Monthly Archives: December 2014

A Survey on Feminism

I have decided to do a bit of a project. Please help me out by clicking the link below and filling out the survey. I promise it’s not that long:


The Purity Myth: Facts at a Glance

Jessica Valenti summarized what she discussed in a facts page at the back of her book. I will repeat these facts here.

“There is no working medical definition for ‘virginity.'”

“‘Vaginal rejuvenation’-in which a woman’s labia is trimmed and her vagina tightened, or her hymen is completely replaced (a ‘revirginization’)-is the fastest-growing form of plastic surgery in the U.S.”

“Over 1400 federally funded Purity Balls, where young girls pledge their virginity to their fathers in a promlike event, were held in 2006 across the United States.”

“Violence against women is going down, unless you’re not white. Between 2003 and 2004, the incidents of intimate partner violence among black females increased from 3.8 to 6.6 victimizations per 1000 women. And the average annual rate of intimate partner violence from 1993 to 2004 was highest for American Indian and Alaskan Native women-18.2 victimizations per 1000 women.”

“A 2007 report from the American Psychological Association found that nearly every form of media studied provided ‘ample evidence of the sexualization of women,’and that most of that sexualization focuses on young women.”

“Over 80 percent of abstinence programs contain false or misleading information about sex and reproductive health, including retro gender stereotypes like: ‘A woman is far more attracted by a man’s personality while a man is stimulated by sight. A man is usually less discriminating about those to whom he is physically attracted.”

“Abstinence-only education programs, which cannot mention contraception unless to talk about failure rates, have received over $1.3 billion dollars since 1996, despite the fact that 82 percent of Americans support programs that teach students about different forms of contraception.”

“Students who take virginity pledges are more likely to have oral and anal sex.”

“Between 1995 and 2007, states enacted 557 anti-choice measures-43 in 2007 alone. Since George W. Bush took office, state legislatures have considered more than 3700 anti-choice measures in total.”

“FDA approval for Plan B, the morning after pill that prevents pregnancy, was held up after a FDA medical official wrote in an internal memo that over-the-counter status could cause ‘extreme promiscuous behaviours such as the medication taking on an ‘urban legend’ status that would lead adolescents to form sex-based cults centered around the use of Plan B.'”

“More and more laws are cropping up that attempt to curb pregnant women’s rights, and even punish them. In 2004, a Utah woman was charged with murder after refusing to have a cesarean section and one of her twin babies was delivered stillborn. One legislator in Virginia even introduced a bill in 2005 that would make it a crime-one punishable by a year in jail-for a woman not to report her miscarriage to the police within 12 hours.”

Science Depends On Philosophy, and practice at examining logical arguments.

This post will be severing two purposes. First as a review for an excellent video Gary Edwards put out on Sunday, and an examination of a deductive argument that I promised on my post about deductive and inductive logic.

Here’s the Video titled “Science Depends On Philosophy” for those interested the video does have a full transcript which can be read by going to the Youtube page clicking the ⚫⚫⚫ More button under the video title.

For ease I will include the definitions and the deductive argument here.


A = “The Hypothetical Philosophy Denialist”

P = “A is doing empirical science”

Q = “A has taken a conceptual and evaluative side” (You have agreed to certain definitions of what your looking at and looking for, that you won’t be redefining things as you go along and that you won’t be moving the goal posts if you don’t like any answers you might get. As well you value some thing, general try of evaluation, or forms of evidence, over other kinds.)

R = “A has engaged in appropriate discourse”

S = “A is Hypocritical and conceited”

T = “A is doing Philosophy”


1. “P” [assumption]

2. “NOT S” [assumption]

3. IF “P” THEN “Q” [premise]

4. IF (“Q” AND “NOT R”) THEN “S” [premise]

5.  IF (“Q” AND “R”) THEN “T” [premise]

6. EITHER “R” OR “NOT R” (This is a case of an exclusive or) [premise]

7. EITHER “S” OR “T” (This is also a case of an exclusive or) [deduction 4+5+6]

8. “T” [deduction 2+7]

9. IF (“P” AND “NOT S”) THEN “T” [deduction 1+2+3+8]

Well scared yet? Hopefully not! Though if your needing the refresher I’ll link back to my discussion of logical connectives here, and the the basic form of an argument here.

First I’m going to take this argument step by step and restate each step of the argument, and discuss it’s importance. If you had no problem following Gary then you may wish to skim though this part, but given this is formal logic and may reading this will have little to no exposure to this type of rather intimidating notation. It is best to try to make the argument as clear as possible.

First come the assumptions. For this argument we are assuming 1. Your doing empirical science (P), and 2. you are not a conceited hypocrite (NOT S). Both of these are build in to give the argument charitability to the philosophical denialists (A). I haven’t yet talked much about charitability and I’ll be writing a full post on it soon as it is very important. I won’t go into it much here other then to say that by being charitable Gray has made his fair, and respectful which is always a good route to go.


So we know “A” is doing empirical science and is not conceited or hypocritical. Now to the premises.

3. First premise is IF “P” THEN “Q”. Which translated back into English is saying:

IF someone is doing empirical science (P) THEN it is the case that that person has taken a conceptual and evaluative side.

Which is to say that someone has accepted some set of acceptable scientific and empirical methodologies in which they will base their conclusions upon. How do we know those methodologies are acceptable? For that we need to go on to the next premise.

4. IF (“Q” AND “NOT R”) THEN “S”

IF someone has taken a conceptual and evaluative side (Q), but has not engaged in appropriate discourse (NOT R). THEN it is the case that person is a conceited hypocrite (S).

What is means to engaged in the appropriate discourse varies some depending on the particular science in questions, but generally speaking this means that you agree to follow those definitions, and methodologies agree on by the scientific consensus, and to be clear about place where you diverge. As well in mean that you will engage in the peer review process allowing other to look over your work, and that you will do the same, taking into considerations and criticism you get, and make corrections as needed. I could go on, but I think that is a compete enough overview for our purposes here.

5. IF (“Q” AND “R”) THEN “T”

IF someone has taken a conceptual and evaluative side (Q), and engaged in appropriate discourse (R) THEN that person is engaged in philosophy (T).

This is the first place most might object to the argument, but I think this premise fits well for both science and philosophy.


EITHER someone is engaged in appropriate discourse (R) OR they’re not (NOT R).

Another place you might object and say there is nuance, but I’ll save arguments against for later.

Now that we have all 4 Premises. Lets move onto the three deductions.


7. EITHER “S” OR “T”

EITHER your a conceited hypocrite (S) OR your doing philosophy (T).

This deduction follows from premises 4, 5 and 6 as follows. First we know from premise 4 and 5 that if someone engaged in appropriate discourse (R) that they doing philosophy, and if they’re not engaged in appropriate discourse they are a conceited hypocrite. With Premise 6 we know you must either be doing appropriate discourse or not, there is not middle group on that issue. Because of that we know that “A” must with be “T” or “S”.

8. “T”

The Hypothetical philosophy denialist (A) is doing philosophy (T).

Due the deduction 7 we know “A” must be “S” OR “T”, and since assumption 2 is that “A” is Not A conceited hypocrite (NOT S) then we know the “A” must be doing philosophy.

9. IF (“P” AND “NOT S”) THEN “T”

This final deduction draws from all the premises and deductions some directly and indirectly. We know that “A” is doing Science from the first assumption. We also know that “A” is not a conceited hypocrite (NOT S) from assumption 2.

As also know that from Assumption 1 and Premise 3 that “A” is doing Empirical Science (P) so “A” must also have taken a conceptual and evaluative sides (Q). Based on deduction  8 and all that came before it we know that If “Q” then we must either have “T” or “S”, but not both. We also know we must have “R” or “NOT R” (6), and that they follow from “Q” (4, 5), and that “Q” follows from “P” (3). Because of all of that confusing mess we know that to do empirical science (Q) we must either do philosophy (T) or be conceited hypocrites (S). We already now we are doing both Science and that we are not conceited hypocrites so we must be doing philosophy! Hopefully that made sense!

Gary Edwards explains line 9 a bit differently and I suggest everyone who’s gotten this far go back and watches again. Both are correct, though his is more concise. My explanation is drawing out the logic more in hope it may help a few people reading this understand.

Though if some this doesn’t make sense, and anyone doesn’t understand why these deductions follow from the premisses and assumptions please ask questions. I’ll do my best to answer, though do try to be specific what line your having issues with. This is formal logic so if it doesn’t make sense the first time though don’t worry it did make sense to me at first either.

Okay know I’m sure people are going to have some issue with the argument and would like to address some of it’s failings, if it has any. I’ll explain the basics of how you would go about doing so, and give an example.

First this argument is sound, the premises guarantee the conclusion. So saying the argument doesn’t work is a no go.The argument does work, if you have an issue you’ll need to indicate why the premise or assumptions are incorrect and how they are incorrect. Another way to think of it is that you can not refute the conclusions of a sound argument. Those are a given and above reproach. Instead you must show that the argument is build on unsound foundations by picking apart the premises.

I pointed out two places, Premise 5 and 6, where one might object. Of these two premise 5 seems the most likely candidate for criticism. That premise was:


5. IF (“Q” AND “R”) THEN “T”

IF someone has taken a conceptual and evaluative side (Q), and engaged in appropriate discourse (R) THEN that person is engaged in philosophy (T).


This premise is largely undefended, while I do agree with it, it still remains a weak spot. This is an important point to remember, you can criticize your own ideas in this manner, and well as those ideas you like. In doing so all you risk is improving your argument by recognizing its weak points and strengthening them, or finding our your wrong.  And finding out your wrong for yourself eases that awkwardness of someone else doing it for you.


First and post obviously you could argue the “T” does not necessarily follow from “Q” & “R”, so far from the discussions those thing seem to be important only too doing “empirical science” (P). Though in order to make this an convincing counter point you must explain why “T” Does not follow from “Q” & “R” what about philosophy make those two things unnecessary? And when you think of that reason why do you think might be the response from Gary? I’m actually drawing a blank, on a good reason, but that might be because I biased anyone have some ideas?


I also suggest any interested parties try to tackle the argument from Premise 6 which in retrospect may have made a better example ;).

Next time I’ll be talking about charitability in arguments and more specifically counter arguments.



The Purity Myth: Resources


I mentioned a while ago that I would be discussing the book The Purity Myth by Jessica Valenti. I have now finished the book and will be discussing it over the next few posts. But first I wanted to provide you all with most of the online resources (unfortunately a number of the resources are unavailable:

Why Are People So Concerned About Gender NonConforming Children? Part 3


The next video I watched was about a kid who doesn’t identify as male or female. The first commenter said “A gold mine for me, pay-day, and Party! It is clear that this child has been influenced by the wrong things. How do these kids know what they want in life at age 6 and 10.They haven’t even gone through puberty yet. Its a sick world we live in when a child goes to this extreme to get attention. He gets to use the nurses bathroom. What a bunch of BS. This is sick and wrong but I’m sure he/she will be featured on Oprah or Ellen show. That’s what its really about. If they can’t naturally procreate than it’s wrong.” And what exactly are the right things to be influenced by? Bigotry? Are you saying you didn’t know what your gender was at 6? If that’s the case, then we should simply avoid labelling them either gender until they’re “old enough” to know what their gender is. They aren’t looking for attention, they’re looking for acceptance. But how exactly is attention seeking sick? Right, because what child doesn’t want to use the nurses bathroom? This kid is prepubescent. No prepubescent child can procreate. Are all children therefore wrong? Or only the ones who don’t identify how you want them to? This kid didn’t say they were transgender. They may always be able to procreate. So I guess your argument is invalid.
The next person said “Anyone check to see if the kid’s parents are gay and politically motivated, or exposure to a lot of bpa and milk hormone? Nice reporting, keeping it real shallow! Instead just explore the new challenges it promotes and not the possible cause, and like a new breed of poodle, everybody should want one to be unique-Some older kids would wear a dress for bathroom privileges just to look at girls, just don’t think that’s the case. n Gay people would meet these questions as demoralizing somehow.” Um…the kid’s parents are a man and a woman. Who are currently married to each other. I suppose one of them may be gay, but why would they so openly support their child but continue to live a lie? You know why they didn’t report on what caused the child to be gender nonconforming? Because we don’t know! Were they supposed to make up lies to make you happy? And why does the story have to be about what caused to kid to be nonconforming? Why can’t a story just be about raising awareness? Trans* people aren’t a new breed. We’ve been around for a while. If a pervert ants to go into a bathroom and watch people, they can do that now. Allowing trans people to use the correct bathrooms won’t suddenly cause men to sneak into the woman’s bathroom. It allows women to use the woman’s bathroom.
The next commenter said “I wonder How Many Vaccines, Pharmaceutical drugs, over-the-counter-drugs, GMO=genetically modified organism foods, processed foods & drinks, flu shots, allergy patches, etc., this boy and/or girl, and ‘its’ parents have eaten and been Injected with?” Stop trying to make up diagnoses! Leave that shit to the people who are trained. Gender dysphoria is not caused by drugs, GMO’s, BPA, vaccines, or anything else that people want to blame all the world’s problems on. People are trans* because people are trans*. Now quite trying to use pseudo-science to excuse your bigotry. And quite calling humans “it.” We’re people, not lamps.
The next person said “Kid-‘Mommy, I want to be a girl. Can I cut my penis off?’ Mom (Liberal Retard)-‘Sure’ LMAO This is why everyone thinks Americans are stupid.” Nope. Personally, it’s people like you that tend to make me think that Americans are stupid. Well, you and the next person: “The issue isn’t that there are kids who are transgendered, the issue is that lib-tard Parents spontaneously & instantly orgasm’d when they saw the boy playing with girl gender toy & that they IMMEDIATELY rushed the child over to a pseudo-science psychiatrist who jumped up & down screaming “we’ve got one” before the boy could even walk inside the room & sit down to say what he really thinks and feels…The issue is that he’s too young & that he’s being coerced & influenced.” Oh really? You know exactly what happened do you? It couldn’t possibly be, you know, that the kid has a brain of their own and is able to express their own preferences. Because some layman from the street clearly knows more about psychology than an actual psychologist.
The next comment says “Let Ryan wait until he gets his first erection & orgasm & make his own choice before you re-enforce his sexual identity issues…He’ll probably want to keep his new toy.” Nobody’s holding the kid’s penis to a chopping block. They can’t have surgery until he’s 18 anyway. Penises aren’t the greatest toy ever, you know. A lot of men seem to think they are, but how you feel about your own penis is not how everybody feels about penises.
I might have a permanent dent in my forehead from all this facepalming…Anyway, they next person said “This is beyond disgusting. Children don’t even have a solid gender-appearance idea when they’re that age-that’s all culture. He says he’s a Tom-Girl because he’s a completely typical testosterone-driven male boy who mom and dad have exploited for some neo-liberal freak-show. You treat your children the gender they are.” What does t mean to have a solid gender-appearance? Gender expression is what you wear. So…children don’t generally wear clothes that match their gender? All gender is cultural. Again, you know exactly how this kid’s gender non-conformity went down? They were just a normal little boy playing with trucks until mom and dad decided to dress them like a girl? Because no child could possibly have a say in how they dress, right? It’s funny, conservatives bitch about how trans* people are trying to make things political, then they turn around and make things political by saying that if you support trans* rights you’re a liberal.
This next comment is another meant-to-be-positive one: “You are right. didn’t mean any disrespect towards ‘the kid’. ‘It’ = non-gender?, boy?, girl?, asexual?, transgender?, homosexual?, alien?, half Human Being, half?………” No! “It” is not a term for people. It is a term for inanimate objects. Lamps are “its,” cars are “its,” humans are “theys” or “hes” or “shes,” etc.
The next person said “‘gender variant’…that’s fucking stupid. Lame loser sicko parents are to blame, these issues belong at home, not IN school. Can’t ID yourself in an AP interview?? Then GET OFF-CAMERA!!” I hate to break it to you, but gender nonconforming kids have to go to school too. They can’t just leave who they are behind because you want them to. Hiding their identity is not an option. And quite blaming the parents. Just because you don’t understand something doesn’t mean it’s some kind of conspiracy.
The last comment I took from this video said “Old Sperm and Dried up Ovaries, this is what happens when try to have children in your 40’s Mutations, I don’t blame the child, I blame the so-called parents.” For one, the parents ages were never given. For another, gender dysphoria is not caused by a mutation. If it was, we’d have figured it out by now. Y are you blaming anyone? This kid is just trying to live their life. They didn’t do anything wrong and neither did the parents. Gender dysphoria is not a crime, and trans* people shouldn’t be treated like criminals.

In the next video, a gender nonconforming teenager sued the DMV for discrimination. The first comment I found on that video said “I think every one should be transgender. Why well if they want to stop boys from being boys in schools and feminize them so let the Libtards get their hedonistic demands. this as we see more Liberal teachers sleeping with their students, homosexuality taught at younger ages and so forth. Then they can ignorantly sit back and wonder why sh*t is falling apart and blame others for their sick and twisted depraved logic.” Some people see conspiracies everywhere, I swear. Nobody is feminizing boys in school. Do you even know what hedonism is? Trying to optimize pleasure is a bad thing? I highly doubt the political views of most teachers caught sleeping with students is even known. How, exactly, does one teach homosexuality?
The next comment said “Someone tell this fag he’s actually a boy.” Again, gender is not the same as sexuality. We have no idea what this kids sexuality is. We do, however, know that he identifies as a boy, but is gender nonconforming. He’s not transgender according to his own words.
The next person said “Here we go! Another tranny/gay/bi/who knows, on the news bitching about their ‘rights.’ The goddamn liberal agenda being pushed and screwing up our system. Why can’t a boy be a boy and a girl be a girl any more? Now anything is allowed, fuck it, you feel like a dinosaur? Well bitch loud enough about it and maybe they’ll put a “D” along side “M” and “F” on applications and exams. This shits ridiculous.” “Tranny” is another derogatory word. Don’t call people “tranny.” If you listened to what they had to say, you’d know how they identify. Should I assume that the scare quotes mean you don’t believe that the LGBT community has rights? Last I checked, all humans deserved equal rights. Boys can be boys and girls can be girls. However, now we don’t force people into those categories.
The next person said “Who cares. This fag needs to act and dress like a man.” Says who? Why should anybody conform to your preferences? Is this kid hurting you by not dressing like you?
The next comment said “There are rules in America. Even for a sissy boy like Chase” ‘Merica.
The next comment said “Woman who wear make up usually always wear make up to look like a woman. Women who wear make up are NOT trying to look like a man that is a BIG DIFFERENCE between women who wear make up and men who think they look like women who wearing make up.. Beside the guy says he nonconformist on his identity, he doesn’t know what he is and until he does, he needs to look like the person he is for his license… a guy.” So…do women who aren’t wearing make-up look like men? Why does it matter why people wear make-up? Have you ever thought that a person can wear make-up because they like to? Saying you’re nonconformist is not the same as saying you don’t know who you are. Some people just simply don’t conform.
The last commenter said “The kid should have just followed the DMV’s rules….gays are so loud and rude these days I really sympathize with the dmv…” How is it rude to say “I wasn’t treated fairly”? And, one last time, gender is not sexuality. Maybe they are gay, but that’s not really the issue here.
All of these videos were simply related to gender nonconforming children living their lives. Not a single one of them was harming anyone. None of them were forcing their views on anyone. They weren’t oppressing anyone. And yet a good half of the comments on those videos were people bitching about how trans* people shouldn’t be allowed to be themselves. And a number of those people, while they self-righteously declared that these children should be oppressed, acted as if their rights are somehow being taken away. Just because other people are given the right to do something that you can already do, doesn’t mean you’re losing any rights. And just because something is legal doesn’t mean you have to do it. You don’t have the right to force your opinions on others. Don’t like the fact that transgender people transition? Don’t transition. But don’t force your own beliefs about transitioning down their throat. If you think they’re going to go to hell for it, oh well, it’s still their choice. To quote a friend of mine, “fucking cis people.”

Why Are People So Concerned About Gender NonConforming Children? Part 2


The next video I watched was dateline type show about gender nonconforming children. The first comment I came across on that video said “‘if you say you’re a woman, you’re a woman’ – I completely disagree with that… saying so simply does not make you one neither does getting a transplant and taking steroids. women reproduce and men can’t so no matter how much you change up your body you will always be what you were born as. that being said, people have the right to do what they want with themselves once it doesn’t affect others negatively because its THEIR LIVES…we may not always accept something but we sometimes need to learn to mind our business, stop being judgemental and move forward in our own lives because we all have dirty hands and skeletons in our closets.” Wait…men can’t reproduce? You mean sperm is useless? Then where does genetic variance come from? And why are there men? Oh wait, you mean men can’t get pregnant. So, by your definition, anyone who can’t get pregnant is a man. That means that women who are infertile are men. And any woman who has gone through menopause was a woman but is now a man. Also, “man” and “woman” are gender terms, not sex terms. If reproduction was tied to our sex, which, as it turns out, it’s not, it would mean that females, not women, can give birth.
The next comment said “Someone should put an end to these freaks…Btw, I’m a candy bar, because I say so.” Lovely. So anyone that you deem abnormal should be killed. People really need to stop comparing gender nonconformity with random shit. Gender is complicated. It’s the result of our genetic make-up, our hormones, and our environment. It is not unreasonable to think that a person could be biologically female buy identify as a man. But we don’t have any chocolate bar DNA in us. We don’t have hormones in us that can cause us to identify as a chocolate bar. But if you want to be a chocolate bar, go for it. Just don’t stand in the chocolate bar isle and try to convince people to buy you: that would probably get you arrested.
The next commenter said “I don’t see a problem with this….. HE IS A DUDE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Be gay all day but you don’t pretend you are a different sex. As soon as everyone can support me in my feeling that I am your king and do what I say I will support you thinking you are something that you are not.” I really don’t get why this concept is so hard: sex isn’t gender. A.K.A your penis doesn’t make you a man. Your brain does. Your penis just makes you male (kind of, it’s more complicated than this, but this is already a really long post). And, yet again, sexuality also isn’t gender. Wearing make-up does not make one attracted to boys. Again, comparing apples to oranges isn’t helpful, it just makes you look stupid.
This next comment is not malicious at all, but it shows a lot of ignorance. The commenter said “I don’t understand transgenders…like, why do they exist? Can someone pls explain?” I know how you feel: I don’t really understand cis (gender conforming) people. Like, I get why you exist, but…I don’t understand how you can live like that. Your lives must be so…boring! Again, it’s not “transgenders,” people. They are humans first and foremost. Why do they exist? Because genetics and hormones aren’t perfect. But mostly because we live in a society that insists on trying to fit us all into neatly labelled boxes.
Another commenter said “I feel for these kids I really do, these kids don’t need to be trans they need Jesus.” This isn’t a case of what the kids need. This is a case of who they are. The didn’t decide to be trans. And religion won’t change who they are. In fact, religion just seems to be good at killing off trans people faster.
This comment is another one simply born out of ignorance: “I was a gender nonconforming child, but once puberty hit I changed. Not all transgendered children will go on to be transexual in adulthood.” Yes, some gender nonconforming children grow up to be cis adults. But being gender nonconforming does not make you transgender. And transexual is generally seen as derogatory. Some transgender people call themselves transexual, but it’s generally considered something that they call call themselves but that other people shouldn’t call them. And “transgendered” isn’t a word. Transgender is a noun, not a verb. You don’t do transgender, you are transgender.
The next commenter said “Idiot Parents!!!!! Children should not have that decision until their 18.” What decision? The decision to wear what they want? A lot of people are under the impression that parents of trans kids whisk them off to have surgery the second they find out their kid is trans. It doesn’t work like that. Even trans adults aren’t able to just up and have surgery. First the parent has to take the kid to a therapist to be diagnosed as having gender dysphoria. Once the kid is diagnosed, then it’s possible for them to start taking hormone blockers come puberty. However, hormone blockers don’t come until puberty. Kids under the age of 11-12 don’t do anything more than wear the close they like and get their preferred haircuts. Why shouldn’t they be allowed to do that? Puberty blockers simply postpone puberty. They prevent the child from going through the wrong puberty. They are completely reversible and they prevent unnecessary future surgeries as well as emotional pain caused by going through something that the kids find distressing. Later on, around 16-18, they can start taking hormones that allow them to go through the correct puberty. These drugs aren’t given to younger children because they aren’t as easily reversible. These hormones can cause infertility and certain other permanent changes, but they are more easily reversed than surgeries are. The surgeries, if they are desired, come last. They can’t be done until the age of 18 (except in extreme circumstances). For people who took the hormone blockers, very little surgery is required. But without the hormone blockers, the required surgeries can be quite extensive and even dangerous (such as having the adam’s apple shaved). Can any of that really be said to be irresponsible?
The next commenter said “The amount of positive reinforcement the mother gives the child at 7:15 is disturbing. Trans children should be observed, not encouraged or dis-encouraged. Neutrality is what she should be showing.” So trans children should be treated as nothing more than lab rats? Giving them positive reinforcement doesn’t mean forcing them to do something. Being encouraged to be ones self doesn’t mean that one can never change. Gender is not something you can force on someone. They will be who they are regardless of how supportive or unsupportive you are, and encouraging them will not stop them from changing if they change.

I came across this gem next: “Ur stupid for say kids just wanna be homo. There kids they don’t know about sex. They know who they r n we need to support them.” This comment is supportive of the gender nonconforming children, but it is still problematic. Homo, like transexual, is a derogatory term. Kids may not know about sex, but their sexualities are in fact developed. This isn’t to say that sexuality can never change, but, for the most part, if a person is homosexual they have been since they were about 3.
The next person said “This is a sick abomination! This will only bring the judgement of God, these kids are obviously demon possessed and were probably sexually abused! Gods word is clear about this.” So anyone who doesn’t fit in to societal expectations must be possessed by a demon? And a sexually abused demon at that. Couldn’t a demon just burn anyone who tried to abuse them? Or make their insides explode or something? Why would your god even care about gender nonconformity in children? Doesn’t he have more important things to worry about? Like starvation and disease?
At this point I think I may have lost all faith in humanity. This next person said “Go get your heads looked at I wouldn’t let them have a surgery so that they could see who they really are.” So…it’s better that a person hide who they are than it is for them to have surgery to be happy with themselves? How…open-minded of you.
Then I came across this: “Don’t encourage this shit its not right.” What exactly would you propose we do? Should we send gender nonconforming children into the woods? Or maybe you’d prefer we set up a noose in their closet. After all, suicide rates are higher among gender nonconforming youth. You must think that death is best for them if you are against methods that help them.
This next comment is very rambley: “in a way transsexuals piss people off but what if a boy who naturally looked female aka Justin bieber. stays a male. just like Justin bieber whos trying to please people by being a male is not good enough for people. everyone wished Justin bieber dead even before his attitude change. they said he was a fag even though he dated girls. people wished death on him. so what if Justin bieber changed into a girl he would of been a pretty girl and people would hate him less. if a transsexual child didn’t tell anyone they were trans they would live happy the people around them would be happy but society says transsexuals need to tell people they are trans. why? so world war 3 can break out between haters and transsexuals? the males would beat the person up or perhaps kill them. it would bring anger out in many people. some things are best kept a secret and its no ones fucking business if a boy feels like a girl and lives that way. he or she isn’t hurting people or killing people. they aren’t stealing or raping. they are just being themselves and its become a crime for transsexuals to be themselves. people are more angry with transexualism than killers and rapists.” This is another comment that is meant to be supportive, but there is a lot of misunderstanding in it. Looking female is not the same as being trans. Justin Bieber doesn’t identify as male because he’s trying to please anyone. He’s male because he happened to be born with the right anatomy to be labelled as such. People don’t like Justin Bieber for many different reasons. Yes, some people are ignorant enough to hate him for looking feminine, but that isn’t the only reason people dislike him. People would not accept Bieber more if he had a sex change. In fact, he’d likely be treated worse. No, if a child who is trans didn’t tell anyone they would not be happier. In fact, they’d be far more likely to commit suicide. They’d become depressed because they were forced to hide who they are from the world. It isn’t healthy. It’s not society that tells trans people to come out as trans. Trans people are telling society that they cannot live their lives in a closet. They can’t hide who they are. You’re right, it is no ones business how another person identifies, but keeping who they are a secret isn’t healthy. They shouldn’t be forced to hide, they should be accepted for who they are.
Another person said “The girl boy with the glasses was already ugly either way why cut your hair.” The kid they’re referring to was 6 or 7. How is this at all appropriate to say of a child that young? And they are a boy, not a girl boy.

Why Are People So Concerned About Gender NonConforming Children? Part 1


Lately there has been a lot of focus on one of the Jolie-Pitt kids. I keep coming across articles about how “Shiloh wants to be a boy.” I have to say, I’m quite annoyed by all this focus. For one, this kid hasn’t signed up to be a celebrity, only their parents have. Celebrity kids should be allowed to be kids. For another, none of these articles quote Jolie-Pitt (I’ll stick with using their last name for convenience sake), they only quote Brad and Angelina. Maybe their child has said that they want to be a boy, but until Jolie-Pitt comes forth and publicly states their gender, that’s their business. And, if Jolie-Pitt has come out and said that they are a boy, then they don’t want to be a boy, they are a boy. But what annoyed me the most has nothing to do with the actual news coverage: it was the comments that really bothered me. I was going to do a post discussing societies obsession with gender nonconforming children, but I decided I’d go through some of the comments I’ve found on various YouTube videos. After all, there are a ton of articles and posts out there about society’s issu with gender nonconformity and why the perception of gender nonconformity as wrong needs to change. But, by focusing on people’s comments, I can actually show what’s wrong with saying certain things and how we can better discuss gender nonconformity. Most of these comments are mean spirited and meant to be insulting, but some are simply born out of ignorance.
The first video I watched was from the show What Would You Do. This episode was about children wanting to dress up in costumes meant for children of the opposite gender. This was the first insulting comment I came across: “(mom):what are you going to be for Halloween? (son): I want to be a nine year old dressed as a 20+ year old woman that nearly got raped by a beast mommy! (mom): >:O the fuck is wrong with you better not want me to let you get surgery so you can cut your dick off a get it replaced by a hole!…WHY CAN’T PEOPLE USE THERE COMMON SENSE STOP LETTING YOUR CHILDREN WATCH AND USE MATERIALS OF THE OPPOSITE SEX OF THE OPPOSITE SEX! If its a BOY get BOY content for him. If its a girl get girl content for her. Children’s minds are still developing don’t ruin it show them their category not another category! The world needs Jesus, you need Jesus, I need Jesus, this mom needs Jesus, and this boy needs jesus. Give it to him straight don’t curve the lines.” This commenter is suggesting that if a child wants to dress in what is generally considered a girls costume then he’s automatically going to go for something inappropriate. The kid wanted to be a princess. Yes, he chose Bell. Given that Beauty and the Beast is a Disney film, I think it’s safe to say that Bell wasn’t nearly raped. Yes, there are problems with the Disney princesses, but the rest of this comment suggests that the commenter would not be concerned if it were a nine year old girl who wanted to dress up like a “20+ year old woman (most of the Disney princesses are actually around 16) that nearly got raped by a beast.” What exactly is boy content? What is the definition of boy content? People assume that children can’t know who they are or what they like simply because they’re young. This is a silly notion. We were all kids once. We may not like the same things now that we did back then, but does that really make our love for our favourite toy/show/friend less genuine? What does Jesus have to do with any of this? We’re talking about Halloween, not church.
The next comment I came across says “Eww weird as shit. Girls like dresses, Not boys. All you weird asses in the comment section smh, I’m raising my kid right at least. Sexual orientation is solely based on how you raise your kid.” Who says that only girls like dresses? Because the fact that there are boys out there who claim to like dresses suggests otherwise. What does it mean to raise kids right? Does it mean suppressing who they are because who they are makes you uncomfortable? If not, then forcing these children be someone their not is not raising them right. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with how you raise your children. It also has nothing to do with gender. These children are gender nonconforming. Their sexuality is irrelevant to the discussion.
The next commenter said “I honestly don’t think this is good. I mean, yea it’s fine if he wants to be a princess a guess, but, this is (I’m sure) kinda saying it’s ok to be a woman when your a man….now, don’t get me wrong, I’m fine with gays, but, if more and more children think like this, the more likely they might grow up to be gay. If that happens, America might start depopulating rapidly.(even though we kinda need to.)” I suppose then that it’s a good thing that facts aren’t based on what you “honestly think” is good. What’s wrong with being a woman? Though, we’re talking about children. They weren’t men or women, they were kids. And they said nothing about wanting to be the other gender, they just wanted to get costumes. There’s a difference between gender identity and gender expression. Not everyone who’s gender nonconforming is transgender. And once again, gender identity is not the same as sexuality. It is possible to be gender non-conforming and straight. But, even if they were the same thing, you can’t just make someone gay by putting a dress on them.
Another commenter said “I’ll be honest, I’m not against transgenders or anything, but if my son was that age or a little older and wanted to get a princess costume, I can say I wouldn’t let him. Not because I have a problem with it, but I know he would get bullied and ridiculed for it, especially kids at school. Not only that if it is only a phase, for years after he would still be teased because of it. I would only be looking out for him, instead of giving bullies fire power to torment him.” Again, these kids were buying costumes. They said nothing about wanting to be (or being) the opposite gender. Wanting to wear a dress if you’re a boy or a Spider-Man costume if you’re a girl doesn’t make you transgender. And you shouldn’t refer to people as “transgenders.” Wording like that removes the person’s humanity. They are a person who is transgender, they are not “transgenders.” Forcing a kid to fit in to stereotypical gender roles is giving in to bullies. You’re victim-blaming: you’re saying that a child who doesn’t conform is responsible for being bullied, and they should be responsible for stopping the bullying that they are subjected to. If you want to stop bullying, teach kids not to bully.
This idea that gender nonconforming children are responsible for the bullying that they suffer is reinforced by another commenter: “Letting him wear a princess costume, is the same as letting him getting bullied. He is a just a kid, you are not suppose to give kids everything they want. If in the end they turn out gay, it doesn’t matter, at least he can’t not say it was your fault for choosing for him. Everyone has the right to decide his or her own destiny the older they get.” No, letting your child wear what they like is not letting them get bullied. Standing there and saying “well he shouldn’t have been wearing a dress” is letting him get bullied. Children need to learn that bullying is wrong. Unfortunately, children watch adults abuse those who don’t conform to gender stereotypes. It’s the behaviour of adults that teaches kids that bullying is okay. And excusing the bullying as “kids being kids” reinforces it. Letting a kid be happy is not giving them everything they ant. You can let your child wear what they want and still have a set bedtime. Again, and I’m going to keep saying it, because people don’t seem to get it, gender identity is not sexuality. They are different.

The second video I watched was another What Would You Do clip. In this video, a girl who was transgender was harassed by her unsupportive father while looking for a prom dress. The first commenter that I came across said “Are you fucking kidding me? FUCK EVERYONE WHO AGREES WITH CHANGING THE GENDER…what’s wrong with people these days???? You agree to be a faggot??? What the fuck? If you are born to be a male or female then why you want to change your gender??? For what fucking reason? You feel that inside???? You feel full of shit inside because everyone who thinks like that has a fucking weak personality and absolutely is mentally sick I couldn’t even continue watching this disgusting video.” You can’t agree to be homosexual. Seriously, everyone who thinks you can, change your sexuality right now. Can you do it? And once again, this person is transgender. Their sexuality was never revealed. You can be trans and straight. Male and female are not genders, they are sexes. You can be physically male and be a woman. The idea of changing ones gender is problematic. This girl is a girl. She was a girl before she began transitioning. She’s not changing her gender. She may, however, eventually change her sex. So…because you yourself feel like the gender you were assigned at birth is correct for you, everyone you doesn’t feel like the gender they were assigned is right for them must be full of shit. Okay then.
The next comment I came across said “You want to support homosexual? fine. You want to support trans people? fine. you want to support all identity? fine. But I can FUCKING promise you these same people would not support bestiality because….oh you know….its disgusting.” Because two (or more) consenting adults are totally the same as someone have sex with an animal.
The next person said “There is no such thing as transgender, just ‘an extreme drag queen.'” Says who? Who are you to dismiss someone’s identity? A person who identifies as transgender feels that they are actually the opposite gender from the one they were assigned at birth. Drag is a performance art. Most drag queens identify with the gender they were assigned at birth. They are simply performers.

%d bloggers like this: