Have you ever face palmed yourself so hard that it hurt? If not, check out this (link). I can’t tell if progressivists are really just trying to troll us. For those of you too lazy to click and read it, here’s the story – listen up.
A birth certificate was issued in British Columbia, Canada, without a sex marker. Here’s the logic for why this was done:
““The assignment of sex in this culture is done when a medical person lifts up the legs and looks at the baby’s genitals. But we know that the baby’s own gender identity will not develop for some years until after they’re born.”
In Doty’s child’s case, the letter “U,” presumably for unspecified or unknown, has been entered in the spot for “sex.”
The idea here is that the “gender identity” of the baby has yet to be determined or developed, and so the sex of the baby should be recorded as unknown or unspecified. But this is nonsense – these persons are confused about their own ideology and terms. Hear me out.
If a healthy gender identity can be distinct from and independent of sex, and if sex can be known without knowing “gender identity”, as transgender advocates would have us believe, then the assignment of a sex to a baby does not also assign that baby’s gender identity. Hence, that this dispute “…comes as the baby’s parent fights to allow their child to develop their own gender identity” is inconsistent with what they themselves believe sex and “gender identity ” are. They’re confused about their own thinking, it seems.
To put it more clearly, my point is this: Advocates for transgenderism cannot have their cake and eat it too. If they wish to proclaim that sex does not determine or entail a “gender identity”, then they cannot consistently claim that assignments of sex on birth certificates determine or are incompatible with certain “gender identities”. That’s inconsistent. They also cannot proclaim that the sex of the baby is unknown or unspecified just because they don’t know his “gender identity” – again, by their own logic, sex can exist and be known independently of any “gender identity”.
Of course, in saying all of this, I don’t mean to give credence to this idea of gender identity – I think it’s a bunch of BS, after all. I am just saying what is consistent or not if we were to use their terms and reasoning.
- Part 3: Responding to Transgender Philosophers: Robin Dembroff’s Pronoun Argument - January 17, 2018
- Part 2: Responding to Transgender Philosophers: “Talia Mae Bettcher” - January 15, 2018
- Part 1: Responding to Transgender Philosophers – “Talia Mae Bettcher” - January 14, 2018
- On Half Men: A Rant Againt Feminism and the Neglect of Virility - January 8, 2018
- “Philosopher” Robin Dembroff Writes About Roy Moore - January 5, 2018
- Don Lemon and Ryan Anderson Debate Homo “Marriage” Stuff - January 4, 2018
- What We Can Learn from the Nativity Story - December 25, 2017
- What is natural law? - December 23, 2017
- In Defence of Philosopher Tully Borland - December 7, 2017
- On the Black Family, Absentee Parents and Progressivism - November 24, 2017