📘 2+2=4 Vol. 5: Pride (Month) and Prejudice
On being done with "preferred pronouns", how the gay movement has been hijacked by trans activism and why white working-class men suffer.
In his Summa Theologica, Saint Thomas Aquinas – a very influential 13th century philosopher and Catholic theologian – pondered about the nature of morality and law, the cardinal virtues and the seven deadly sins. About one (arguably even the deadliest) of these seven sins, Pride, Aquinas wrote: “Pride is opposed to humility. Now humility properly regards the subjection of man to God […] Hence pride properly regards lack of this subjection, in so far as a man raises himself above that which is appointed to him according to the Divine rule or measure…” (Question 162, Art. 5).
As June has been declared “Pride Month” in many Western countries, Thomas Aquinas’ definition of Pride provides some food for thought. What does it actually mean to celebrate the notion of “Pride” outside the realm of politics and activism? Isn’t Pride an expression of our own hubris, a narrowing and self-aggrandizing focus on our own ego, an exaltation of the self? It seems like the postmodern ethos of hyper-individualization and self-obsession doesn’t really allow for ideas like “humility” or “subjection” to a higher force anymore – whether it be God, the universe, karma or simply the concept of a universal morality. Humility, it seems, is out of season. ‘Tis the season of Pride.
#1 Why I’m Done With “Preferred Pronouns”
by Megyn Kelly (The Megyn Kelly Show, published on June 2, 2023)
Send this to everyone you know. Megyn Kelly’s opening monologue from her June 2 show is probably one of the most powerful, most articulate and most nuanced speeches that you will ever see about the topic of “preferred pronouns” and the overall destructiveness of transgender ideology. By outlining her own journey from a former proponent of using “preferred pronouns” to an avid opponent of it, Kelly touches on a variety of crucial issues that women and children are facing as the transgender movement keeps tearing down one barrier after the other: rising numbers of gender confused children wanting to cut off body parts, female athletes losing out on trans-identifying biological males in sports, the insanity of male sex offenders “identifying as women” and therefore being housed in female prisons, the horror of “gender affirming” surgeries that are nothing short of mutilation, the violence faced by so-called “TERFs”1 trying to defend women-only spaces and, finally, the loss of truth itself. As Kelly closes her monologue citing brandubh’s poem “I am not a dress”, you start to understand that you have just listened to the most important video during this “Month of Pride”.
#2 I fought for gay rights — but trans activists have destroyed the meaning of Pride
by Bruce Bawer (The New York Post, published on June 1, 2023)
As the Anglosphere is awash with Pride flags during the month of June, gay activist Bruce Bawer reflects on the true meaning of the Pride flag and how it has been taken hostage by radical trans activism and big corporations like Disney and Anheuser-Busch, who want to “virtue signal” their way into their customers’ wallets (with little success). Bawer describes the utter alienation most gays and lesbians feel from the LGBTQI+ movement, which now seeks to extinguish the idea of an innate biological sex altogether, thereby effectively erasing concepts such as same-sex attraction (which doesn’t work without the idea of sex). As the trans movement becomes increasingly radicalized, violent and dogmatic, voices like Bawer’s are crucial to remind people that many supposed “LGBTQI+” members are actually not on board with the “TQI+” part of the acronym.
#3 Who is Pride really for?
by Andrew Doyle (The Spectator, published on June 2, 2023)
By recalling the history of the gay rights movement and the origin of Pride, Andrew Doyle – much like Bruce Bawer – criticizes the current iteration of Pride celebrations that embrace gender ideology, propagate the idea that “nature is queer” (whatever that means) and tout the existence of hermaphroditic fish. Slowly but surely, the trans movement has hijacked the gay rights movement as the Pride flag has become the “Progress Pride” flag (including that white-pink-blue-brown-black triangle), LGBT charities like Stonewall have paradoxically turned homophobic (“same-sex attraction” is now “same-gender attraction”, which means nothing) and the Tavistock pediatric clinic has turned gay children into mutilated “trans children” (before it was shut down). Doyle’s conclusion is sobering: Pride today has become “a sham”.
#4 The Truth About ‘Puberty Blockers’
by Gerald Posner (The Wall Street Journal, published on June 7, 2023)
Just a month ago, The Atlantic published an important piece about the “potential” dangers of “gender-affirming care” for transgender youth. This month, The Wall Street Journal has taken it even one step further by openly stating that puberty blockers like Lupron are extremely harmful both for children and adults and have never been approved by the FDA for treating gender dysphoria. Posner outlines the horrible long-term side effects caused by Lupron such as “thinning and brittle bones, teeth that shed enamel or cracked, degenerative spinal disks, painful joints, radical mood swings, seizures, migraines and suicidal thoughts […] fibromyalgia […] fertility problems and cognitive issues.” His article is another hopeful sign that public discourse around gender-affirming care is finally changing.
#5 The betrayal of white working-class men
by Irvine Welsh (UnHerd, published on May 27, 2023)
Who better than Trainspotting author Irvine Welsh to dissect the social prejudice that declares all white men to be privileged patriarchs responsible for the injustices of the world? Using clarity, concision and many curse words, Welsh points out how white working-class men have been the big losers of postmodern intersectionality: Not only don’t they have any privileged position or better opportunities in today’s capitalist system, they are also collectively shunned and used as a scapegoat for everything that has gone and is going wrong in society. In a tour de force, Welsh connects the problems of intersectionality, the crisis of masculinity, the influence of digital technology, the domestication of today’s youth and the overall meaninglessness of 21st century capitalism – and even manages to mention George Orwell in all of this. A fantastic read.
This slur is used by radical trans activists and means “trans-exclusionary radical feminist”.
One of the problems I face as a liberal anti-trans activist is that I don't want to be associated with all the conservative ideas that conservatives hold, ideas that I consider to be very bad. For that reason I was hesitant to watch the Megyn Kelly segment, but I did out of curiosity. She didn't utter a single word that I disagreed with, and I felt the anger she was expressing.
The question for me, however, is -- How conservative is she?
If she is tolerant of trans individuals, is she also tolerant of gay people? Most conservatives, especially Christians, are not.
Is she a racist? Republicans across the country continue to try to disenfranchise black voters.
Does she support abortion? Abortion is arguably more important to women than rejecting trans ideology is.
Does she support the social safety net? The social safety net probably benefits more women than men, given that women live longer and need Social Security for more years.
Does she think the 2020 election was stolen from Trump?
The list goes on.
I keep wondering why conservatives are so clear and articulate in their opposition to transgender ideology, and yet they are so wrong on so many other issues.
Where do you stand on these other issues, Ms. M? Are you a knee-jerk conservative?
Thanks for the links and thumbnail sketches. Too much to read through at the moment but I had seen Megyn Kelly's post earlier -- quite a "cri de coeur", a rather stunning volte face and profound sea change. Hopefully one which will "peak" a great many people.
However, I can't help but get the impression that there are still a bunch of misperceptions on both sides which tends to preclude an early resolution to the problems entailed by transgenderism. And first and foremost is that pretty much every last man, woman, and otherkin has profoundly different and quite antithetical definitions for both "sex" and "gender", the latter in particular. Nice summary of the problem from evolutionary biologist Colin Wright:
Wright: "Most confusion about 'gender' results from people not defining it. Many definitions are in circulation:
1. Synonym for sex (male/female)
2. A subjective feeling in relation to one's sex
3. Societal sex-based roles/expectations
4. Sex-related behavior
5. Personality traits"
https://twitter.com/SwipeWright/status/1234040036091236352
Apropos of which, I did, as you suggested, finally read Helene's post over at PITT. Quite a damning indictment of transgenderism, but seems clear that her "there are only 2 genders, male and female" puts her into those thinking "sex" and "gender" are synonymous.
In addition, I also managed to at least skim through your article there -- also quite a damning indictment -- and was intending to post a comment there on it. But one thing that kind of struck me as "problematic" is that you seem to give short shrift to the argument that there is some merit in the concept of gender, that you more or less agree with Helene that "sex" and "gender" are synonymous:
https://pitt.substack.com/p/leave-the-kids-alone
No doubt that there are many "toxic" aspects to "gender ideology", but rejecting Wright's items 3 through 5 seems to preclude being able to grapple with some aspects of the issue that are important to resolving the problem. You may wish to take a gander at my elaborations on that theme in a post on Lisa Davis' Substack:
https://lisaselindavis.substack.com/p/florida/comment/17050351
And, on the other side of the coin, you might also have some interest in a Note by a US professor and politician Robert Reich, and my response to him:
Reich: "Why has the GOP targeted transgender people? There’s not a shred of evidence that trans people are threats to anyone. All they want is to live peacefully as their true selves."
https://substack.com/profile/21792752-steersman/note/c-16959278
"true selves" -- 🙄. Seems like a rather serious misunderstanding of the situation, one which is apparently predicated on a serious lack of any sort of agreement on what we actually mean by "sex" and "gender". As philosopher Will Durant put it in commenting on Voltaire's quip:
Durant: “ 'If you wish to converse with me,' said Voltaire, 'define your terms.' How many a debate would have been deflated into a paragraph if the disputants had dared to define their terms! This is the alpha and omega of logic, the heart and soul of it, that every important term in serious discourse shall be subjected to strictest scrutiny and definition. It is difficult, and ruthlessly tests the mind; but once done it is half of any task. — Will Durant"
https://quotefancy.com/quote/3001527/Will-Durant-If-you-wish-to-converse-with-me-said-Voltaire-define-your-terms-How-many-a