are splintering off from the major groups—HRC, GLAAD and Stonewall—specifically over the excesses of the T. But for now, the major lobbies are very zealously in T’s corner. So, as a result, are most institutions, including schools and media. Being pro-gay is a PR softball at this point. Most organizations at least make gestures in support of historically persecuted groups over whose history many people feel a deep social guilt and/or a new moral enthusiasm. With institutional support as strong as it is, people may worry about making even the faintest of stinks over something, like T, that they don’t really understand or care much about and thereby risk losing their jobs or being made to go through diversity training or some such awful thing. Or simply face unwanted social pressure. 3) To those who aren’t T initiates, it is not an appealing topic. The medical, surgical and aesthetic implications of transition are probably not ones that most people care to ruminate over in too much detail, even if they’re fine with transgenderism in theory.

    It’s a really interesting moment. As others have said, I think people are hoping that this thing will blow over: Maybe the T gets what it wants, more or less, but the numbers stay small, and maybe you have to make a few new rules surrounding bathrooms and pronouns, but for the most part things can just continue as usual. I don’t think they will, though–not quite. Pediatric transition is too explosive a topic to be quietly negotiated on a case-by-case basis—and the numbers of such cases seem to be scaling up dramatically. Women’s sports and women’s spaces (bathrooms, locker-rooms, jails, shelters etc.) are far from being matters of indifference. Feminists are already at each other’s throats over such questions. Detransitioners and desisters—people who have been harmed by so-called affirmative care—are organizing and won’t be shut out of the news forever. I expect the political fight to get more intense over the next year, particularly if the political campaigns decide to risk jumping into what’s swiftly becoming the hottest zone in the culture wars. I’m betting they will. And then you’ll get your likes and shares. But only if people don’t feel like the Inquisitors will come hunting them down for it.

    • #36
  7. CarolJoy, Above Top Secret Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Above Top Secret
    @CarolJoy

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):

    Henry Racette: two overlapping bell curves of masculine and feminine traits

    Bell curves are one-dimensional. Human traits are very complicated with hundreds of dimensions of various modal distributions. Because of this, there is the idea that every person is their own unique “gender”. What is the point of that? The word “gender” has just been re-defined to match “personality” and we need to use proper nouns instead of pronouns.

    Ah, so now we have over 7 billion distinct, delightful and unique genders. Yet the very people who brought us this concept of gender fluidity now  want to have us possess only one way of looking at each and every problem facing us, a concept that will most likely bring about zero successful solutions.

    • #37
  8. Aaron Miller Inactive
    Aaron Miller
    @AaronMiller

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):
    This is a hill to die on.

    Though it seems like such a ridiculous issue, I think you’re absolutely right. This is important.

    Maybe but it is done, your side lost. Conform or be punished.

    Yeah, and Kavanaugh will never make it to the Supreme Court.

    Sorry, I’m not ready to declare defeat just yet, my faux androgynous friend. And, honestly, I think you’re mistaken (again).

    A benefit of the Christian worldview is knowing that the war for justice and truth is already won. We are like Allied soldiers on the road to Berlin. Yes, on that road we might suffer and die. But we participate in a victory beyond our vision. 

    Fight for truth and virtue regardless of political consequence or practical benefit. As Americans, we do not strive to design a perfect society. We aim to perfect ourselves and dare society to stop us. 

    • #38
  9. Zach H. Inactive
    Zach H.
    @ZachHunter
    • #39
  10. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio…
    @ArizonaPatriot

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Henry, I understand your position, but I don’t think that it’s conservative. I think that it is libertarian.

    Oh, don’t do that. I was a libertarian, once upon a time. But I got over it.

    Why would you find cross-dressing perfectly permissible? Well, because you’re a libertarian, at least on this issue. There’s a problem with this. If your rule is that people can dress however they want, how are you going to stop them from wearing no clothes at all in public?

    I’m aware of no American tradition of regulating attire, beyond basic decency standards. If I remember right, you’re a lawyer, and so you may know better than I about that, and I’ll accede to your greater knowledge if you’re aware of significant examples. But if I’m right and simple modesty — covering the necessary bits of male and female anatomy — is the only standard we’ve ever enforced, then I’ll claim that, yes, it is conservative to maintain that standard.

    And finally, my interest is always to persuade. Arguments against compelling people to profess belief in what they consider to be a fiction — for example, that “trans-women” are in fact women — are fairly easy to make from first principles. Similar compelling arguments for forcing men and women to comply with conventional expressions of masculinity and femininity are much more difficult to make.

    So, while you and I probably agree about the larger absurdity of the trans movement, we’ll differ about the individual’s freedom to dress as he or she pleases. I think our traditions are pretty clear in that regard.

    Henry, thanks for the response.  If you think that our tradition is that people can dress however they like, I respectfully disagree.  That is the breakdown of our tradition, not our tradition.

    Dress has become increasingly casual, especially out West where I live.  I don’t want to go back to the coat-and-tie days, if only because this gets quite brutal in the Arizona desert.  But think of how Doc and the Earps were dressed in Tombstone.  That’s our tradition.

    The rules are pretty easy, especially for guys.  No long hair and no weird haircuts.  If you’re not sure about whether your haircut is long or weird, it is.  Generally wear decent jeans or chinos, and a collared shirt.  No bizarre colors.

    Basically, dress and groom yourself so that anyone 10 or more years younger than you would be inclined to call you “sir,” and anyone 10 or more years older than you would be inclined to think “what a nice, clean-cut young man.”  Duh.

    Obviously, there are exceptions if you’re heading to Home Depot, or for fun, unusual occasions like Christmas, Halloween, or a football game.

    [Cont’d]

     

    • #40
  11. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio…
    @ArizonaPatriot

    For the gals — dress so that no one will mistake you for a hooker, or a stripper, or a dancer in a music video.  Make your clothes a frame for your face, not a way to draw attention to your curvature.  Avoid male-style haircuts, and longer hair is best.  Avoid cleavage.  Avoid showing your legs above the knees.  If you don’t want to be objectified, don’t dress so as to attract such unwanted attention.

    Shorts are generally OK in hot weather, but make them decent shorts, with pockets, extending close to the knees.  Obviously, this does not typically apply in Court or at work, unless you work outside.

    • #41
  12. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio…
    @ArizonaPatriot

    While I’m in get-off-my-lawn-rant mode, I should add:

    No tats.  If you’ve already made this mistake, it’s OK, we still love you, but cover them up when you dress.

    No piercings, except that a woman can have a single, small piercing in the lobe of each ear.

    I think that we all know this.  Remember Those Were The Days?  I love that line about “freaks were in a circus show.”  Don’t do anything, in your attire or grooming, that would make Archie Bunker think that you were a freak who ought to be in a circus show.

    Here’s an example from the 1963 Civil Rights March on Washington — this picture is at the American Association of University Women website, here:

    They were mostly poor and definitely oppressed.  Look at how they dressed.  These are people who took themselves seriously.  They acted with dignity while demanding dignity, and they darned well deserved it.

    I’ve decided not to contrast this with an example of the typical Gay Pride parade today.  They demand dignity while behaving, and dressing, like ridiculous buffoons.  You can Google the images if you like.

     

    • #42
  13. CarolJoy, Above Top Secret Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Above Top Secret
    @CarolJoy

    Paul Erickson (View Comment):

    Someone in our family came out recently as a trans-woman. It’s hard for me to think of him as confused – a successful engineer, age 32. I am sure he has no illusions of bearing children. In fact he has frozen his sperm and hopes to find the right woman to start a family with. Yes, you read that right.

    I was talking with his grandmother about it and asked the questions that Matt Walsh often poses. He feels like he is a woman. What does he mean by that? And how does he know what that feels like?

    Anyhow, our family is pretty cool and everyone is treating him pretty much as they always did. I guess that’s a good thing.

    I am glad to hear that your family is okay with things.

    The problem is not merely about whether someone who feels they are a woman can then become a woman. Rather the opposition has come about  when the trans population demands that the rest of society must “make way” for that individual or group of individuals.

    For instance, the military services has long determined that no one is to become a member of the services if they need injectable drugs to remain a live or in good shape. So there has been a longstanding prohibition against  diabetics who need to inject insulin being accepted into the services.

    Recently  there is all this brouhaha about how it is absolutely necessary to accept the trans population into the military. However so many of them need to inject hormones to remain rational functioning humans that it doesn’t seem to be unreasonable for the military regs to prohibit accepting them.

    I would not want to be a young person stationed in Afghanistan and know the guy or gal next to me will have a physical and emotional breakdown if the drugs they rely on do not get to my combat unit  during a time period when we are under fire. Common sense needs to be followed on all these issues.

    • #43
  14. Midget Faded Rattlesnake Member
    Midget Faded Rattlesnake
    @Midge

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):
    …but make them decent shorts, with pockets, extending close to the knees.

    Hahahaha — you expect women to find clothing for the lower half of their body that has pockets?

    Even womenfolk perfectly happy with wearing all clothing knee-length or lower struggle to find clothing with pockets. Especially functional pockets.

    Moreover, I’ve heard from others that Christian etiquette requires, if a woman does find herself in clothing with functional front pockets, for her to by no means put her hands in them, as that is considered vulgarly pointing to a place Christian women should not point.

    • #44
  15. CarolJoy, Above Top Secret Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Above Top Secret
    @CarolJoy

    Midget Faded Rattlesnake (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):
    …but make them decent shorts, with pockets, extending close to the knees.

    Hahahaha — you expect women to find clothing for the lower half of their body that has pockets?

    Even womenfolk perfectly happy with wearing all clothing knee-length or lower struggle to find clothing with pockets. Especially functional pockets.

    Moreover, I’ve heard from others that Christian etiquette requires, if a woman does find herself in clothing with functional front pockets, for her to by no means put her hands in them, as that is considered vulgarly pointing to a place Christian women should not point.

    Yes you are pointing out one of the main reasons of “Christian etiquette” why I came to consider Catholicism so suspect. All the sex prohibitions – little boys being scolded if they got too close to a girl wearing patent leather shoes. Little boys being scolded for having their hands in their pants pockets.

    I remember one Catholic nun slamming a good friend’s hands with a ruler for having put his hands in his pocket. As he cried, she was screaming: “So what are your hands doing in your pockets? You were doing something dirty, weren’t you!”

    He said “I wasn’t doing anything bad.”

    She replied: “Then what were you doing?”

    “I was getting my list of sins to tell the priest when we went over to confession to add something I just thought of.”

    This kid was all of 11 years old when this happened.

    As far as I am concerned, any group of people who thinks someone is being “dirty” or engaging in lewd behavior relating to pockets needs their heads examined. They either have far too much time on their hands, or are extremely obsessive about sex themselves and projecting it on to others. Considering that the above occurred during the same time period another classmate was being repeatedly abused by the pastor of our church, I even consider it a sickness that allows for real sex crimes to occur.Period.

    • #45
  16. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio…
    @ArizonaPatriot

    Midget Faded Rattlesnake (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):
    …but make them decent shorts, with pockets, extending close to the knees.

    Hahahaha — you expect women to find clothing for the lower half of their body that has pockets?

    Even womenfolk perfectly happy with wearing all clothing knee-length or lower struggle to find clothing with pockets. Especially functional pockets.

    Moreover, I’ve heard from others that Christian etiquette requires, if a woman does find herself in clothing with functional front pockets, for her to by no means put her hands in them, as that is considered vulgarly pointing to a place Christian women should not point.

    Oh, boy.  I mean, oh, girl.  No, I don’t know what I mean.

    The shorts comment was directed at men.

    I’m not sure whether it is strange that women’s clothes rarely have functional pockets.  Women generally carry a purse or bag, so they don’t really need pockets, I guess.  In any event, their clothes are so tiny that I don’t know how to include functional pockets.  At least, they seem really tiny to me.  My pants could easily be mistaken for a tent, which allows them to have pocket space the size of, well, a purse.

    I carry a purse when I’m carrying my wife’s purse (or occasionally my older daughter’s purse).  This does not make me feel self-conscious.  It makes me feel powerful.  You know, the power of the purse.  :)

    • #46
  17. Ontheleftcoast Inactive
    Ontheleftcoast
    @Ontheleftcoast

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    I usually comment about it on Facebook, rather than here, because I assume most people here are broadly in agreement that the whole thing is silly.

    No, it’s not silly, as I think you already realized.

    As C. S. Lewis wrote in That Hideous Strength

    Every fold of drapery, every piece of architecture, had a meaning one could not grasp but which withered the mind. Compared with these the other, surrealistic, pictures were mere foolery. Long ago Mark had read somewhere of “things of that extreme evil which seems innocent to the uninitiate,” and had wondered what sort of things they might be. Now he felt he knew.

    No, not silly at all.

     

    • #47
  18. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):
    This is a hill to die on.

    Though it seems like such a ridiculous issue, I think you’re absolutely right. This is important.

    Maybe but it is done, your side lost. Conform or be punished.

    Yeah, and Kavanaugh will never make it to the Supreme Court.

    Sorry, I’m not ready to declare defeat just yet, my faux androgynous friend. And, honestly, I think you’re mistaken (again).

    Short term I am right. Long term your point will win. The Gods of the CopyBook Headings will eventually return and the Gods of the Market Place will flee.

    I’m not sure what all that means, but it seems to me that you can’t win in the long term unless you eventually win in the short term.

    Anyway, I think we are nearing an inflection point. On multiple fronts, I think conservativism is beginning to surge. I am an optimist and I may be projecting more of my own hopes into this than I should, but it does seem to me that normal people are increasingly impatient with the nonsense.

    http://www.kiplingsociety.co.uk/poems_copybook.htm

    • #48
  19. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):
    Henry, thanks for the response. If you think that our tradition is that people can dress however they like, I respectfully disagree. That is the breakdown of our tradition, not our tradition.

    Jerry,

    You and I are looking at different goalposts here.

    When I say there’s nothing wrong with men and women cross-dressing, in my opinion, I’m stating my opinion. I don’t have a problem with it. It isn’t something that I’d get a kick out of, but fetishes come in all sorts of varieties and I’m reluctant to ascribe mental illness to those who practice the more benign ones.

    I tried to be careful to talk about compelled behavior, not socially expected behavior. I understand that there are traditional modes of dress; the tradition of which was speaking is our tradition of allowing people to dress as they please, so long as they achieve the minimum legal requirements for public decency. I’m talking about our laws, not our customs. We have traditionally — in fact always, as far as I know — had the legal right to dress as well or as poorly or as oddly as we please, within the constraints imposed by public decency.

    You’re talking about something else, and in the process making precisely the point I wouldn’t try to make because, as I said, I want to be persuasive. It’s hard enough to encourage people to protest something as absurd as the transgender movement. Asking them to also say that folks should comply with the sartorial sensibilities of our great grandparents is, I think, a tough sell.

    (For what it’s worth, I wear blue jeans, black boots, and a black shirt — either a tee-shirt or a sweatshirt — 360 days a year, deviating from that only for weddings and funerals and graduations and similar ceremonies. My own attire doesn’t meet the standard of a few generations ago. But, thankfully, we have that laissez-faire tradition of allowing people to dress pretty much as they please.)

     

    • #49
  20. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):
    I’m not sure whether it is strange that women’s clothes rarely have functional pockets.

    I’m going to guess it has more to do with aesthetics than anything. Women’s clothes tend to be designed to flatter their figures, and a pocket full of stuff makes them look lumpy where they should appear smooth.

    • #50
  21. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    I saw that same news article on the man complaining of menstruation.  I just shook my head.  It’s all so absurd.  I have to disagree on this though:

    Henry Racette: It also seems important, in that it’s the first time we Americans have been told that we have to profess belief in something patently absurd or face censure in the workplace and society

    This isn’t the first time.  There has been a few things over the years the government has and continues to profess as true.  That a goodly amount of women can pass a fireman’s test.  Heck, even two people of the same gender can get married.  We live in a world of absurdity.

    • #51
  22. CarolJoy, Above Top Secret Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Above Top Secret
    @CarolJoy

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):
    Henry, thanks for the response. If you think that our tradition is that people can dress however they like, I respectfully disagree. That is the breakdown of our tradition, not our tradition.

    Jerry,

    You and I are looking at different goalposts here.

    When I say there’s nothing wrong with men and women cross-dressing, in my opinion, I’m stating my opinion. I don’t have a problem with it. It isn’t something that I’d get a kick out of, but fetishes come in all sorts of varieties and I’m reluctant to ascribe mental illness to those who practice the more benign ones.

    I tried to be careful to talk about compelled behavior, not socially expected behavior. I understand that there are traditional modes of dress; the tradition of which I was speaking is our tradition of allowing people to dress as they please, so long as they achieve the minimum legal requirements for public decency. I’m talking about our laws, not our customs. We have traditionally — in fact always, as far as I know — had the legal right to dress as well or as poorly or as oddly as we please, within the constraints imposed by public decency.

    SNIP

    (For what it’s worth, I wear blue jeans, black boots, and a black shirt — either a tee-shirt or a sweatshirt — 360 days a year, deviating from that only for weddings and funerals and graduations and similar ceremonies. My own attire doesn’t meet the standard of a few generations ago. But, thankfully, we have that laissez-faire tradition of allowing people to dress pretty much as they please.)

     

    Henry, about ten years ago, I was at a Sausalito Calif. Kinko’s coffee shop, attempting to have the young tattooed employee help me get a copy machine to work. When I could finally get his attention away from beating out the beats in his favorite collection of Heavy Metal, he sauntered over to me and adjusted the machine. He glanced at my poster, which had to do with a rock group from the Sixties coming to Marin.

    “Grhh,” he snarled. “You Baby Boomers think you did so much for the world, when all you did was hang out and listen to the likes of the Grateful Dead. And this Sons of Champlin band too.”

    I eyed the guy, wearing his “manager’s pin” and name tag. He had piercing across his face and ears. Tatts everywhere, and was wearing an odd array of leather and denim with many rips across all his clothes.

    I really had to bite my tongue from replying, “Well sonny boy, if you think you’d be wearing what you’re wearing and holding down a job with your tatts everywhere if us Baby Boomers hadn’t at least gotten a more lenient dress code in place, you are kidding only yourself.”

    • #52
  23. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Manny (View Comment):

    I saw that same news article on the man complaining of menstruation. I just shook my head. It’s all so absurd. I have to disagree on this though:

    Henry Racette: It also seems important, in that it’s the first time we Americans have been told that we have to profess belief in something patently absurd or face censure in the workplace and society

    This isn’t the first time. There has been a few things over the years the government has and continues to profess as true. That a goodly amount of women can pass a fireman’s test. Heck, even two people of the same gender can get married. We live in a world of absurdity.

    I’m going to disagree with you on that. I can’t think of any time normal citizens have been forced to use certain words that express an idea they reject.

    • #53
  24. Midget Faded Rattlesnake Member
    Midget Faded Rattlesnake
    @Midge

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):
    I’m not sure whether it is strange that women’s clothes rarely have functional pockets.

    I’m going to guess it has more to do with aesthetics than anything. Women’s clothes tend to be designed to flatter their figures, and a pocket full of stuff makes them look lumpy where they should appear smooth.

    Yes, putting pockets on women’s pants and skirts risks making them look awkwardly pouchy.

    As well as opening the door for Devil’s pointing…

    • #54
  25. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    Midget Faded Rattlesnake (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):
    I’m not sure whether it is strange that women’s clothes rarely have functional pockets.

    I’m going to guess it has more to do with aesthetics than anything. Women’s clothes tend to be designed to flatter their figures, and a pocket full of stuff makes them look lumpy where they should appear smooth.

    Yes, putting pockets on women’s pants and skirts risk making them look awkwardly pouchy.

    As well as opening the door for Devil’s pointing…

    Demon pockets!!!

    • #55
  26. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    I saw that same news article on the man complaining of menstruation. I just shook my head. It’s all so absurd. I have to disagree on this though:

    Henry Racette: It also seems important, in that it’s the first time we Americans have been told that we have to profess belief in something patently absurd or face censure in the workplace and society

    This isn’t the first time. There has been a few things over the years the government has and continues to profess as true. That a goodly amount of women can pass a fireman’s test. Heck, even two people of the same gender can get married. We live in a world of absurdity.

    I’m going to disagree with you on that. I can’t think of any time normal citizens have been forced to use certain words that express an idea they reject.

    “Gay marriage.”  You don’t think the government enforcing people to support gay marriage through bakers being forced to bake cakes for weddings they reject are weddings is an example?

    • #56
  27. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    They were mostly poor and definitely oppressed. Look at how they dressed. These are people who took themselves seriously. They acted with dignity while demanding dignity, and they darned well deserved it.

    I’ve decided not to contrast this with an example of the typical Gay Pride parade today. They demand dignity while behaving, and dressing, like ridiculous buffoons. You can Google the images if you like.

    Excellent observation!

    A black marcher wearing a suit and tie shows respect for the crowd and commands dignity for himself.  A gay man wearing chaps with nothing else does not . . .

    • #57
  28. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Manny (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    I saw that same news article on the man complaining of menstruation. I just shook my head. It’s all so absurd. I have to disagree on this though:

    Henry Racette: It also seems important, in that it’s the first time we Americans have been told that we have to profess belief in something patently absurd or face censure in the workplace and society

    This isn’t the first time. There has been a few things over the years the government has and continues to profess as true. That a goodly amount of women can pass a fireman’s test. Heck, even two people of the same gender can get married. We live in a world of absurdity.

    I’m going to disagree with you on that. I can’t think of any time normal citizens have been forced to use certain words that express an idea they reject.

    “Gay marriage.” You don’t think the government enforcing people to support gay marriage through bakers being forced to bake cakes for weddings they reject are weddings is an example?

    Manny, I understand your point about compelled expression, but I’m being pretty literal about that “use certain words” part. The idea of equal accommodation muddies the water, because a lot of actions that can be interpreted as expressing a belief may be compelled, but I’m not considering those because they aren’t explicit instances of literal compelled speech. But, again, I get your point.

    • #58
  29. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    I saw that same news article on the man complaining of menstruation. I just shook my head. It’s all so absurd. I have to disagree on this though:

    Henry Racette: It also seems important, in that it’s the first time we Americans have been told that we have to profess belief in something patently absurd or face censure in the workplace and society

    This isn’t the first time. There has been a few things over the years the government has and continues to profess as true. That a goodly amount of women can pass a fireman’s test. Heck, even two people of the same gender can get married. We live in a world of absurdity.

    I’m going to disagree with you on that. I can’t think of any time normal citizens have been forced to use certain words that express an idea they reject.

    “Gay marriage.” You don’t think the government enforcing people to support gay marriage through bakers being forced to bake cakes for weddings they reject are weddings is an example?

    Manny, I understand your point about compelled expression, but I’m being pretty literal about that “use certain words” part. The idea of equal accommodation muddies the water, because a lot of actions that can be interpreted as expressing a belief may be compelled, but I’m not considering those because they aren’t explicit instances of literal compelled speech. But, again, I get your point.

    OK.  

    • #59
  30. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Stad (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    They were mostly poor and definitely oppressed. Look at how they dressed. These are people who took themselves seriously. They acted with dignity while demanding dignity, and they darned well deserved it.

    I’ve decided not to contrast this with an example of the typical Gay Pride parade today. They demand dignity while behaving, and dressing, like ridiculous buffoons. You can Google the images if you like.

    Excellent observation!

    A black marcher wearing a suit and tie shows respect for the crowd and commands dignity for himself. A gay man wearing chaps with nothing else does not . . .

    I think I’d like Stad to share more of his Gay Pride memories with us. Different perspectives and all that….

    Jerry, I appreciate your point about the shifting standards. The black marchers were trying to communicate something different, I think, than are the Gay Price marchers. In particular, the latter group is marching from a position of power, which is why they are deliberately provocative.

    This is beside the point of the original post, but it occurs to me that there are (at least) two different approaches to defending norms against radicalism. One is to challenge the radicals at the margin, where transformation is happening right now. The other is to challenge radicalism at the root, or closer to it, and to call for the restoration of a much earlier state.

    Either approach might be more or less efficacious, depending on the situation. I think I tend to focus on the leading edge of change, and try to slow or stop it. It seems to me that, if you’re going to win an argument for conservatism, you’re more likely to win it there than by fighting on ground that’s already been gone over and left behind.

    The leading edge of radicalism today is identity politics and all of the speech controls that come with it. The trans movement is the preposterous poster child of radical identity. It seems, to me, to be the most practical place to fight against the progressive tide. I think an argument can be made for calling for a return to some much-earlier norms, but it isn’t an argument I feel comfortable or particularly competent making; it just doesn’t sound plausible and persuasive to me. I’ll leave it to others to go there.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.