I don’t really understand the whole trans thing and why it’s suddenly become the job of the whole world to reinforce someone’s self conception. Lots of people have body dysmorphia and think they are morbidly obese. Some will even go so far as to buy XL clothing and larger toilets because they think they need them. But they aren’t obese, and nobody is expected to treat them like that.<p>For the sake of one group, we’re expected to accept an ideology and we’re now supposed to use language to fit within the boundaries of this ideology. Anyone who expresses skepticism can expect to be fired, harassed or simply brow beaten into lip service on the premise that being skeptical is hateful and bigoted. This isn’t how you gain acceptance, it’s merely compliance. It creates a culture of lip service, resentment and subversion.<p>I don’t hate the trans crowd. I simply think the notion of gender is baseless and the tactics many of their activists use are misguided and obnoxious.
"protesters overtook the campus square, setting off pink and blue flares, while Stock cancelled her courses and followed police advice to stay off campus and secure her home. I asked a protester whether the demo was designed to be intimidating. <i>“We’re standing still,” they said. “Her presence to us is intimidating.”</i> Emphasis mine.<p>Is there a word to describe this? This frame of mind is deeply disturbing to me and it seems very insidious. I believe people need a term in order to understand the behavior/mindset that is being displayed here. And, to be able to inform others about it.
> <i>The conflict dates back to May 2018, when Stock published a blog post that calmly raised concerns over the shift to self-ID. “Some have pointed out,” she wrote, that “this change in the law will allow some duplicitous or badly motivated males to ‘change gender’ fairly easily,” putting women at risk not from those who are trans but from predatory men.</i><p>People (in the US) panicked when a black man danced with a white woman because "women need to be protected." People panicked when gay couples asked for the right to get married because "marriage needs to be protected." It's always the same fake concern, changing the subject so as not to deal with the actual problem at hand, the treatment of certain kinds of minority people as lesser than others.<p>With trans people in particular the concern always seems to be that trans people somehow open the door to this kind of predation (see the "bathroom bills" in America). But why is that trans people's problem? A predator is a predator and should be dealt with as such. It has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not a trans person deserves the simple dignity of being recognized for what they really are (human people), rather than what is convenient for old-fashioned people to see them as (second-class citizens who are "confused" and don't know what is good for themselves).
"Physical danger" is not caused by someone having a different opinion. Nobody has the right to change reality to suit the fragile worldview they've created for themselves. Rather, any rational worldview should be strengthened by investigation.
My understanding is that in "queer theory" gender is 100% socially constructed. This essentially means "women" are socially constructed. It is hard to have feminism if you don't have "women". This seems to be at the core of the "terf" conflict.<p>Ironically in critical race theory race is also socially constructed but racism forces race on people and therefore you must defeat racism before you can get to socially constructed race.<p>This all quite complex so apologies if I didn't get that quite right.
I just finished reading <i>The Coddling of the American Mind</i> by Haidt and Lukianoff. Fantastic book. Here’s the article from <i>The Atlantic</i> that started the idea: [1]. In the book the authors discuss exactly this phenomenon and some possible causes. I’m not going to do it justice, so just read the article.<p>I’d love to be a professor because research and teaching sounds like a delightful vocation. Things like this give me pause.<p>1: <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/" rel="nofollow">https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-cod...</a>
For those who want to protect academic freedoms, consider donating to FIRE (<a href="https://www.thefire.org/" rel="nofollow">https://www.thefire.org/</a>), a nonprofit that in many ways is the new ACLU. You can read about their mission at <a href="https://www.thefire.org/about-us/mission/" rel="nofollow">https://www.thefire.org/about-us/mission/</a>
Well I will certainly trust any article that immediately resorts to commenting on the spelling of protestors.<p>> “Some have pointed out,” she wrote, that “this change in the law will allow some duplicitous or badly motivated males to ‘change gender’ fairly easily,” putting women at risk not from those who are trans but from predatory men.<p>Well I can't see why people would object to her implying that trans people are just male abusers looking for cover to assault women. Seems a totally apolitical stance to take