Guest post: A helpful glossary of genderist bullshit
Originally a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? on Non-binary in Huddersfield.
The media outlet reporting this story has included a helpful glossary of genderist bullshit to indoctrinate (or at least confuse) its readers. Let’s play along!
Terms you need to understand
I seriously doubt it.
There are a lot of words used within the LGBT community that you may need help to understand. Here are some of the key definitions you may not know, as explained by Stonewall.
I might not know them because they’re wrong or made up. The likelyhood of anything from Stonewall leading to an improvement in my “understanding” is close to zero..
• Non-binary – the term used to describe people who don’t feel they comfortably identify as a man or a woman
Perhaps this should have started with definitions of “man” and “woman.” It would clarify whether the discomfort has anything to do with sexist stereotypes. As it is, I’m with Jesus & Mo’s barmaid: we’re all “non-binary.”
• Bisexual – a person who is attracted to people of more than one gender
WRONG. LOOK AT THE WORD: BI= two. SEXUAL = sex. That means “people attracted to both sexes.” “More than one” only insofar as you mean TWO, like it says in the “bi” part of the word. And sex, NOT “gender.” How can you be trusted with words if you can’t even get the fucking syllables right.
• LGBT – this is an acronym for lesbian, gay, bi and trans
As far as Stonewall’s activism is concerned, “T” is the only one that counts, but if they were to be honest and dropped the other letters, they would no longer be able to benefit from its parasitism of the gay rights movement, nobody would know what they were talking about anymore, and they would lose even more support.
• Gender Dysphoria – this is when a person feels discomfort or distress because they feel there is a conflict between their sex assigned at birth and their gender identity
Damn those doctors, nurses and midwives for failing to see the Magical Gender Essence in the delivery room. It’s all their fault! Good thing that there are places like Tavistock to medicate and carve the bodies of these distressed people so that they conform to their preferred, bullshit sexist stereotypes! Wait. What is “gender?”
• Gender Identity – how a person feels innately about their own gender – whether it be male, female or non-binary
Wait. What is “gender?” You’ve used it twice now, without defining it. How does differ from bullshit, sexist stereotypes?
• Pan – a person whose attraction towards others isn’t limited by sex or gender
A “gender” is not a “sexuality.” People are gay, straight, or bi. That’s it, that’s all, that’s everything. Stonewall used to know this.
• Trans – an umbrella term used to describe those whose gender is not the same as, or does not sit comfortably with, the sex they were assigned at birth
An almost useless catch-all term that includes people who don’t even want to be labeled trans. And don’t even ask about all the rest of you fuckers that we’re going to label “cis.”
Note that “genderqueer,” that extraordinarily meaningful, insightful, and powerful term, the accidental discovery of which helped launch the downward spiral of Pan Hollingworth’s pursuit of surgical solutions to mental problems, is nowhere to be found on this list. Perhaps because it is meaningless, incoherent, and contradictory genderbabble?
“People are gay, straight, or bi. That’s it, that’s all, that’s everything.”
Do you think asexuality is a real orientation?
Like bald is a hair colour.
Just pointing out, as is obligatory, the fact that they mixed sex and gender again while pretending the two are distinct. Again.
Sex pertains to biology; gender to grammar. French verbs do not have sex; at least, not publicly. (What they may get up to behind closed doors in Montmartre is another matter, and their own business.) ‘Sex’ and ‘gender’ are not synonymous, though people with suitable motivation are prepared to pretend that they are. The more such distinctions exist, the richer the language.
And as Hamlet said, the rest is bullshit.
“Sex assigned at birth”.
No.
You are not “assigned” a sex. You are born with one.
You are not “assigned” legs or “assigned” skin or “assigned” a central nervous system. You have them at birth. They are biological realities.
Sexual organs are likewise not “assigned”. You are born with them.
I am growing increasingly angry with the Modern Left. To be a leftist used to mean to stand up for science, to acknowledge reality as it was. Now they are increasingly like the Right – free to dismiss science if it doesn’t suit ideology.
Sex is real. Look at the rest of the animal world! How do cows, chickens, mantises, lions, toucans, chimpanzees, rhinos and a million other species reproduce!? They reproduce goddamn sexually! Sexual reproduction! It’s an established fact amongst the animal world – it’s the method by which most multi-cellular beings continue to propagate themselves!
And we are expected to deny that it is a biological reality? That male and female categories, which can be applied to so many other lifeforms, simply doesn’t exist for humans? Are they out of their goddamn minds? Are we the only mammalian species to not have sexual reproduction?
In the end – in the end, however, NOTHING they say can eliminate the fact that biological sexes exist. Their words cannot and do not change reality.
It’s rather clear that gender ideologues haven’t really thought this through, or worse, don’t really care. Positing “gender” or “gender identity” as a biological reality exclusive to humans rather complicates things. Introducing this bit of human exceptionalism doesn’t help their argument, because it suggests a whole range of questions that they are poorly equipped to answer. When did “gender” arise? What selective advantage did it offer? Why do no other animals have “genders?” It’s like asking for fossil evidence of the human “soul,” and about as productive.
I don’t think genderists really care about any of the implications that their reification of “gender” entails. They’re not interested in the questions their fairy tale raises, they’re only concerned with the power it can give them. Stopping to try to explain the details only gets in the way of the goal of shaping law and policy.
I’ve been informed by TRAs that gender is found throughout the animal kingdom, particularly in mammals and primates. What they seem to be talking about is sex-based behavioral differences — female chimps being nurturing homebodies, male chimps being aggressive hunters, etc. These natural distinctions in gender are even more developed in Homo sapiens.
This is particularly amusing because
1.) they otherwise categorically reject sex-based biological determinism with its claim that women are born to be natural submissive homemakers and men natural leaders and breadwinners. That’s what religious conservatives want and since these same conservatives absolutely hate transgenderism theres obviously no connection between what they’re saying and biological determinism.
2.) they generally fall all over themselves pointing out that transgender people can be gender conforming OR gender nonconforming, and might behave any way at all because there’s no predicting anything. A transwoman might be gruff and tough and have a beard and wear overalls, a trans man might be dainty and feminine in short skirts and high heels. Don’t assume. Which I find hard to connect to gendered behavior in the animal kingdom,
Yes.
So a “gender” is not predictive at all, just like the Mermaids Powerpoint slide where not having dysphoria was an indicator for being “trans.” Heads I win, tails you’re a TERF.