Tag Archives: Gender

In 2020, we need to fight the new thoughtpolice, by Frank Furedi

Control words and you can control thought. From Frank Furedi at spiked-online.com:

Speech, thought and culture are being policed on a terrifying scale.

During the past decade, and especially this year, those in positions of influence have tried to change the narrative through which society understands itself.
There is an insidious crusade afoot aiming at controlling what the public sees, hears, thinks and believes. This project, which seeks hegemony in various Western cultures, is no less pervasive and thoroughgoing than previous attempts at thought control by totalitarian and theocratic regimes.

But since this campaign to control the narrative has no name, and does not promote an explicit ideology, its significance tends to be underestimated, even by those who oppose the many attempts to police language and thought.

Continue reading

It only costs about 20 grand to get away with murder, by Simon Black

Simon Black’s weekly collation of government-related absurdities, from sovereignman.com:

Are you ready for this week’s absurdity? Here’s our Friday roll-up of the most ridiculous stories from around the world that are threats to your liberty, your finances, and your prosperity.

Kentucky Governor Pardons Murderer after family’s fundraiser

Kentucky Governor Matt Bevin lost reelection in November.

But the governor still had some campaign debt to retire. And it’s not easy to convince people to donate to a campaign that already lost.

Still, one family managed to raise over $20,000 for the governor at a fundraiser they held for him after he lost the election, but before he left office.

Why would they do this? Perhaps it is related to the fact that a few weeks later, Governor Bevin pardoned the fundraiser’s brother– a convicted murderer.

The brother was serving a 19 year sentence for dressing as a cop, invading a man’s home, and shooting him to death.

Believe it or not, that wasn’t the only questionable– to say the least– pardon of the 428 issued by the governor since he lost reelection.

Continue reading

Corrupting Our Social Norms, by Walter E. Williams

XY is male and XX is female and never the twain shall meet, regardless of surgeries and hormones. That basic scientific fact poses problems for a political ideology which says anyone can be any gender they want to be. From Walter E. Williams at lewrockwell.com:

Here are several questions for biologists and medical professionals: If a person is found to have XY chromosomes (heterogametic sex), does a designation as female on his birth certificate, driver’s license or Social Security card override the chromosomal evidence? Similarly, if a person is found to have XX chromosomes (homogametic) does a designation as male on her birth certificate, driver’s license or Social Security card override the chromosomal evidence? If you were a medical professional, would you consider it malpractice for an obstetrics/gynecology medical specialist, not to order routine Pap smears to screen for cervical cancer for a patient who identifies as a female but has XY chromosomes?

If you were a judge, would you sentence a criminal, who identifies as a female but has XY chromosomes, to a women’s prison? A judge just might do so. Judge William Pryor of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit focused on a Florida school district ruling that a transgender “boy,” a person with XX chromosomes, could not be barred from the boys’ restroom. Pryor suggested students shouldn’t be separated by gender at all.

Continue reading

The Collapse of Gender Sanity, by Rachel Lu

It’s a measure of intellectual deterioration that Rachel Lu could probably get herself disinvited from being a graduation speaker or kicked off a faculty at one of our thought control centers masquerading as a university. Fortunately, she teaches at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minnesota. The heretical challenges to established dogma always seem to come from professors at colleges you’ve never heard of. From Lu, at thepublicdiscourse.com, with a hat tip to The Burning Platform:

Physiology doesn’t lie: Women are less effective than men at meeting military objectives, and far more likely to be injured in combat. Let’s stop denying reality in a misguided effort toward “equality” and agree that women should not be drafted to combat roles.

Men were built for fighting. Women were built for childbearing. It’s interesting to note how stubbornly true—even obvious—these statements remain, despite aggressive efforts to bury them.

Modern people have a penchant for denying obvious things. Dysfunctional politics and political correctness have brought us to the point of potentially approving women’s inclusion in a military draft. The Senate Armed Services Committee recently entertained arguments in favor of requiring women to register for the selective service, and three candidates endorsed the plan in New Hampshire’s Republican debate. The trickle is turning into a stampede. Suddenly political correctness requires that we all agree that girls can fight just as well as boys.

The problem is that it’s just not true. We need to return to some basic Aristotelian principles in order to explain why drafting women would be both imprudent and unjust.

Playing Politics

From a political standpoint, it’s easy to understand why Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, and Chris Christie were all prepared to agree that women should register for the selective service. (Senator Mike Lee is pushing legislation to block the drafting of women, which has won support from Rubio and from Ted Cruz.) Somewhat farcically, all three candidates treated selective service registration as a wonderful new “opportunity” for women. That’s silly; the system exists to enable conscription in a time of extreme need. Women already have the opportunity to enlist in the military if they meet the relevant requirements.

Rubio specified that most likely a draft would apply only to women who met the physical requirements. But this would be a foolish policy in an emergency scenario. If you desperately need a large number of soldiers in a hurry, is it sensible to start screening populations of people that will mostly be unfit for the job? Should children and retirees also be included, in case a few turn out to be suitable for active service? This is nonsense. Every society in history has built its armies primarily of young men, for an excellent reason: They are overwhelmingly the most fit for the job.

If the Republican candidates were thinking clearly, they would be racing to specify that they support drafting women only to non-combat roles. This is a more sane position, modeled on the example of other nations (such as Israel) that use female conscripts primarily in supporting roles (as medics, logistical support, etc.). Considering that a draft would only be implemented in a time of extreme need, asking unattached young women to serve their country in these capacities could be reasonable. Demanding that they serve as infantry would not be.

The Collapse of Gender Sanity

It’s disconcerting to see even Republicans sanctioning this kind of foolishness, but there may be a silver lining here. There is value to discussing this issue at a moment when we desperately need a starting point for a more reasonable conversation about sex and gender. Sending thousands of young women to die in battle would be morally monstrous, but luckily, we are not currently threatened with a draft. Instead we are facing a near-total collapse of gender sanity.

With schools banning the concepts of “boyhood” and “girlhood,” single-sex restrooms being treated as an affront, and even the Olympics allowing anatomical males to compete in women’s events, American gender politics has reached freakish levels of absurdity. If there is any chance of returning to sanity, our understanding of gender will need to be rooted in reflections on something objective and measurable: the body.

To continue reading: The Collapse of Gender Sanity