Rebecca Kukla – Philosophy, Georgetown, and cop of all things trans – has a public Facebook post from last week about how her piece for the Institute of Art and Ideas was drastically cut without her knowledge and how the Institute of Art and Ideas didn’t tell her it was a multi-person piece and that she would be posting in the company of TERFs. She includes the uncut piece, and what she says in one of the cut parts is interesting.

There is no such thing as ‘the’ transgender experience and identity of course; the experiences of transgender folks are as varied as the experiences of anyone else, and transgender people also do not share a single identity. Some trans folks identify with one of the two binary genders and some do not. Some take themselves as always having had their current gender; others experience their gender as shifting. Some care about medically altering parts of their body and others do not. No philosopher can speak to ‘the’ experience or identity of a whole group.

No doubt, but on the other hand, if it’s that various and undescribable, I have to wonder what the word “trans” even means. Some identify with one of the genders and some don’t – ok so what does it mean then? Anything and everything?

But what comes next is what really interested me.

That said, I think that philosophy can contribute a lot to contemporary discussions of gender and transgender identity. Indeed, each of the traditional major branches of philosophy provides useful tools and lenses for thinking about these issues. Using the tools of metaphysics, or the study of what exists and how, we can ask what it is to have a gender, and what personal identity is. A metaphysician might ask what role gender plays in identity, whether one’s gender is (or is sometimes) essential to one’s personal identity, and what it means for gender and identity to change. Epistemologists, who study knowledge and justification, can examine how each of us knows our own gender, and by what standards, and – separately – how we take ourselves to know other people’s genders. If I feel certain of my gender, is my certainty warranted, or could I be wrong?

We can do all that, can we? We can ask what it is to have a gender, and what personal identity is? If we can, why is it that we get yelled at and called names when we do? We can ask what role gender plays in identity, whether one’s gender is (or is sometimes) essential to one’s personal identity, and what it means for gender and identity to change? But the people Kukla calls “TERFs” do ask those questions, and Kukla ostracizes them and demonizes them. We can examine how each of us knows our own gender, and by what standards? We can ask how we take ourselves to know other people’s genders? We can ask if we could be wrong about our gender? We who are not trans can ask that too? But then why does Kukla call philosophers who do ask those questions “TERFs”?

That’s a real question. I don’t get it. She lays down how people can systematically think about this subject, but meanwhile she is prominent among the philosophy academics who do their best to ostracize and punish people who do try to systematically think about this subject. She was one of the fiercest voices attacking Rebecca Tuvel for her attempt, and at the beginning of this post she says:

Today I found out that without giving me any hint of this in advance, it was published as part of a symposium including Bindel, Stock, and Lawford-Smith, among others. This completely recontextualizes my original piece. I would not have agreed to what looks like a friendly ‘debate’ with them and would have written a different piece if I had.

Because they ask what it is to have a gender, and what personal identity is.

You couldn’t make it up.

If you read the post don’t miss the comments, because “Rachel” McKinnon turns up under the name “Her Thighnes” [sic] and goes on at massive length about how important it is to nail these things down first and how he does lots of meeja and here is his whole correspondence with the BBC and are you impressed? It’s hilarious, in a disgusting way, and all the more so because Kukla after an initial groveling acknowledgement ignores him.