Posted on | February 10, 2019 | No Feedback
Ace of Spades summarizes a not-so-surprising discovery:
[F]emale-to-male transgenders are discovering that “Male Privilege” truly doesn’t exist, and that the precise privilege belongs to ladies. They’re saying that now as “males,” they’re being accused of “mansplaining” for merely disagreeing or correcting errors, and are anticipated to defer to ladies in any social interplay.
The supply is Carl Benjamin discussing a current Washington Submit story:
By the way, right here’s one thing about me: I don’t watch YouTube movies. If you wish to inform me one thing, write it. For any literate individual, studying is way extra environment friendly than listening to the spoken phrase. I’m a particularly quick reader, and will absolutely comprehend the transcript of a whole 15-minute video in lower than two minutes, and why ought to I waste that further time? For this reason I’m typically confounded by the celebrity, reminiscent of it’s, of YouTube “celebrities.” There are individuals on the market who’ve tons of of hundreds of YouTube subscribers and fee as “celebrities” inside no matter area of interest of fandom they attraction to, and I’ve by no means heard of them, as a result of I don’t watch YouTube movies. And once I see somebody like Carl Benjamin (a/okay/a, Sargon of Akkad) making a very good level in a YouTube video, I’m tempted to yell at my pc: “WHERE’S THE F–KING TRANSCRIPT?” Like, you couldn’t even be bothered to put in writing up your argument as a weblog publish? In the event you consider what you’re saying in your YouTube channel is essential, wouldn’t it attain a wider viewers and have extra impression for those who took time to publish a transcript, or at the very least a synopsis of your argument? However I digress . . .
The current conflict between feminism and transgenderism (see “The Rocky Horror Ideology Present,” American Spectator, Jan. 29) fascinates me as a result of, as has been identified, feminists are to some extent being hosted on their very own petard. It was feminists who originated the declare that there are not any significant variations between female and male, that each one distinctions of social roles between women and men are a product of patriarchal oppression. If that is so — if “gender” is merely a socially constructed phantasm — then why can’t males be ladies or vice-versa? However this wasn’t a consequence they thought-about again within the day when feminism’s utopian scheme of a gender-neutral world of “equality” was being theorized by radical nutjobs like Kate Millett, Shulamith Firestone, Ti-Grace Atkinson, Andrea Dworkin, Mary Daly, et al.
As we speak’s radical feminists insist (and rightly so) that transgenderism is threatening to erase every little thing that feminists fought to realize, however isn’t it true that the theoretical foundation of transgender ideology derives from feminist principle, in fairly the identical means that feminist ideology was derived from Marxist concept a half-century in the past? And all of those left-wing ideologies are rooted within the worst of human feelings, envy.
Feminists in 1969 asserted that “male supremacy” was inherently unjust:
“Ladies are an oppressed class. Our oppression is complete, affecting each side of our lives. . . .
“We determine the brokers of our oppression as males. . . . All males obtain financial, sexual, and psychological advantages from male supremacy. All males have oppressed ladies.”
Understand that within the yr that was revealed, greater than 11,000 American males have been killed by enemy motion in Vietnam and I doubt the “psychological advantages from male supremacy” have been satisfactory compensation for getting blown up by a Viet Cong mortar shell.
However oh, these ladies have been oppressed, you see — denied the privilege of being shipped abroad to die in a sweltering jungle. Envy is the worst of human feelings, I say, rivaled solely maybe by self-pity, which is what feminist claims of “oppression” are actually about, making an attempt to get individuals to really feel sorry for them, as if American ladies in 1969 weren’t among the many most lucky individuals in all of human historical past, dwelling in a time and place of exceptional affluence and alternative. And the success of the feminist motion (“success,” at the very least, when it comes to acquiring political energy) has been so extraordinary some males now envy the superior social standing of girls, coveting the political authority exercised by feminists, and so now we’ve transgender feminists, e.g., Charles “Charlotte” Clymer.
Some have used the acronym “LARP” — live-action role-playing — to explain the pursuit of fantasy achievement concerned in such preposterous impostures. As I wrote, within the case of a younger mentally ailing lady who dedicated suicide 18 months after starting testosterone injections: “What insanity evokes these individuals? How a lot of a way of failure as a lady do you’ll want to consider you’d be higher off injecting artificial hormones and present process surgical procedure to grow to be a pretend ‘man’?”
Transgenderism is being promoted, on the one hand, as the last word in sexual fantasy and, however, as a magic cure-all for no matter dissatisfaction anybody may need with society’s expectations of what it means to be male or feminine. The fantasy facet displays an envy of the imagined pleasures to be obtained as a member of the other intercourse, whereas the magic cure-all displays a self-pity concerning the abject distress of being “trapped” in a single’s organic intercourse. However as Carl Benjamin factors out, ladies who “succeed” in transition to the purpose of with the ability to move as male discover that the “male privilege” so typically denounced by feminists isn’t what they’d imagined once they have been gazing fondly on the greener grass on the opposite aspect of the fence. We all know that gender dysphoria has excessive charges of “co-morbidity” with psychological sickness, in order that their irrational and disordered thought processes forestall these individuals from with the ability to consider soberly the sensible penalties of their selections. In my American Spectator column about Gavin McInnes this week, I famous his 2014 protection of “transphobia”:
We’re all transphobic. We aren’t blind. We see there are not any previous trannies. They die of drug overdoses and suicide means earlier than they’re 40 and no one notices as a result of no one is aware of them. They’re mentally sick gays who need assistance, and that assist doesn’t embrace being maimed by physicians. These aren’t ladies trapped in a person’s physique. They’re nuts trapped in a loopy individual’s physique. . . .
By pretending that is all completely sane, you’re enabling these poor bastards to mutilate themselves. This insane struggle on pronouns is about telling individuals what to do.
What has permitted this insanity? Think about how the “vanity” cult has taken over the tutorial system and mental-health professions. Years in the past, researchers famous a correlation between (a) success and (b) feeling good about your self, and as an alternative of creating the apparent inference that success results in excessive vanity, reversed the causation, to suppose as an alternative that prime vanity causes success:
For hundreds of years, conventional Judeo-Christian values emphasised modesty and humility because the measures of a well-lived life. In these occasions, the self was down-played for the sake of pursuing a higher collective objective. However within the mid 20th century, a brand new philosophy took maintain: that each individual is particular, no matter how gifted they’re.
Within the 1950s and 1960s, the seeds of the Cult of Self have been sown with the humanistic psychology motion. The famed Abraham Maslow was considered one of its earliest supporters, which result in his proposal that people have a hierarchy of wants. The upper-order want to realize our full potential (which he referred to as self-actualization) couldn’t be achieved till our lower-order wants (like meals and water, bodily security, and relationships) have been met. . . .
Within the 1970s, the hearth of vanity started to catch. The mega best-seller The Psychology of Self-Esteem wildly claimed that there wasn’t “a single psychological drawback — from nervousness to melancholy, to worry of intimacy or of success, to partner battery or youngster molestation” that wasn’t the results of low vanity.
This absurd principle has grow to be the idea of the “everybody-gets-a-trophy” mentality which now prevails in faculties. There may be no particular reward for winners, nor any punishment for failure, as a result of this may harm the vanity of the valuable little snowflakes. An analogous concept underlies the “anti-bullying” interventions in faculties, in addition to the countless celebrations of “variety” and “inclusion” as the very best ethical beliefs. These concepts derived from the Cult of Self-Esteem have influenced “social justice” ideology, which claims that any expression of ideas which may harm somebody’s emotions are “hate” and “violence” which we’re all anticipated to sentence. It’s “hate” to talk critically of weight problems or homosexuality, and this angle of political correctness typically takes the type of denouncing “stigma.” You should use slang phrases when referring to the mentally ailing, as a result of phrases like “lunatic” and “nutjob” contribute to the stigma of psychological sickness. However doesn’t the stigma exist for a cause? Loopy Individuals Are Harmful, as I’ve typically defined, and irrational behaviors are stigmatized as a result of they’re socially dangerous.
When the herpes-infected feminist Ella Dawson launched the #ShoutYourStatus hashtag to battle the “stigma” of sexually transmitted illness, I warned concerning the penalties:
What we acknowledge is that feminism has develop into a quasi-religious religion, during which males are demonized because the satanic forces of patriarchy. . . .
What outcomes from this Manichean dualism — feminism good, males dangerous — is that the present era is coming of age in a cultural local weather the place younger individuals are inspired to ignore any grownup who tries to warn them concerning the apparent risks of making an attempt to reside out the “social justice” fantasies of feminist ideology.
I don’t criticize feminism so as to defend “male privilege,” however moderately as a result of feminist ideology is demonstrably dangerous to society, together with younger ladies who foolishly embrace it. By the identical token, my criticism of the transgender cult isn’t about “hate,” however about rejecting a misleading ideology that falsely guarantees happiness might be achieved by turning delusions into actuality by means of artificial hormones and surgical procedure.
Nobody is “trapped within the mistaken physique.” This can be a delusion. Somebody’s unhappiness with the truth of their physique as male or feminine might cause them to think about life can be higher if they might destroy this organic actuality — their bodily self — and exchange it with a brand new self. But making this damaging suicidal impulse the idea of “remedy,” which is what the transgender cult has finished, requires everybody else to play together with this weird delusion. In England, you might be investigated for “hate speech” if refuse to endorse the ideology of the transgender cult:
A 74-year-old retired journalist confronted a grilling from police in England after she posted on-line feedback reminiscent of, “Intercourse is actual.” . . .
Margaret Nelson wrote in a publish on-line: “Gender’s trendy nonsense. Intercourse is actual. I’ve no cause to really feel ashamed of stating the reality.”
Additionally, she reasoned that if a transgender individual’s physique was given a autopsy examination, “his or her intercourse would even be apparent to a scholar or pathologist.”
“Not the intercourse that she or he selected to current as, however his or her natal intercourse; the intercourse that she or he was born with,” she wrote. . . .
Nelson stated she quickly heard from officers “policing” individuals’s opinions.
“The officer stated she needed to speak to me about a number of the issues that I’d written on Twitter and my weblog,” she informed James Kirkup of the Spectator. “She stated that a number of the issues that I’d written might have upset or offended transgender individuals. So might I please cease writing issues like that and maybe I might take away these posts and tweets?
“I requested the officer if she agreed that free speech was necessary. She stated it was. I stated that in that case, she’d perceive that I wouldn’t be eradicating the posts or stopping saying the issues I feel.”
The transgender motion embraces a victimhood ideology based mostly in self-pity, and subsequently accuses critics of “hate” merely for talking fact.