|
Transgender – The Inability To Distinguish Facts From Wishes
Matt Taibbi opines on the latest piece of transgender nonsense:
The Dumbest Cover Story Ever – Racket News, Mar 13 2024
New York Magazine's "Freedom of Sex" is the ultimate example of the lunatic nihilism that's consumed America's intellectual class
New York Magazine has a new cover story, by the trans writer Andrea Long Chu: “The moral case for letting trans kids change their bodies.” A jeremiad in support of the idea that children must have absolute political agency, it makes the Unabomber manifesto read like a Shakespeare sonnet. The money passage:
We must be prepared to defend the idea that, in principle, everyone should have access to sex-changing medical care, regardless of age, gender identity, social environment, or psychiatric history.
A lot of the piece is standard-issue woe-is-me fuck-everything cartoon nihilism you’d hear from any laptop-class liberal arts product, arguing for a generalized smashing of the patriarchy, among other things by attacking the biological conspiracy to produce those units of material labor value known as babies. Complete abolition of norms would be an “impossible task,” Chu notes sadly, but that doesn’t preclude their “collective reimagining” by an alliance of intersectional victims working toward a Marxian paradise free of “oppressive systems,” which of course include the nuclear family.
The nihilism Taibbi points to is also the major theme the French anthropologist Emmanuel Todd takes on in his book "The Defeat of the West".
From its New York Times review:
This Prophetic Academic Now Foresees the West’s Defeat (archived) – New York Times, Mar 9 2024
American leadership is failing: That is the argument of an eccentric new book that since January has stood near the top of France’s best-seller lists. It is called “La Défaite de l’Occident” (“The Defeat of the West”). Its author, Emmanuel Todd, is a celebrated historian and anthropologist who in 1976, in a book called “The Final Fall,” used infant-mortality statistics to predict that the Soviet Union was headed for collapse.
…
Mr. Todd is not a moralizer. But he insists that traditional cultures have a lot to fear from the West’s various progressive leanings and may resist allying themselves on foreign policy with those who espouse them. In a similar way, during the Cold War, the Soviet Union’s official atheism was a deal-breaker for many people who might otherwise have been well disposed toward Communism.
…
Mr. Todd does believe that certain of our values are “deeply negative.” He presents evidence that the West does not value the lives of its young. Infant mortality, the telltale metric that led him to predict the Soviet collapse half a century ago, is higher in Mr. Biden’s America (5.4 per thousand) than in Mr. Putin’s Russia — and three times higher than in the Japan of Prime Minister Fumio Kishida.
While Mr. Todd is, again, not judgmental on sexual matters, he is judgmental on intellectual ones. The inability to distinguish facts from wishes astounds him at every turn of the Ukraine war. The American hope early in the war that China might cooperate in a sanctions regime against Russia, thereby helping the United States refine a weapon that would one day be aimed at China itself, is, for Mr. Todd, a “delirium.”
Back in January Todd expanded on the inability of distinguishing facts from fiction, which is also the basis of trans-genderism, during an interview with Le Figaro. From its English translation:
Q: Over time, haven't you become a bit of a reactionary?
I was brought up by a grandmother who told me that, sexually speaking, all tastes are part of nature, and I'm faithful to my ancestors. So, LGB, welcome. For T, the trans issue is something else. The individuals concerned must of course be protected. But the fixation of the Western middle classes on this ultra-minority issue raises a sociological and historical question. To establish as a social horizon the idea that a man can really become a woman and a woman a man is to assert something that is biologically impossible, it is to deny the reality of the world, it is to assert the false.
Trans ideology is therefore, in my opinion, one of the flags of this nihilism that now defines the West, this drive to destroy not just things and people but reality. But, once again, I am in no way overwhelmed here by indignation or emotion. This ideology exists and I have to integrate it into a historical model. In the age of the metaverse, I can't say whether my attachment to reality makes me a reactionary.
The intentional denial of reality, as it is currently practiced in the West, is not a new phenomenon. It is the basis of neo-conservatism from where it has crept over to the progressive side.
As Ron Susskind wrote in his portrait of the first years of the Bush junior presidency:
Faith, Certainty And The Presidency Of George W. Bush (archived) – Ron Susskind / New York Times, Oct 17 2004
The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore." He continued "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors … and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
Karl Rove, the Bush advisor Susskind had quoted, displayed the same lunatic nihilism that is represented by those who argue that children, teenagers or people generally should can freely chose their gender. It is an attempt of "creating other new realities". It represents a total denial of actual reality and of the common values derived from it. The Bush administration failed in its endeavor to create new realities in Iraq. The current regime in the West will fail likewise with regime change in Russia. So will others who deny realities.
The author of the Todd book review, Christopher Caldwell, adds:
Fighting a war based on values requires good values. At a bare minimum it requires an agreement on the values being spread, and the United States is further from such agreement than it has ever been in its history — further, even, than it was on the eve of the Civil War. At times it seems there are no national principles, only partisan ones, with each side convinced that the other is trying not just to run the government but also to capture the state.
I see a very similar denial of reality, followed by nihilism and a lack of values, at the top of the current European leadership. The loss of the common view of things is splitting societies on both sides of the Atlantic.
However, with regards to transgenderism, some sense of reality is still trying to survive:
National Health Service England stops prescribing puberty blockers, citing 'not enough evidence' – USA Today. Mar 13 2024
"We have concluded that there is not enough evidence to support the safety or clinical effectiveness of (puberty suppressing hormones) to make the treatment routinely available at this time," the publication by NHS England stated.
Puberty is a natural process which often includes a temporary confusion about ones identity. Blocking a kids puberty to further some ephemeral confusion some may have during those time is in my view criminal.
I even agree with Rishi Sunack on this:
U.K. prime minister on gender: ‘A man is a man and a woman is a woman’ – Washington Post, Oct 5 2023
British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak asserted his stance on gender identity in a speech Wednesday, stating it was “common sense” that “a man is a man and a woman is a woman” — a remark that sparked criticism from transgender rights activists and elicited fervent applause from attendees of the Conservative Party Conference.
I see myself, just like Matt Taibbi seems to see himself, as a progressive striving for a society based on some form of socialism and justice.
To then find myself on the same side of an issue as some staunch conservatives, and getting attacked for it, is mildly disturbing.
Is it really impossible to be reality based and on the left side of things?
Many insightful comments here. How is this related to imperialist slaughter, theft and genocide?
Below are some related items, historical context around the class politics of identity and the class politics of what is the state.
“Events are the real dialectics of history.”
Antonio Gramsci
—
The CIA & the Frankfurt School
Foundations of the Global Theory Industry
Frankfurt School critical theory has been—along with French theory—one of the hottest commodities of the global theory industry. Together, they serve as the common source for so many of the trend-setting forms of theoretical critique that currently dominate the academic market in the capitalist world, from postcolonial and decolonial theory to queer theory, Afro-pessimism and beyond. The Frankfurt School’s political orientation has therefore had a foundational effect on the globalized Western intelligentsia…
What the Frankfurt School had to offer the bread givers of “the shackling society” was nowise insignificant. Mobilizing pseudo-dialectical sophistry, they defended in highfalutin academic language the State Department line that communism is indistinguishable from fascism, even though 27 million Soviets had given their lives to defeat the Nazi war machine in WWII (to mention but one of the most blatant forms of opposition between communism and fascism, although there are of course many others since they are mortal enemies). Moreover, by displacing class struggle in favor of an idealist critical theory severed from practical political engagements, they shifted the very foundations of analysis away from historical materialism toward a generalized theoretical critique of domination, power, and identity thinking.
Adorno and Horkheimer thus ultimately played the role of radical recuperators. Cultivating an appearance of radicality, they recuperated the very activity of critique within a pro-Western, anti-communist ideology. Like other members of the petty-bourgeois intelligentsia in Europe and the United States, which formed the basis of Western Marxism, they publicly expressed their social-chauvinistic disgust with what they described as the savage barbarians in the East, who dared to take up the weapon of Marxist theory à la Lenin and use it to act on the principle that they could rule themselves. From the relative comforts of their capitalist-funded professorial citadel in the West, they defended the superiority of the Euro-American world that promoted them against what they referred to as the levelling project of the bolshevized barbarians in the uncivilized periphery.
Furthermore, their generalized critique of domination is part of a larger embrace of an anti-party and anti-state ideology, which ultimately leaves the Left bereft of the tools of disciplined organization necessary to wage successful struggles against the well-funded political, military and cultural apparatus of the capitalist ruling class. This is perfectly in line with their overall politics of defeat, which Adorno explicitly embraced through his anti-Marxist defense of inaction as the highest form of praxis. The leaders of the Tui Academy in Frankfurt, amply funded and supported by the capitalist ruling class and imperialist states, including the U.S. national security state, were thus ultimately global spokesmen for an anti-communist politics of capitalist accommodation. Wringing their hands at the infelicities of consumer society, which they sometimes described in remarkable detail, they nonetheless refused to do anything practical about them because of the bedrock assumption that the socialist cure to such misfortunes is much worse than the disease itself. Gabriel Rockhill 2022
~~
ZD: How do you understand the role and function of identity politics and multiculturalism, which are currently prevalent in the Western left?
GR: Identity politics, like the multiculturalism affiliated with it, is a contemporary manifestation of the culturalism and essentialism that have long characterized bourgeois ideology. The latter seeks to naturalize social and economic relations that are the consequence of the material history of capitalism. Rather than recognizing, for instance, that racial, national, ethnic, gender, sexual, and other forms of identity are historical constructs that have varied over time and result from specific material forces, these are naturalized and treated as an unquestionable foundation for political constituencies. Such essentialism serves to obscure the material forces operative behind these identities, as well as the class struggles that have been waged around them. This has been particularly useful to the ruling class and its managers as they have been forced to react to the demands of decolonization and of materialist antiracist and antipatriarchal struggles. How better to respond than with an essentializing identity politics that proposes false solutions to very real problems because it never addresses the material basis of colonization, racism, and gender oppression?
The self-proclaimed anti-essentialist versions of identity politics operative in the work of theorists like Judith Butler do not fundamentally break with this ideology. In purporting to deconstruct some of these categories by revealing them as discursive constructs that individuals or groups of individuals can question, play with, and re-perform, theorists working within the idealist parameters of deconstruction never provide a materialist and dialectical analysis of the history of the capitalist social relations that have produced these categories as major sites of collective class struggle. They also do not engage in the deep history of actually existing socialism’s fight collectively to transform these relations. Instead, they tend to draw on deconstruction and a practically dehistoricized version of Foucauldian genealogy to think about gender and sexual relations discursively, and they are at best oriented toward a liberal pluralism in which class struggle is replaced by interest-group advocacy.
By contrast, the Marxist tradition—as Domenico Losurdo has demonstrated in his magisterial work Class Struggle—has a profound and rich history of understanding class struggle in the plural. This means that it includes battles over the relationship between genders, nations, races, and economic classes (and, we could add, sexualities). Since these categories have taken on very specific hierarchical forms under capitalism, the best elements of the Marxist heritage have sought to both understand their historical provenance and radically transform them. This can be seen in the longstanding struggle against the domestic slavery imposed upon women, as well as the battle to overcome the imperialist subordination of nations and their racialized peoples. This history has played itself out in fits and starts, of course, and there is still much work to be done, in part because certain strains of Marxism—such as that of the Second International—have been tainted by elements of bourgeois ideology. Nevertheless, as scholars like Losurdo and others have demonstrated with remarkable erudition, the communists have been at the vanguard of these class struggles to overcome patriarchal domination, imperialist subordination, and racism by going to the very roots of these problems: capitalist social relations.
Identity politics, as it has developed in the leading imperialist countries and particularly the United States, has sought to bury this history in order to present itself as a radically new form of consciousness, as if communists had not so much as thought of the woman question or the national/racial question. Theorists of identity politics thus tend to assert arrogantly and benightedly that they are the first ones to address these issues, thereby overcoming an imagined economic determinism on the part of the so-called vulgar reductionist Marxists. Instead of recognizing these issues as sites of class struggle, moreover, they tend to use identity politics as a wedge against class politics. If they do make any gesture toward integrating class into their analysis, they generally reduce it to a question of personal identity, rather than a structural property relation. The solutions that they put forth therefore tend to be epiphenomenal, meaning that they focus on issues of representation and symbolism, rather than, for instance, overcoming the labor relations of domestic slavery and racialized superexploitation through a socialist transformation of the socioeconomic order. They are thereby incapable of leading to significant and sustainable change because they do not go to the root of the problem. As Adolph Reed Jr. has often argued with his signature biting wit, identitarians are perfectly happy to maintain extant class relations—including imperialist relations between nations, I would add—on the condition that there is the requisite ratio of representation of oppressed groups within the ruling class and the professional managerial stratum.
In addition to helping displace class politics and analysis within the Western left, identity politics has made a major contribution to dividing the left itself into siloed debates around specific identity issues. Instead of class unity against a common enemy, it divides—and conquers—working and oppressed people by encouraging them to identify first and foremost as members of specific genders, sexualities, races, nations, ethnicities, religious groups, and so forth. In this regard, the ideology of identity politics actually is, at a much deeper level, a class politics. It is the politics of a bourgeoisie aimed at dividing the working and oppressed peoples of the world in order to more easily rule over them. It should come as no surprise, then, that it is the governing politics of the professional managerial class stratum in the imperial core. It dominates its institutions and informational outlets, and it is one of the primary mechanisms for career advancement within what Reed insightfully calls “the diversity industry.” It encourages everyone involved to identify with their specific group and advance their own individual interests by posing as its privileged representative. We should note, moreover, that wokeism also has the effect of driving some people into the arms of the right. If the dominant political culture encourages a clan mentality combined with competitive individualism, then it is unsurprising that white people and men have also—as a partial response to their perceived disenfranchisement by the diversity industry—advanced their particular agendas as “victims” of the system. Identity politics devoid of a class analysis is thus absolutely amenable to right-wing and even fascist permutations.
Finally, I would be remiss not to mention that identity politics, which has its recent ideological roots in the New Left and the social chauvinism V. I. Lenin had earlier diagnosed in the European left, is one of the principal ideological tools of imperialism. The divide-and-conquer strategy has been used to splinter targeted countries by fostering religious, ethnic, national, racial, or gender conflicts. Identity politics has also served as a direct justification for imperialist intervention and meddling, as well as destabilization campaigns, if it be the purported causes of liberating women in Afghanistan, supporting Black rappers “discriminated” against in Cuba, backing purportedly “ecosocialist” Indigenous candidates in Latin America, “protecting” ethnic minorities in China, or other such well-known propaganda operations in which the U.S. empire presents itself as the benevolent benefactor of oppressed identities. Here we can clearly see the complete disconnect between the purely symbolic politics of identity and the material reality of class struggles insofar as the former can—and does—provide thin cover for imperialism. At this level as well, then, identity politics is ultimately a class politics: a politics of the imperialist ruling class.
“Imperialist Propaganda and the Ideology of the Western Left Intelligentsia”
Interview with Gabriel,Rockhill 2023
Posted by: suzan | Mar 14 2024 18:33 utc | 203
The trans cult is obviously a top down agenda, not a freedom movement of a few plucky and brave cross dressers. No actual freedom movement gets the support of the entire Establishment. No rational person is allowed to confront it, on pain of harassment or the loss of a job. Now they are trying to make calling someone by the pronoun in English that conforms with the actual biological sex of the person referred to, illegal. There are already fines in progress, but they are pushing for actual jail time now.
How is it possible that anyone can look at the lockstep adoption of the narrative by the government, including the courts, the military, the police and the prisons, the media, including conservative media like the NY Post and Daily Mail, which also conform to calling obvious men “she”, as ordered, even if the charge is raping a child, the schools and universities, the libraries, the medical-industrial complex, especially Big Pharma the corporations, social media and NGOs, the scientific establishment, and fail to see the agenda
How can people look at the top down enforcement of allowing men to push their way into women’s spaces, sports, prisons, prison cells, bathrooms, locker rooms, rape centers and domestic violence shelters, and still confidently channel the top down narrative that “these are the Most Oppressed People Ever”? (MOPEs)
Midwives have been kicked out of their organizations for refusing to call women “birthing bodies”. (Which you will see used in every official publication about pregnant women.)
La Leche League now includes the term “chest feeding”. Their motto used to be “The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding”!!
Only a powerful ruling class could force such turn arounds.
Of course this is not Marxism. Forcing people to deny the evidence of their eyes and ears, as Orwell pointed out, is the final and most oppressive act of the ruling class. Sure, they call it Marxism, but that is part of the agenda.
Marx was firm on his opposition to the idealism that claimed that human thoughts created reality, pointing out that it is reality that creates human thought, instead.
The people who cry crocodile tears over the horrible plight of the MOPEs, and denounce those who refuse to obey the dictates to conform to Unreality, are doing the bidding of their rulers. How ironic that they claim the mantel of progressivism or even Marxism, as their justification! Talk about confused.
And “Science ™” has once again followed the money, instead of the science, pumping out complete bullshit about sex for journals for the masses.
There is no such thing as a third or fourth sex. No one is born born male and female, or neither. That is absurd.
“”Sex is biological and 99.98 percent of humans are either straight up male or female with no ambiguities. It’s determined at conception and fertilization, and is observable in every cell, every system, all our hormones, every organ, and in our entire biology. Sex is not assigned, it’s observed as a physical, material, and biological fact. Ultimately it’s all about the gametes. If you produce sperm you are male. If you produce ova you are female. No human was ever born without the haploid contribution of both male and female gametes.
And as regards intersex, this occurs in about 0.017 percent of humans and every case is a disorder of sexual development of either a male or a female. We have a ton of good data and the DSD categories are well understood genetically. These are the six biological karyotype sex disorders that do not result in immediate death to the fetus:
X – Roughly 1 in 2,000 to 1 in 5,000 people (Turner’s )
XX – Most common form of female
XXY – Roughly 1 in 500 to 1 in 1,000 people (Klinefelter)
XY – Most common form of male
XYY – Roughly 1 out of 1,000 people
XXXY – Roughly 1 in 18,000 to 1 in 50,000 births
“If you are 46, XX, you are female. If you are 45, XO, you are still female, but with Turner syndrome. 47 XXX, 48XXXX and 49XXXXX, aren’t a spectrum of femaleness, they are classified as female chromosomal disorders. If you are 46, XY, you are male. If you are 47, XXY, you are male, but with Kleinfelter syndrome. If you are 48, XXYY, you are male, but with XXYY syndrome. 48,XXXY, 49,XXXXY. All are still male. These aren’t on a spectrum – they are categorized as male genetic disorders. They aren’t considered intersex conditions, but a lot of trans activists like to claim they are.
If someone had trisonomy 21, we don’t say they are on a human spectrum of any sort, we classify them as having Down syndrome.
Intersex conditions by themselves can exist in a spectrum, but only in relation to the severity of that specific condition. But even over that spectrum they have clearly defined categories. Androgen insensitivity syndrome is someone who is genetically male, but their reproductive organs don’t masculinize. It has 3 categories of severity.
There is no spectrum gradient between male and male with androgen insensitivity syndrome. These are clearly defined categories. There is no spectrum gradient between female and androgen insensitivity syndrome. You are either in the category female or category male with androgen insensitivity syndrome. There is no spectrum gradient between having an intersex condition and not.
If you have all the typical indicators of your sex, you are that sex, you are in that category. If you are born with the number and type of sex chromosomes off from your external genitalia, with unmatching or mixed type of gonads, with ambiguous internal reproductive anatomy; and/or ambiguous external genitalia, then you are in the intersex category. There is NO spectrum gradient or overlap between being typical male and having an intersex condition.”
Bottom line: Intersex is a specific set of individual genetic disorders of sexual development – not a third sex or a collection of different sexes.”
Two last points. One: Puberty blockers are actually approved to be used for elderly men with prostate cancer. They are used off-label on children to stop normal growth and development. Remember when the same media that calls giving children cancer drugs off-label “life saving medical care” told us that using other drugs off-label for covid was “dangerous and harmful”? Yeah, that.
Two: To use the language of the befuddled, it shows their “privilege” when they say the trans agenda hurts no one. Clearly, they are not a woman in prison, forced to bunk with a violent man, or afraid to let their children come on Visitor’s Day because the authorities have placed a child abuser in their prison.
They cannot empathize with a rape victim, forced to tell the details of her rape to a male fetishist in drag. They aren’t a domestic violence victim, forced to share a room with a male, even though they are terrified of men at that point. They aren’t a female athlete, forced to share a locker room with a naked man, or to compete against him in sports, which includes losing a potential scholarship.
No. the Just Be Kind people are privileged people, unable to understand the feelings of actual oppressed people, admonishing them to go out and talk to a trans, and then they will understand how important it is to cater to male fantasies and demands.
Posted by: wagelaborer | Mar 14 2024 23:28 utc | 289
|
