Yesterday my daughter said, “I want pudding.” And I said, “No.” And she said, “Why do you hate pudding?” And I said, “I do not hate pudding.” And she said, “Why do you hate me?” And I said, “I do not hate you. I just think chocolate pudding for breakfast is a bad idea.” And, because she is three, she threw herself on the floor and started screaming, “Why are you so mean? And I said, “Because I care about you.” And she said, “If you cared about me, you would give me pudding.”
Is that example way more simplified than current transgender issues? Yes.
Does it illustrate the logical fallacies that I continue to run into when discussing gender ideology in public schools? Yes. For instance - the appeals to emotion, the erroneous presumptions, the glossing over of facts, the hasty generalizations, and, also, the personal attacks.
Note: The subtitle is a joke. But I know that it is all that some of you will get out of this post. So when you write your divisive, emotionally manipulative, and misleading letter to the Dispatch Editor complaining about how that white privileged, anti-LGBTQ community member is so out of touch that she thinks that the emotionally laden and deeply difficult topic of gender dysphoria is the same as pudding preferences, know that you are plagiarizing.
____
The following are edited excerpts from a couple of letters I had to write this week to readers who appear to think that a) I am ignorant, intolerant and/or full of hate, and b) I should stop speaking publicly about these issues because I am harming people with my words.
I am not anti-LGBTQ+. Some of my best friends are gay/lesbian. I have a (distant) transgender cousin and a few friends and acquaintances who transitioned. In the early 2000s, I attended all of the marches and the parades with them because I believe that everyone should have the same rights. And I was there with them when they had to do things like come out to their families who then disowned them for five years. These people are my friends and my family. I would never want to hurt them or try to erase them.
And I know for a fact that there are LGBTQ+ folks who agree with me. They are either in the minority or they are just quiet - I am not sure which but either way they still count. So whether my words are considered “LGBTQ+ friendly” or not is really a subjective judgment. And I would argue (to, I am sure, considerable laughter by my local FB “diversity” group) that in speaking out I am supporting LGBTQ+ folks because I think the way the current movement is heading is harmful to them. Just because the most vocal and politically organized part of the community thinks something is a good idea, doesn’t automatically make it so and therefore immune to criticism.
What do I think is problematic about the current movement, you ask? In its - which I know are well-meaning - attempts at spreading inclusion and acceptance, it is trampling on the rights of parents with kids in public schools by demanding that teachers and administrators promote ideas that embrace a controversial ideology and hide a child’s sexuality and/or preferred gender from their parents.
Gender ideology is blatantly controversial for various reasons, including that it ignores biology (and all the problems that can come from ignoring biology), it has the potential to destroy women’s sports and women’s safe spaces (and I am here referring to opportunistic predators who would take (and have taken) advantage of the movement), it reenforces gender stereotypes, it encourages people to ignore any potential underlying mental illness (which is a common occurrence alongside gender dysphoria), it misleads girls who are uncomfortable with puberty into believing something is wrong with them, it opens doors to inappropriate conversations between students and teachers, and it teaches that any disagreement with or criticism of the movement is evidence of hate.
This movement may be progressive, but it is anti-liberal. And your side has - so far - no answer to me when I raise any of these concerns except to say my concerns are imaginary pearl-clutching and evidence of the “hate in my heart” along with various other personal attacks.
But - here is the main point - my thoughts and your thoughts on the politics of this are not relevant to what a public school should be teaching our kids. This is an area where the schools should stay out. I think we are in agreement there? And that is all I am fighting for.
Don’t read books to my six-year-old that introduce terms like homosexual or heterosexual because I am not ready for that conversation with my kid and I sure as hell don't want the first grade teacher going there first. (And, I would argue, this is completely different from a book that happens to show a kid with two dads or moms - which I am totally okay with. Kids can get that without having to get into sexual concepts or terms with teachers). Don’t hang a Christian flag or a BLM flag in your classroom. Depending on who you are and what you believe, one of those flags represents love and the other represents hate. Public school is suppose to be a neutral environment so all kids feel safe. It's simple, right?
Yes, you can have a gender identity support plan with the school for your kid that includes access to certain books, materials, etc - that's private and none of my business. But don’t do a read-aloud to my first grade kid’s class that tells them a doctor may have gotten their sex wrong at birth, that biology is not relevant, and that a person can be a boy and a girl or neither. Or maybe a tree. And that all of this is based solely on their own feelings which should never be questioned. Don’t ask my kid their preferred pronoun and then ask if they would like that information to be kept a secret from me.
This is not about censorship - it’s about age appropriateness. This is not about erasing a viewpoint - it is about how to provide an accepting but neutral environment in a public school. This is not about phobia - it is about a parent’s right to know what the government is doing with his or her child.
I appreciate your polite requests for me to stop talking about this subject because it has or may hurt people’s feelings. It does make me step back and think. I don’t want to hurt anyone. And I know for sure that I am not always right and sometimes I am abysmally wrong.
But we cannot ask people to be silent because their words hurt our feelings. That just cannot be the basis for what is acceptable to talk about and what is not. You see that, right? Asking people who disagree with (or even just question) the movement’s direction to be quiet solely in order to spare someone’s feelings is demanding everyone to avoid a critical look at what the movement may be doing to itself and others.
If I have the facts wrong - if I’m coming to the wrong conclusions - if my concerns really are imaginary or ridiculous - then meet me there and explain that to me. But don’t just appeal to emotion and ask me to shut-up.
We have to be able to talk about this stuff or we will never move forward.
Sincerely, Shana
I am not transphobic. I just disagree with you.
One really good way a therapist can recognize they are in the presence of someone with a personality disorder is; does the client who is an adult consistently act like an unreasonable adolescent.
If the therapist does not address the behavior with appropriate executive functioning but is guided by the current cultural view toward celebrity status and tolerance,(which conforms to an over reliance of empathy) the reactive adolescent behavior of the client will take over the therapeutic process and create chaos.
The therapist must not be “allergic” to addressing issues by establishing and maintaining clear boundaries, not fearing the narcissistic emotional reactions of the client that are intended to avoid the self discipline that leads to growth.
In many ways those who are our leaders in this youth oriented culture resembles the therapist office where the therapist has lost control.
They not only incredulously advocate for reactive adolescent behavior but are terrified by impression that they will appear intolerant, unkind or at worst, uncool!
As long as this tendency continues, chaos will occur on a cultural and societal level; the executive headship has disappeared!
At this point in time, our culture is in desperate need for true leadership! Sadly, the current elite institutions have miserably failed at providing that guidance.
A call for a new institutions with a radically different perspective to replace the ones that are currently in control are desperately needed