My best friend and closest political comrade Barry Finger, who, like me, is a decades-long left activist, thinker, and writer, reviewed my blog below before I posted, at my request, and said this of it: "I think your manner of approaching this is kind and expansive, without a trace of demagoguery. It dials the passion down, which is exactly what should be done." I hope it is received in that spirit--GF
I realize I’m opening the
proverbial can of worms by bring up this topic the way I am going to do here,
but what I’m going to write below on transgender issues I’m writing because not
only do I think it is important, but also, there’s a lot of major confusion on
the issues involved. So, I write to
invoke clarity on the issue. I won’t be
surprised if I’m misunderstood on this, but I can’t help or avoid that if I am
to be honest.
To start off, let me restate the
obvious: the transgender opponents of
the far right, the right-wing Culture Warriors such as Ron DeSantis, are
reprehensible. They are using scare
tactics and red herring scenarios to promote an openly bigoted agenda based on
dubious “what if” scenarios, e.g., males entering women’s bathrooms or locker
rooms as phony “females.” These are the
same Culture Warriors who rejoiced when Roe v. Wade was overturned, who want to
impose Christian Nationalism on the US public despite the US’s deliberate
founding as a secular nation, who are against gay marriage, and
even no-fault divorce, contraception, in vitro fertilization, and a whole range
of other measures that have made life in the US more bearable than it was when
it was under the thrall of “tradition.” They
are truly despicable, and that goes without saying.
But among these I do not
include feminist transgender critics such as J.K. Rowling and Kathleen
Stock. Their criticisms are of a
different, more valid, order, and they are undeservedly maligned as TERFs
(Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists, as if somehow their feminism was
corrupted and fake). The truth is, there
is such a thing as biological sex, and it does not go away just because someone
of one biological sex feels differently about what is his/her “real” sexual
identity. Fact is, rapes of biological
women have occurred in women’s shelters and prisons by transgender biological
males, and many women who use such shelters to protect themselves from abusive
males do not at all feel comfortable as sharing such safe spaces with
biological males, no matter that such males do not consider themselves male at
all. I consider these valid objections,
and quite simply, biological sex doesn’t just go away because of one’s
subjectivity. That is why such disconnect
between gender and sex is called a “dysphoria,” meaning a mismatch, a glaring
contradiction between biological objectivity and psychological
subjectivity. Quite simply put,
biological males have penises and testicles, and produce sperm; biological
females have vaginas, and within them have uteruses, fallopian tubes, and
produce eggs to be fertilized by sperm to reproduce new humans. Surgery nowadays can create an artificial penis
or vagina, but cannot create the inner workings of such—such created organs are
not able to biologically reproduce, the whole biological purpose of sex and
different sexual parts in the first place.
For those feeling transgender, a mismatch between psychological identity
and biological sex is automatically built-in, and there’s nothing automatic in
any psychology that can replace biology.
No social construct, no subjective sense of identity, nothing.
However, a medically diagnosable gender
dysphoria is real, and affects a small number of people (I’ll say more on that
below, with statistics). It is a chronic
unease and anxiety due to a sense of mismatch between one’s biological sex and
one’s perceived sexual identity, and are rooted in nerve pathways rather than
in the brain, though the evidence for this is not presently conclusive. Genetics and heredity also play a part. Still, it is there, causes extreme distress,
is unrelated to sexual orientation (i.e., preference for sexual partners of one
particular sex or the other), and is included in the latest edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic
and Statistical Manual (the bible of psychiatric diagnosis
classifications), DSM-5. However, it is
found only in 0.005-0.014% of the male population, and only 0.002-0.003% of the
female population (biological sex in both cases). That means that in the US, with an overall present
population of 335,000,000 in round numbers (as taken from the US Census) with a
50-50 split between males and females (also taken from the Census, June 22,
2024), the number of gender dysphoric males and females overall ranges from
117,250-294,750. Far smaller than the
population of Indianapolis where I live, or many another medium or small city! Contrast these numbers to the number of
hermaphrodites (i.e., people with both male and female genes), 1.7% of the
population, or 5,695,000 people; schizophrenics, 1% of the population, or
3,350,000 people; people who are bipolar, 2.8% of the population, or 9,380,000;
or depressives, i.e., people who suffer from depression, 8.3% of the
population, or 27,805,000 people. So,
the number of people with actual, genetically based, biological gender
dysphoria is quite small. However, of
course, culture wars over transgender, both from the left as from the right, as
well as social environmental concerns, e.g., mental illness, peer pressure,
cultural and social susceptibility, the Internet and the way it promotes
certain social identities, have evidently created a phenomenon far larger than
the actual number of such individuals.
This is a societal “ill” at least as much as it is a biological or
genetic one.
Yes, for certain sectors of the
left, especially the Western left, gender dysphoria or transgenderism is quite
“hip,” quite trendy, and attracts more people to it that there are actual
biological people with gender dysphoria.
Or so it certainly seems. This
was borne out by a recent polling at elite Brown University, where 40% of the
students identified as homosexual or transgender (whereas the actual percentage
of male homosexuals is 10% of the male population, and female homosexuals, 5%
of the female population, according to Dr. Kinsey’s classic study of sexual
prevalence in the US). In fact, in
certain sections of the left it’s quite faddish and fashionable to be anything
but a heterosexual male or female!
Moving the issue from biology to social psychology and sociology.
In fact, one has honestly to admit,
the disconnect between those identifying as transgender, and those with actual
gender dysphoria, makes gender dysphoria diagnosis, treatment, and the place of
the gender dysphoric in society a matter of cultural and social norms, along
with peer pressure, every bit as much, if no more, than biological and genetic
factors. That’s why it’s become a major
“culture wars issue” for both the right and the left, why it’s led to such
acrimony, cultural shaming and affirmation, and such divisiveness, with
“culture wars” hostility on both sides of the divide. Missing on both sides, of course, is regard
for the gender dysphoric as human beings; they are but “culture wars” chess
pieces, to be maneuvered and even sacrificed as the strategy of either left or
right demands. Humanity and humanism
once again fall by the wayside. As much victims of left intransigence as they
are of right bigotry and insistence on “proper” sexual norms.
Further, on the standard treatment
regimen for gender dysphoria, the application of puberty blockers, initiation
of hormone treatments, and even massive surgery: while the majority view as expressed in
scientific papers appears to be that such treatment is effective, there is also
a significant minority of such that states it isn’t. As an example, one 2020 review of the
literature found 51 papers positively affirming such treatment as effective;
however, 4 papers stated such treatment’s effects were null or negative. A small number of papers on both sides, which
means there quite simply may not be a statistically significant sample of
participants in such studies as to draw meaningful scientific conclusions. (Later, as more research came in, more
negative studies were written, as reported reliably in the US newsweekly The
Week, January 26, 2024.) Certainly,
treatments through puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and even major surgery
are medically invasive, and the ethics of such, not to say common sense,
informs us that such major means of treatment had better be of very high
efficacy and easily medically justified.
That, to this author, doesn’t seem to be the case right now. Especially with being transgender somewhat of
a societal “fad,” at least in some social circles, it may well be that some
people are being “treated” for a gender dysphoria they don’t genetically
have. Further, remember, though it’s
cynical, it’s also realistic to remember—medicine is a business, and major
medical treatments command major revenues for the doctors involved. Moreover,
as there are a number of transgender clinics now in the Western world, where
the diagnosis of gender dysphoria seems like its given automatically, are these
clinics really effective treatment centers, or are they more akin to the
oxycontin “clinics” that fueled the opioid addiction crisis? Seems to me, a good answer is, “We just don’t
know.” As the field right now is very
much unregulated. (Worth briefly
mentioning is that certain illnesses are more prominent in biological women
than in biological men, e.g., breast cancer and lupus; and in biological men,
of course, testicular cancer and the rare penis cancer [which occurs only in
uncircumcised men]. So, wouldn’t it be
medical malpractice to treat transgenders without regard for their original
biological sex for these biological sex-based illnesses and their biologically
based prevalences?)
Social factors and peer pressure
simply can’t be ignored propellants in the explosion of persons identifying as
transgender. Especially among young
teenagers, social and peer pressure are immense; yet the decision to change
one’s gender is permanent, and adolescence is also a volatile time. Is it really smart or correct to allow an
adolescent to undergo such major sex change treatment when that adolescent
isn’t even old enough to get a learner’s permit to drive an automobile? Can’t get a tattoo without signed parental
permission? Can’t vote, let alone drink
alcohol or consumer tobacco or vape legally?
And how many of us in real life made such major conclusions about our
life identities that we didn’t change later?
How many of us are what we were as teenagers, only just older? Very few, if any, I’d say. Certainly, I’m not the person I was at 12, or
16, or even 18; and even what I was in my late twenties or early thirties
corresponded very precious little to my adolescent expectations, desires and
wishes, not to say identities. Yet, when
it comes to identifying as gender dysphoric, we allow mere adolescents to make
such permanent choices even before they’re legally able to drive an automobile!
The whole matter thus calls for a
big warning sign: “Proceed with
caution.” But the “culture wars” left
dismisses such caution as transphobia, unfortunately, while the “culture wars”
right is openly and demagogically transphobic.
I say, both sides are wrong, terribly, simplistically, wrong. “Proceed with caution” needs to be our
societal watchword. Period.
Especially since an identity or
diagnosis as transgender doesn’t negate biology. Biological males are still male, still have
testosterone as the major sexual hormone, same as biological females have
estrogen. Further, and this is especially
important for sports, biological males, even if transgender, especially those
not biologically “neutered” by early hormone treatments, are bigger, stronger,
weigh more, and are taller generally than the corresponding biological females. Certainly, this is bound to create a valid
sore spot among women athletes, who might well feel subject to unfair
competition—as has happened. Not to
mention rapes in prisons and in women’s centers by transgender “women” who are
actually biological males. After all,
one’s social or individual psychological identity does not negate the
biological “facts of life.”
Nor does extensive sexual surgery
create a fully biological male or female.
While an artificial penis can be surgically created, it does not
ejaculate the sperm that fertilizes the biological woman’s egg. An artificial vagina can similarly be
created, but again, without the biological function of the real biological
one. It can’t hold eggs for
fertilization by male sperm. And it is
reproduction that drives sexuality and sexual differentiation biologically in
the first place!
Such is certainly far from being a
mere “social construct.” While we can be
many things societally, in the end it is based substantially on what we are
biologically, and that can’t be brushed aside.
Societal norms of what it means to be “male” or “female” ultimately come
down to the biological question of producing offspring. Without such, the species does not
survive. As true for humans as it is for
fishes, or salamanders.
That is why the transgender
imbroglio is truly an imbroglio, a conflict where social norms often conflict
with biological realities, which do not disappear because we within society
would like them to disappear. Throw in
peer pressure, changing societal expectations, cultural fluidity, and the
dividing up of the public into us vs. them tribes, and the imbroglio truly
becomes an intense one, one for which, this author believes, there just is no
easy answer except “Proceed with caution,” meaningfully regulate the
transgender clinic and transgender clinic industries, understand that major
invasive processes such as the standard treatments for gender dysphoria require
a firmer scientific and ethical basis than they have now, and that,
diagnostically, it is mandatory that real gender dysphoria be distinguished
from mere adolescent whim and bowing to peer pressure.
But how should we treat those who
identify as transgender, no matter what the cause of it? With kindness, dignity, and respect, of
course. They are, above all, human
beings, and even if we think them wrong, we do not negate their humanity. And we shouldn’t through rejectionist bigotry.
Period.
