Close this search box.

The Self-Defeating Logic of Transgenderism

By now you are fully aware that Bruce Jenner would like to be a woman.  He has had some work done and is now presenting himself to the world as “Caitlyn.”

Earlier this week, we stated the obvious.  Bruce Jenner is still a man.

However, there are a few less obvious points worth making as we try to wrap our heads around the bizarre world that is America in 2015.

The argument in support of transgenderism is that sex and gender are different.  While proponents are forced to acknowledge that DNA determines anatomy, they deny that anatomy is necessarily connected to gender.

Gender, they argue, is a social construct determined more by the way a child’s parents, siblings, teachers, and friends treat a child rather than any innate, fixed difference between the biologically male and female.

The irony is that a sex change itself reinforces the gender stereotypes they claim to be rejecting.

You can’t become a woman if being a woman doesn’t mean something and the moment you try to switch your gender, you are acknowledging that male and female are distinct.

“But gender is determined by the way you feel, not by your anatomy,” they respond.

And they still have the nerve to call other people “anti-science.”

But this is just the start of the confusion.

While the transgender world poses on the front of a magazine with “come hither” eyes as if to say, “See, I’m in lingerie. How much more woman can I be?”, the feminist and lesbian wing of the family is making the argument that women need not be feminine in order to be fully woman.

The caricature of femininity being presented by Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner is typically insulting to the feminist world.

Feminists could be insulted by the idea that womanhood can be purchased by a man with enough money.

One of the rare times they missed their cue to be indignant.

But feminism isn’t the only movement that abandons its core principles to support transgenderism.

It seems that once you are willing to change your gender, the implication that one can choose their sexuality is no longer offensive.

The Vanity Fair article discussing Jenner’s makeover included the following: “Bruce Jenner as Bruce Jenner had a sexual appetite exclusively for women. Caitlyn has no idea what the future will hold as Caitlyn Jenner. But, she adds, it is not important to her right now. ‘If you have a list of 10 reasons to transition, sex would be number 10.'”

Of course the implication that choice has ever had anything to do with sexuality provokes outrage in any other context.

While feminism, transgenderism, and homosexuality hold positions that cannot be reconciled with each other, it is of no concern to them because their goal is not to discover what is true. Quite the opposite. They are united by a common desire to make the world embrace their belief that nothing is true except the things they want to be true.

They are declaring independence from a fixed reality.

Unlike Martin Luther King Jr’s civil rights movement, which was rooted in the notion of a fixed natural law that the racist laws of the time were incongruent with, the goal of these movements is to demonstrate that there is no natural law.

“Being born a man doesn’t mean I have to be a father if I want to be a parent.  I can be a mother if I want to.”

If there is no standard, there is nothing to be incongruent with.

While they see themselves as pioneers, they are in fact the current players in the oldest campaign in human history.

Ever since Eve ate the apple in the Garden of Eden, convincing herself that it would make her like God, man has been fighting for the idea that there are no rules except the ones we like.

We shouldn’t be too harsh in our critique because this is a campaign we have all been part of to varying degrees.

But we don’t do anyone any favors by telling the person who is frustrated by the rules that there are no rules.  Because sooner or later they will confront reality, even if they spent all their life convinced it didn’t exist.

Read More