X Close

Is France too sexy for the trans wars? Radical activism is sweeping across Europe

Dora Moutot > Judith Butler (Eric Fougere/Corbis via Getty Images)

Dora Moutot > Judith Butler (Eric Fougere/Corbis via Getty Images)


March 17, 2023   6 mins

A bit like Napoleon, radical transactivism is moving swiftly and imperviously across Europe. Blithe to the consequences for women, lesbians, and gay men, pan-European LGBT organisations such as ILGA Europe are lobbying hard for governments to introduce self-ID, and also to outlaw so-called “conversion therapy” — in other words, talking therapies — for dysphoric people planning to cut off their body parts.

So far, it seems to be working. ILGA is well-funded and has great influence, both with national governments and in the EU. Belgium brought in self-ID in 2018. Spain did so in February this year, as did Finland. Undeterred by the fiasco of Nicola Sturgeon putting male rapists in female prisons in the name of inclusivity, Germany and the Netherlands are teetering on the brink.

In France, meanwhile, a very French version of this culture war is playing out. On the side of those insisting that biological differences matter socially and politically is feminist Dora Moutot, who is facing a lawsuit from transactivists for accurately describing a transwoman as a “trans-identified male” on TV last year. In the past few months, Moutot has launched the “Femelliste” website with fellow feminist Marguerite Stern, aimed at explaining to a mostly uncomprehending French public some of the main problems caused by transactivism, as they see it.

Also on Moutot’s side is Catholic commentator Eugénie Bastié, signatory to a public letter in support of Moutot, and author of a recently published book-length essay entitled Sauver La Différence Des Sexes (Save Sex Differences). Moutot is a social media influencer and a former writer for Vice magazine. She also runs a website dedicated to increasing the number of female orgasms in the world. On the face of it, then, she is a strange bedfellow with a conservative like Bastié. Such is the extremity of transactivism, however, almost everyone who isn’t chronically underinformed or under 25 ends up on the other side of it eventually.

According to The Times, Bastié argues in her new book that — thanks to a legacy of biology-denial, whether under the guise of feminism or transactivism — “women struggle to combine a career and childcare, and men, shorn of role models and their ancestral identity, become sad porn addicts”. Sticking to a well-established script, her opponents on the progressive Left have fought back this week with an equally broad brush. Writing in Libération, philosopher Camille Froidevaux-Metterie insists that Bastié is wrong: allowing that men can become women is a laudable extension of the project of changing patriarchal social norms.

Although what we have here is a dynamic simultaneously playing out across a number of Western stages — that is, a provisional and uneasy alliance among those who think there are limits to human bodily plasticity, against those who think there are none — there are also some unmistakably French elements in the mix. One is the unfeasible glamour of everyone involved. Another is the sheer aggression with which Parisian transactivists are currently pursuing Moutot and Stern, throwing ugly death threats all over the place in classically hyperemotional Gallic style.

The final national giveaway is the desire to blame the Anglosphere for all of it. Bastié, according to The Times, thinks she knows the culprit for the parlous social predicament of the sexes: “the arrival in France of British and American theories involving a ‘totalitarian’ cancel culture and the negation of biological realities”.

Frankly, this strikes me as a bit rich. French philosophers can hardly be let off the hook for the currently popular belief in the near-total malleability of the human body through choice. Arguably, they are up to their chic black polonecks in the matter. Descartes was a big fan of cleaving inner minds from “divisible” corporeal bodies. Four centuries after that, Jean-Paul Sartre gave us the slogan that “existence precedes essence” — the idea (roughly) that the meaning of being human is not fixed by membership of a shared animal species, but rather forged through conscious choice. Admittedly he probably didn’t have a choice of body parts in mind when he wrote that, but it’s not clear on what grounds he could object.

Simone de Beauvoir, meanwhile, viewed female biology as inherently an “obstacle” to women and something that it would be better to be able to transcend. Then came Michel Foucault, arguing that distinguishing between types of humans could only ever be a means of covertly exercising power over them. Foucault thought the idea that human concepts captured some pre-existent natural reality was moot. Radical feminists such as Monique Wittig took up this cause in the Eighties, claiming there was no “natural grouping” of women at all, but only a perniciously politically motivated one designed to oppress… women. (No, me neither.)

All of this sexy-sounding stuff about the power of humans to build big things with their words was too much for passing Americans to resist. Judith Butler took Foucault and Wittig’s ideas and translated them for US audiences in her books Gender Trouble and Bodies That Matter, sometimes in sentences lasting an entire page. Graduate students swooned. Et tout le monde connaît la suite.

But when it comes to building the scaffolding for transactivist success, it is not just the provision of an intellectual background for which we can thank France. Arguably, no other European country has done more to make certain versions of femininity look irresistible, both to women and to men. It’s hard not to equate cultural expressions of femininity with womanhood when they look so bloody beguiling that nobody can see straight. The coltish, gamine, doe-eyed ingénue template was trademarked there, as was the blonde bombshell. A thousand French songwriters have added to the mystique of women with twinkling eyes and a sentimental tremor in their voices. And a thousand French plastic surgeons have artfully improved on the basic model. When Charles Aznavour sang in his most famous tribute that “She may be the mirror of my dream”, it is perhaps not surprising that some men took this as a hint.

It will be interesting to see how transactivist pressure plays out in France in the months to come. There are some promising signs of dissent, at least as far as the medicalisation of children is concerned. Twelve “old-school” Leftist members on the scientific council of the government body responsible for tackling discrimination recently denounced the “symbolic violence and often physical violence” faced by scientists who questioned treatments such as puberty blockers and hormones for minors. Unfortunately, though, the equality minister’s symbolically violent response to this was to disband the scientific council altogether.

When it comes to the issue of males in woman-only spaces and sports teams, meanwhile, it is hard to believe that France will prove as susceptible as the US and the UK, even despite its own philosophical traditions. For one thing, it’s difficult to imagine that a nation so firmly psychologically committed to exaggerated social differences between the sexes could ever properly fall for the idea that there aren’t any at all. Feminism has barely reached the masses yet, let alone wild ideas about gender identity. (Only in France — and I say this with genuine admiration — could you find a group of women responding to #MeToo by calling for a defence of their “right to seduce”.) And there’s also the fact that secularism is the norm in the public sphere in France. The strong whiff of religiosity in transactivists will surely put many people’s antennae up.

Then again, I’ve written before about how the British and US versions of transactivism involve grim alliances between radicals and petty bureaucrats. The former just want to move fast and break things, removing boundaries wherever they find them, mostly for the sake of it. The latter, in contrast, like making up new rules and telling people what to do. Bastié may think of cancel culture as an Anglo-American phenomenon, but cancel culture is also essentially bureaucratic, and there is a well-established love of red tape in France. What greater bureaucratic project could there be than rearranging every sex-separated space or resource to accommodate gender identity instead?

In the end though, it may be France’s own intellectual tradition that saves the day. The national baccalaureate exam still has a philosophy component within it, and last time I looked at a Parisian newsstand, there were several specialist philosophical magazines for the general public in circulation. In short, French people still care about abstract ideas. Unlike in the UK, it’s not considered somewhat embarrassing to have them. Uncritically spouting half-baked French ideas may still work for English-speaking academics as a shorthand for the possession of intellectual depth, but it’s unlikely to do the same for native thinkers.

And French philosophy is not a monolith — there are plenty of thinkers happy to accept that there are independent limits set by the natural world, which don’t depend on our thoughts or choices. With a bit of luck then, French philosophers will soon be ridiculing the idea that biological sex is completely malleable — and the parts of the world most susceptible to the allure of Gallic sophistication will breathe a sigh of relief.


Kathleen Stock is an UnHerd columnist and a co-director of The Lesbian Project.
Docstockk

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

120 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Derek Smith
Derek Smith
1 year ago

‘Arguably, they are up to their chic black polonecks in the matter.’

This is why I love reading Kathleen Stock. Long may she continue!

Last edited 1 year ago by Derek Smith
Edward Seymour
Edward Seymour
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Smith

Along with ” . . they look so bloody beguiling that nobody can see straight.”

Alan Elgey
Alan Elgey
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Smith

Oh there’s so much of it in here. I liked, “Uncritically spouting half-baked French ideas may still work for English-speaking academics as a shorthand for the possession of intellectual depth, but it’s unlikely to do the same for native thinkers.” She must have had some specific people in mind here, perhaps from Sussex. Brilliant.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Smith

I was heartened to hear Dora Moutot say “trans identified men”. The trans woman thing is so confusing, I keep having to stop and think what it really means, as if the whole thing isn’t challenging enough.

Alison Wren
Alison Wren
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

That is how they’ve done it… so many people still think transwomen are a variety of woman. They’re a variety of MEN!!! Language capture (ref 1984) preceded societal capture.

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Alison Wren

Indeed. Chicks with dicks or men with (fake) breasts?

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Alison Wren

Indeed. Chicks with dicks or men with (fake) breasts?

Alison Wren
Alison Wren
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

That is how they’ve done it… so many people still think transwomen are a variety of woman. They’re a variety of MEN!!! Language capture (ref 1984) preceded societal capture.

Tom More
Tom More
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Smith

It’s delightfully written. One catches in the west the loss of western philosophical realism.. Aristotle and Aquinas.
“Final Causation” – the intelligible end or purpose of everything.. BEING.. the ground of all finite being including us. The European Catholic scholastic philosophy we adopted and developed from Socrates and the Greek philosophical tradition.
With naive materialism we are utterly unintelligible and as realist philosopher Dennis Bonnette shows, Descartes , when he promoted self consciousness as the ground of experience, forgot about the real world things of which he was conscious. Reality.
Thank God for Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas and the possibility of sanity. Philosopher Peter Kreeft may be the best philosopher alive and one of he best ever. Wonderful Marriage Between Faith and Reason, Peter Kreeft, Ph.D. – YouTube

Edward Seymour
Edward Seymour
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Smith

Along with ” . . they look so bloody beguiling that nobody can see straight.”

Alan Elgey
Alan Elgey
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Smith

Oh there’s so much of it in here. I liked, “Uncritically spouting half-baked French ideas may still work for English-speaking academics as a shorthand for the possession of intellectual depth, but it’s unlikely to do the same for native thinkers.” She must have had some specific people in mind here, perhaps from Sussex. Brilliant.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Smith

I was heartened to hear Dora Moutot say “trans identified men”. The trans woman thing is so confusing, I keep having to stop and think what it really means, as if the whole thing isn’t challenging enough.

Tom More
Tom More
1 year ago
Reply to  Derek Smith

It’s delightfully written. One catches in the west the loss of western philosophical realism.. Aristotle and Aquinas.
“Final Causation” – the intelligible end or purpose of everything.. BEING.. the ground of all finite being including us. The European Catholic scholastic philosophy we adopted and developed from Socrates and the Greek philosophical tradition.
With naive materialism we are utterly unintelligible and as realist philosopher Dennis Bonnette shows, Descartes , when he promoted self consciousness as the ground of experience, forgot about the real world things of which he was conscious. Reality.
Thank God for Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas and the possibility of sanity. Philosopher Peter Kreeft may be the best philosopher alive and one of he best ever. Wonderful Marriage Between Faith and Reason, Peter Kreeft, Ph.D. – YouTube

Derek Smith
Derek Smith
1 year ago

‘Arguably, they are up to their chic black polonecks in the matter.’

This is why I love reading Kathleen Stock. Long may she continue!

Last edited 1 year ago by Derek Smith
J Bryant
J Bryant
1 year ago

Years ago I visited France several times and learned how proud the French are of their culture and how the term “Anglo Saxon” was almost an insult.
Of course they should resist the trans agenda for the sheer nonsense that it is, but those opposing the trans activists would be wise to characterize it as an Anglo Saxon innovation. That will stiffen French spines.

Chris Amies
Chris Amies
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

tbh I don’t like the term “Anglo-Saxon” as I don’t live in the 9th century. It’s also used for “English-Speaking” which is clearly incorrect.

Rocky Martiano
Rocky Martiano
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Amies

You may not like it, but it’s universally used in France to denote English culture and the English speaking world. They understand its meaning perfectly well which is what really matters when it comes to language.
In some circles, the use of ‘Anglo-Saxon’ terms in spoken and written French is frowned upon in much the same way.

Rocky Martiano
Rocky Martiano
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Amies

You may not like it, but it’s universally used in France to denote English culture and the English speaking world. They understand its meaning perfectly well which is what really matters when it comes to language.
In some circles, the use of ‘Anglo-Saxon’ terms in spoken and written French is frowned upon in much the same way.

Chris Amies
Chris Amies
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

tbh I don’t like the term “Anglo-Saxon” as I don’t live in the 9th century. It’s also used for “English-Speaking” which is clearly incorrect.

J Bryant
J Bryant
1 year ago

Years ago I visited France several times and learned how proud the French are of their culture and how the term “Anglo Saxon” was almost an insult.
Of course they should resist the trans agenda for the sheer nonsense that it is, but those opposing the trans activists would be wise to characterize it as an Anglo Saxon innovation. That will stiffen French spines.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago

I am curious to know, how “trans” got hold of the idea that gender differences are just social constructs.
I wonder if they simply picked up the baton and ran with it.
Moral: Don’t leave batons laying about.

Last edited 1 year ago by polidori redux
Isabel Ward
Isabel Ward
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

This is how feminism laid the seeds for its own destruction.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Isabel Ward

If only that were true for French philosophy. They should stick to getting laid and seeding.

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  Isabel Ward

The trouble as they were all on the gender is a social construct model until they were hoist by their own petard.
We can expect the same in relation to the controlling and coercive behaviour legislation… but it was only intended to apply to men

harry storm
harry storm
1 year ago

Gender IS a social construct. It doesn’t even exist, much the same as ghosts and the soul. Biological sex isn’t a social construct. The only use of “gender” that makes any sense is as a synonym for biological sex. I suppose an argument could be made for using terms like “gendered behaviour”, but frankly I’d give those a miss too, as its expressions like that that got us into this mess in the first place.

Caroline Watson
Caroline Watson
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

Exactly. ‘Gender’ only exists in linguistics and, in some languages (including French), is applied to inanimate objects.
Prudes, particularly in America, have used it as a synonym for sex, and that is where the confusion lies.
The French are not prudes! It would be interesting to know, however, how the mindset of a totally gendered language affects their perception of this issue.

Janet G
Janet G
1 year ago

I am old enough to remember when gender was a grammatical term and people engaged in “sex-role behaviours”.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

Exactly. How would they manage the pronoun thingy with a masculine and feminine language. And for those learning french, yikes!

Laura Pritchard
Laura Pritchard
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Exactly my thought in any language that assigns feminine and masculine properties to unanimate objects. Let alone the ones that have other genders. I suspect that ultimately, it all comes down to language specifically the English one.

Tom More
Tom More
1 year ago

It all comes down to philosophy and the presence or absence of rational thoughts. Aristotle vs mindless matter in meaningless motion and its faithful adherents.
Faith and reason are meant to walk together.

Tom More
Tom More
1 year ago

It all comes down to philosophy and the presence or absence of rational thoughts. Aristotle vs mindless matter in meaningless motion and its faithful adherents.
Faith and reason are meant to walk together.

Laura Pritchard
Laura Pritchard
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Exactly my thought in any language that assigns feminine and masculine properties to unanimate objects. Let alone the ones that have other genders. I suspect that ultimately, it all comes down to language specifically the English one.

Tony Conrad
Tony Conrad
1 year ago

In using the gender in language she is still feminine and he is still masculine.

Bruni Schling
Bruni Schling
1 year ago

As a native German speaker with a language that has three genders insted of only two like the French, I tell you the gender wars in Germany are fiercely faught on linguistic grounds. It’s a complete farce.

J. Hale
J. Hale
1 year ago
Reply to  Bruni Schling

It’s been my observation that among German youth the slang word “da” is starting to replace the gendered der, das, die.

Last edited 1 year ago by J. Hale
J. Hale
J. Hale
1 year ago
Reply to  Bruni Schling

It’s been my observation that among German youth the slang word “da” is starting to replace the gendered der, das, die.

Last edited 1 year ago by J. Hale
polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago

Yes. I have been mumbling and stumbling towards that for a while, but never quite got there. It’s crystal clear when you arrive.

Janet G
Janet G
1 year ago

I am old enough to remember when gender was a grammatical term and people engaged in “sex-role behaviours”.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

Exactly. How would they manage the pronoun thingy with a masculine and feminine language. And for those learning french, yikes!

Tony Conrad
Tony Conrad
1 year ago

In using the gender in language she is still feminine and he is still masculine.

Bruni Schling
Bruni Schling
1 year ago

As a native German speaker with a language that has three genders insted of only two like the French, I tell you the gender wars in Germany are fiercely faught on linguistic grounds. It’s a complete farce.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago

Yes. I have been mumbling and stumbling towards that for a while, but never quite got there. It’s crystal clear when you arrive.

Tony Conrad
Tony Conrad
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

I always thought gender was the same as biological sex. It never was a social construct before. Why are they changing our language?

Aphrodite Rises
Aphrodite Rises
1 year ago
Reply to  Tony Conrad

The change occurred when the gender was identified with sex between 1974 and 1980

Aphrodite Rises
Aphrodite Rises
1 year ago
Reply to  Tony Conrad

The change occurred when the gender was identified with sex between 1974 and 1980

Bruni Schling
Bruni Schling
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

oh, I think the soul exists.

Tom More
Tom More
1 year ago
Reply to  Bruni Schling

It most certainly does. But its not a “thing” like a sense object “inside” us.. the crude and frankly ignorant notion most carry but rather, like form and matter potency and act, Aristotle’s sane worldview as delivered by Thomas Aquinas, these are two metaphysical principles necessary to explain reality
Descartes forgot about them to our universal peril.
We have arrived near the bottom of insanity.
Aristotle and Aquinas are the pathway back to sanity.
Reality
The Transcendental Certitude of Metaphysical First Principles : Strange Notions

Tom More
Tom More
1 year ago
Reply to  Bruni Schling

It most certainly does. But its not a “thing” like a sense object “inside” us.. the crude and frankly ignorant notion most carry but rather, like form and matter potency and act, Aristotle’s sane worldview as delivered by Thomas Aquinas, these are two metaphysical principles necessary to explain reality
Descartes forgot about them to our universal peril.
We have arrived near the bottom of insanity.
Aristotle and Aquinas are the pathway back to sanity.
Reality
The Transcendental Certitude of Metaphysical First Principles : Strange Notions

Jacquie 0
Jacquie 0
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

Gender isn’t actually a social construct. There are gender roles and gendered behaviour and it is a manifesttaion of biology. They have seen it in rat/mice studies where they have given females doses of testosterone (and vice versa) and the females abandon their babies and start humping everything that moves. Their agression goes through the roof (something women transitioning into ‘men’ have found and are now speaking out about) and they exhibit what is typical male behaviour. If you tested top women executives you would probably find that their testosternone levels are way too high. Same with violent female offenders and the like. The notion that there aren’t biology based male and female behavoirs is a nonsense.

Last edited 1 year ago by Jacquie 0
Claire England
Claire England
1 year ago
Reply to  Jacquie 0

And here’s an interesting example. If you work with young children, you’ll soon learn that little boys cry far more frequently than little girls. I’ve no idea why. Little girls gossip and form alliances that ruthlessly ostracize other girls. Little boys will sock one another and be besties later on that day. These are gendered behaviors which almost certainly reflect evolutionary adaptations to differences in how males and females most successfully navigated their literal and social struggles in our ancient past.

michael stanwick
michael stanwick
1 year ago
Reply to  Jacquie 0

What is your meaning of “gender” in your comment?

Claire England
Claire England
1 year ago
Reply to  Jacquie 0

And here’s an interesting example. If you work with young children, you’ll soon learn that little boys cry far more frequently than little girls. I’ve no idea why. Little girls gossip and form alliances that ruthlessly ostracize other girls. Little boys will sock one another and be besties later on that day. These are gendered behaviors which almost certainly reflect evolutionary adaptations to differences in how males and females most successfully navigated their literal and social struggles in our ancient past.

michael stanwick
michael stanwick
1 year ago
Reply to  Jacquie 0

What is your meaning of “gender” in your comment?

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

Semantics
You know what they meant

Tom More
Tom More
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

As Aristotle showed, the soul obviously exists. What doesn’t exist is your notion of what the soul is. That indeed doesn’t exist. Ensoulment… or again from Aristotle.. “animation” – we forget that anima means soul… refers to living things. Things that have immanent action… they are the source and purpose of their actions unlike a rock of postmodern philosophy text.
Aristotle is the way home to sanity.. Final Causation.. the end or purpose of things. Even God sanely understood.
And the human soul is seen properly as incorporeal.. indeed the act of the body.. the form of the matter.. (as in our word from Aquinas, “information”) because we all live and experience free will and our mind deals with non material things like justice, beauty and the number 3.
Beauty is indeed a function of purpose and so the beauty of the most beautiful creation.,, ,woman, who us guys are literally dying to love and serve. In healthy folks anyway..
Aristotle vs Kant and his insanity which too many “value”.
Peter Kreeft is a wonderful realist philosopher and knows his Aristotle and the disasters of Hume , Kant and others very well.
https://www.wordonfire.org/videos/the-great-debates-of-philosophy/aristotle-vs-kant-on-epistemology-and-ethics/

Caroline Watson
Caroline Watson
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

Exactly. ‘Gender’ only exists in linguistics and, in some languages (including French), is applied to inanimate objects.
Prudes, particularly in America, have used it as a synonym for sex, and that is where the confusion lies.
The French are not prudes! It would be interesting to know, however, how the mindset of a totally gendered language affects their perception of this issue.

Tony Conrad
Tony Conrad
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

I always thought gender was the same as biological sex. It never was a social construct before. Why are they changing our language?

Bruni Schling
Bruni Schling
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

oh, I think the soul exists.

Jacquie 0
Jacquie 0
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

Gender isn’t actually a social construct. There are gender roles and gendered behaviour and it is a manifesttaion of biology. They have seen it in rat/mice studies where they have given females doses of testosterone (and vice versa) and the females abandon their babies and start humping everything that moves. Their agression goes through the roof (something women transitioning into ‘men’ have found and are now speaking out about) and they exhibit what is typical male behaviour. If you tested top women executives you would probably find that their testosternone levels are way too high. Same with violent female offenders and the like. The notion that there aren’t biology based male and female behavoirs is a nonsense.

Last edited 1 year ago by Jacquie 0
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

Semantics
You know what they meant

Tom More
Tom More
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

As Aristotle showed, the soul obviously exists. What doesn’t exist is your notion of what the soul is. That indeed doesn’t exist. Ensoulment… or again from Aristotle.. “animation” – we forget that anima means soul… refers to living things. Things that have immanent action… they are the source and purpose of their actions unlike a rock of postmodern philosophy text.
Aristotle is the way home to sanity.. Final Causation.. the end or purpose of things. Even God sanely understood.
And the human soul is seen properly as incorporeal.. indeed the act of the body.. the form of the matter.. (as in our word from Aquinas, “information”) because we all live and experience free will and our mind deals with non material things like justice, beauty and the number 3.
Beauty is indeed a function of purpose and so the beauty of the most beautiful creation.,, ,woman, who us guys are literally dying to love and serve. In healthy folks anyway..
Aristotle vs Kant and his insanity which too many “value”.
Peter Kreeft is a wonderful realist philosopher and knows his Aristotle and the disasters of Hume , Kant and others very well.
https://www.wordonfire.org/videos/the-great-debates-of-philosophy/aristotle-vs-kant-on-epistemology-and-ethics/

michael stanwick
michael stanwick
1 year ago

Was it? Are there laws that discriminate on sex?

harry storm
harry storm
1 year ago

Gender IS a social construct. It doesn’t even exist, much the same as ghosts and the soul. Biological sex isn’t a social construct. The only use of “gender” that makes any sense is as a synonym for biological sex. I suppose an argument could be made for using terms like “gendered behaviour”, but frankly I’d give those a miss too, as its expressions like that that got us into this mess in the first place.

michael stanwick
michael stanwick
1 year ago

Was it? Are there laws that discriminate on sex?

A Willis
A Willis
1 year ago
Reply to  Isabel Ward

Quite, starting with Second Wave Feminism, Simone de Beauvoir, then Betty Freidan in the 1990’s.
The present lunacy is the the inevitable outcome.
.

Caroline Watson
Caroline Watson
1 year ago
Reply to  A Willis

Absolute nonsense. Second wave feminists recognise the reality of biological sex whilst rejecting the oppressive social constructs of domesticity and femininity. We loathe gender ideology. It is against everything we believe in.
There is barely a hair’s breadth, however, between believing that women should simper and wear dresses and believing that everyone who simpers and wears dresses is a woman. Both are rooted firmly in misogyny.

Janet G
Janet G
1 year ago

“There is barely a hair’s breadth, however, between believing that women should simper and wear dresses and believing that everyone who simpers and wears dresses is a woman.”
Brilliant summation!

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Janet G

Exactly!!

John Solomon
John Solomon
1 year ago
Reply to  Janet G

I read that, and immediately thought of Little Britain’s Emily, thr cr*p transvestite, and her catchphrase “I’m a lady!” Who would have thought that life would end up imitating art to that extent?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Janet G

Exactly!!

John Solomon
John Solomon
1 year ago
Reply to  Janet G

I read that, and immediately thought of Little Britain’s Emily, thr cr*p transvestite, and her catchphrase “I’m a lady!” Who would have thought that life would end up imitating art to that extent?

Andrew Stoll
Andrew Stoll
1 year ago

It is sexual, emotional and aesthetic attractiveness and sexual, emotional and aesthetic attraction!
Misogyny, misandry and misanthropy are their antitheses.

michael stanwick
michael stanwick
1 year ago

How do you define femininity?

0 0
0 0
11 months ago

Since I agree with Caroline I’ll take this one; femininity describes the culturally defined trappings that are imposed upon the female sex; for example to the Maasai it is a neck elongated by metal rings. To Europeans, a hairless body and unblemished skin. To many Africans; a dainty vaginal opening free of labial lips. All 3 examples are direct challenges to biological sex, ironically, requiring body modifications

0 0
0 0
11 months ago

Since I agree with Caroline I’ll take this one; femininity describes the culturally defined trappings that are imposed upon the female sex; for example to the Maasai it is a neck elongated by metal rings. To Europeans, a hairless body and unblemished skin. To many Africans; a dainty vaginal opening free of labial lips. All 3 examples are direct challenges to biological sex, ironically, requiring body modifications

Tom More
Tom More
1 year ago

The nonsense is yours. De Beauvoir developed the term “gender” specifically to separate our actual and interdependent roles in life from reality. Men and women are only intelligible in the context of their interactive roles in life itself.
“Ms.” pretends we are somehow intelligible outside of our very natures which are ordered to the real.
Ideological insanity is the result and what we are dealing with today. We live in a philosophical wasteland.
Peter Kreeft 10 Lies of Contemporary Culture.
https://youtu.be/K7FtUlnIXd0

0 0
0 0
11 months ago
Reply to  Tom More

“Ms” allows women to go through life without their marital status front and center in EVERY domain, the may men can with Mr. there was NO attempt in using Ms to erase women. Ms says we are not defined by marriage or virginity

Most here are too young to understand the deep importance marital status had in the way women were treated in every aspect of life. Ms was an extraordinary win for us.

0 0
0 0
11 months ago
Reply to  Tom More

“Ms” allows women to go through life without their marital status front and center in EVERY domain, the may men can with Mr. there was NO attempt in using Ms to erase women. Ms says we are not defined by marriage or virginity

Most here are too young to understand the deep importance marital status had in the way women were treated in every aspect of life. Ms was an extraordinary win for us.

Janet G
Janet G
1 year ago

“There is barely a hair’s breadth, however, between believing that women should simper and wear dresses and believing that everyone who simpers and wears dresses is a woman.”
Brilliant summation!

Andrew Stoll
Andrew Stoll
1 year ago

It is sexual, emotional and aesthetic attractiveness and sexual, emotional and aesthetic attraction!
Misogyny, misandry and misanthropy are their antitheses.

michael stanwick
michael stanwick
1 year ago

How do you define femininity?

Tom More
Tom More
1 year ago

The nonsense is yours. De Beauvoir developed the term “gender” specifically to separate our actual and interdependent roles in life from reality. Men and women are only intelligible in the context of their interactive roles in life itself.
“Ms.” pretends we are somehow intelligible outside of our very natures which are ordered to the real.
Ideological insanity is the result and what we are dealing with today. We live in a philosophical wasteland.
Peter Kreeft 10 Lies of Contemporary Culture.
https://youtu.be/K7FtUlnIXd0

Caroline Watson
Caroline Watson
1 year ago
Reply to  A Willis

Absolute nonsense. Second wave feminists recognise the reality of biological sex whilst rejecting the oppressive social constructs of domesticity and femininity. We loathe gender ideology. It is against everything we believe in.
There is barely a hair’s breadth, however, between believing that women should simper and wear dresses and believing that everyone who simpers and wears dresses is a woman. Both are rooted firmly in misogyny.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Isabel Ward

If only that were true for French philosophy. They should stick to getting laid and seeding.

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  Isabel Ward

The trouble as they were all on the gender is a social construct model until they were hoist by their own petard.
We can expect the same in relation to the controlling and coercive behaviour legislation… but it was only intended to apply to men

A Willis
A Willis
1 year ago
Reply to  Isabel Ward

Quite, starting with Second Wave Feminism, Simone de Beauvoir, then Betty Freidan in the 1990’s.
The present lunacy is the the inevitable outcome.
.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Leading to a typically French version of the relay, no doubt, involving a male-identifying male, female-identifying female, male-identifying female and female-identifying male; all of them experiencing orgasms as they pass the baton.

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve Murray
Deborah H
Deborah H
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

can a female identifying male on hormones still have orgasms?

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Deborah H

It may occur spontaneously in a women-only space?
Emission via admission.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Deborah H

The mind boggles and the imagination has taken off.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Deborah H

It may occur spontaneously in a women-only space?
Emission via admission.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Deborah H

The mind boggles and the imagination has taken off.

Deborah H
Deborah H
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

can a female identifying male on hormones still have orgasms?

Warren Trees
Warren Trees
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

2 Thessalonians, chapter 2, in the new Testament explains it all. Worth the read.
There is no more basic truth than male and female, regardless of what someone says. It is how our species reproduces. This licentiousness has happened before and it will pass. Corinth and ancient Rome come to mind.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

Is it the begining of the end of civilization along with climate change? Seems a fitting end.

Tony Conrad
Tony Conrad
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I believe a lot of the climate change narrative is also a social construct.

Tony Conrad
Tony Conrad
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I believe a lot of the climate change narrative is also a social construct.

Johanna Louw
Johanna Louw
1 year ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

x

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

Is it the begining of the end of civilization along with climate change? Seems a fitting end.

Johanna Louw
Johanna Louw
1 year ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

x

Fiona English
Fiona English
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

But gender is a social construct – it’s sex that isn’t. The confusion between the meaning of gender and sex is partly how we got here. It’s only ever used in a human context either as a euphemism for the term ‘sex’, with which some people are uncomfortable, or when referring to sociocultural matters as in ‘the gender pay gap’. If you think about it, we never use the term ‘gender’ when referring to animals!

A Willis
A Willis
1 year ago
Reply to  Fiona English

I do wonder how this gender revolution is going to hit the French (with apologies for the term, “the French”, which someone suggested a couple of weeks ago was xenophobic).
Whatever are they going to do about, for example, a table that want to self-identify as masculine?
If a tree falls over in the forest and no-one hears, was it male, or female?
How are they going to handle New York’s hundred-and-seventy-odd genders, when they only have masculine, feminine and neuter?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  A Willis

Exactly.

Alan Elgey
Alan Elgey
1 year ago
Reply to  A Willis

Le plume de mon tante est sur le table.

Ben Shipley
Ben Shipley
1 year ago
Reply to  A Willis

They don’t have neuter. That’s the Germans. But if France was American, they’d have students demanding the right to use either le or la to qualify any noun, depending on mood, whim, or laziness. There’s an element of intellectual laziness in all of the marshmallow concepts being sold to the youth of the Anglosphere.

Last edited 1 year ago by Ben Shipley
Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  A Willis

Exactly.

Alan Elgey
Alan Elgey
1 year ago
Reply to  A Willis

Le plume de mon tante est sur le table.

Ben Shipley
Ben Shipley
1 year ago
Reply to  A Willis

They don’t have neuter. That’s the Germans. But if France was American, they’d have students demanding the right to use either le or la to qualify any noun, depending on mood, whim, or laziness. There’s an element of intellectual laziness in all of the marshmallow concepts being sold to the youth of the Anglosphere.

Last edited 1 year ago by Ben Shipley
harry storm
harry storm
1 year ago
Reply to  Fiona English

I wrote almost the same thing above before I saw this.

A Willis
A Willis
1 year ago
Reply to  Fiona English

I recall many years ago the first time I came across someone ignorantly using the word ‘gender’ instead of sex. It was in the transcript of an equality lecture given by a Harvard professor (I believe it might have been Rosabeth Moss Kanter, but apologise to her if it was not) to a group of US CEOs.
The story I heard was that the professor had correctly used the term ‘sex’, but that her secretary had substituted every use of it for the word ‘gender’. When asked why, she is purported to have said that she just imagined that all these men (CEO’s of the US’s biggest corporations) would snigger at the use of the word, so substituted it. Apparently the Professor left it thus.
Yet men are the ones that were accused of stereotyping!
.

Tony Conrad
Tony Conrad
1 year ago
Reply to  A Willis

Both terms mean the same to me and to most of the people I know.

John Solomon
John Solomon
1 year ago
Reply to  Tony Conrad

Then I assume neither you nor they have ever studied another language. One of the first things taught in French lessons is that gender and sex are not necessarily the same.
Of course, most people in Britain suffer several years of French lessons in school, and remain utterly untouched by the language.

John Solomon
John Solomon
1 year ago
Reply to  Tony Conrad

Then I assume neither you nor they have ever studied another language. One of the first things taught in French lessons is that gender and sex are not necessarily the same.
Of course, most people in Britain suffer several years of French lessons in school, and remain utterly untouched by the language.

Tony Conrad
Tony Conrad
1 year ago
Reply to  A Willis

Both terms mean the same to me and to most of the people I know.

Joann Robertson
Joann Robertson
1 year ago
Reply to  Fiona English

Yes! Sex is biological. Gender is a social construct, meaning the roles men and woman typically take in any society.

Alan Tonkyn
Alan Tonkyn
1 year ago

But this ‘social construct’ idea, eg as defined by you, still leaves us in confusion. What, then, are the categories of gender (aside from the purely linguistic ones of masculine, feminine, neuter and common which are outside this discussion)? They come back down, it seems to me, to the sex-based division of male and female! You talk about ‘the roles men and women ….take’ as defining gender: so we are back to biological sex again! Gender, divorced from biological sex, becomes an empty concept. If we go back to your ‘roles’ definition, if a man, say, looks after a baby, does he have a different gender? If so, how would you name it? Gender, as I understand it and in its non-linguistic sense, began as a euphemism for sex, and has morphed into an amorphous monster!

Alan Tonkyn
Alan Tonkyn
1 year ago

But this ‘social construct’ idea, eg as defined by you, still leaves us in confusion. What, then, are the categories of gender (aside from the purely linguistic ones of masculine, feminine, neuter and common which are outside this discussion)? They come back down, it seems to me, to the sex-based division of male and female! You talk about ‘the roles men and women ….take’ as defining gender: so we are back to biological sex again! Gender, divorced from biological sex, becomes an empty concept. If we go back to your ‘roles’ definition, if a man, say, looks after a baby, does he have a different gender? If so, how would you name it? Gender, as I understand it and in its non-linguistic sense, began as a euphemism for sex, and has morphed into an amorphous monster!

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Fiona English

Good point.

michael stanwick
michael stanwick
1 year ago
Reply to  Fiona English

You got to one meaning of “gender” – as a euphemism for sex (perhaps synonym?) but didn’t arrive at a second meaning of “gender” in sociocultural matters as in your example of the “gender pay gap”.

A Willis
A Willis
1 year ago
Reply to  Fiona English

I do wonder how this gender revolution is going to hit the French (with apologies for the term, “the French”, which someone suggested a couple of weeks ago was xenophobic).
Whatever are they going to do about, for example, a table that want to self-identify as masculine?
If a tree falls over in the forest and no-one hears, was it male, or female?
How are they going to handle New York’s hundred-and-seventy-odd genders, when they only have masculine, feminine and neuter?

harry storm
harry storm
1 year ago
Reply to  Fiona English

I wrote almost the same thing above before I saw this.

A Willis
A Willis
1 year ago
Reply to  Fiona English

I recall many years ago the first time I came across someone ignorantly using the word ‘gender’ instead of sex. It was in the transcript of an equality lecture given by a Harvard professor (I believe it might have been Rosabeth Moss Kanter, but apologise to her if it was not) to a group of US CEOs.
The story I heard was that the professor had correctly used the term ‘sex’, but that her secretary had substituted every use of it for the word ‘gender’. When asked why, she is purported to have said that she just imagined that all these men (CEO’s of the US’s biggest corporations) would snigger at the use of the word, so substituted it. Apparently the Professor left it thus.
Yet men are the ones that were accused of stereotyping!
.

Joann Robertson
Joann Robertson
1 year ago
Reply to  Fiona English

Yes! Sex is biological. Gender is a social construct, meaning the roles men and woman typically take in any society.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Fiona English

Good point.

michael stanwick
michael stanwick
1 year ago
Reply to  Fiona English

You got to one meaning of “gender” – as a euphemism for sex (perhaps synonym?) but didn’t arrive at a second meaning of “gender” in sociocultural matters as in your example of the “gender pay gap”.

Caroline Watson
Caroline Watson
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

‘Gender’ is a wholly social construct and, therefore, ‘gender differences’ are social constructs. I think the word that you are looking for is sex. All mammalian species are sexually dimorphic. The difference between males and females is entirely for reproductive purposes.
The question to ask is, ‘Do other mammals do this?’
If the answer is ‘yes’, it is inherent and related to biological sex and reproduction. If the answer is ‘no, only humans’, then it is a social construct.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

Do other mammals do what?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

Do other mammals do what?

Tom More
Tom More
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Neo Marxist shill and unhappy alcoholic feminist Simone de Beauvoir invented the idea of “gender” , adopting the “Ms.” identifier of common experience. Most don’t stop to think that this actually means that somehow one can understand what the two sexes are without referencing their dare I say intimate relatedness in life itself.
Add the Marxist “social construction” ideology and support for even things like sodomizing one another … and we have voila.. the modern world. Postmodernism adds the final dash of insanity and purposelessness.
Not to end in despair, check out philosopher Peter Kreeft. Aristotle and Aquinas.. abandoned for reasons of expediency not sanity… are the way back and the way forward. Hume and Kant left us adrift in nonsense. Aristotle to the rescue.. father of western realism.
https://www.wordonfire.org/videos/the-great-debates-of-philosophy/aristotle-vs-kant-on-epistemology-and-ethics/

J. Hale
J. Hale
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

It’s also interesting that race is now considered a social construct. Nobody denies there are different breeds of horses, dogs, and pigs. But acknowledging sub species of humans is not allowed.

Isabel Ward
Isabel Ward
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

This is how feminism laid the seeds for its own destruction.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Leading to a typically French version of the relay, no doubt, involving a male-identifying male, female-identifying female, male-identifying female and female-identifying male; all of them experiencing orgasms as they pass the baton.

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve Murray
Warren Trees
Warren Trees
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

2 Thessalonians, chapter 2, in the new Testament explains it all. Worth the read.
There is no more basic truth than male and female, regardless of what someone says. It is how our species reproduces. This licentiousness has happened before and it will pass. Corinth and ancient Rome come to mind.

Fiona English
Fiona English
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

But gender is a social construct – it’s sex that isn’t. The confusion between the meaning of gender and sex is partly how we got here. It’s only ever used in a human context either as a euphemism for the term ‘sex’, with which some people are uncomfortable, or when referring to sociocultural matters as in ‘the gender pay gap’. If you think about it, we never use the term ‘gender’ when referring to animals!

Caroline Watson
Caroline Watson
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

‘Gender’ is a wholly social construct and, therefore, ‘gender differences’ are social constructs. I think the word that you are looking for is sex. All mammalian species are sexually dimorphic. The difference between males and females is entirely for reproductive purposes.
The question to ask is, ‘Do other mammals do this?’
If the answer is ‘yes’, it is inherent and related to biological sex and reproduction. If the answer is ‘no, only humans’, then it is a social construct.

Tom More
Tom More
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Neo Marxist shill and unhappy alcoholic feminist Simone de Beauvoir invented the idea of “gender” , adopting the “Ms.” identifier of common experience. Most don’t stop to think that this actually means that somehow one can understand what the two sexes are without referencing their dare I say intimate relatedness in life itself.
Add the Marxist “social construction” ideology and support for even things like sodomizing one another … and we have voila.. the modern world. Postmodernism adds the final dash of insanity and purposelessness.
Not to end in despair, check out philosopher Peter Kreeft. Aristotle and Aquinas.. abandoned for reasons of expediency not sanity… are the way back and the way forward. Hume and Kant left us adrift in nonsense. Aristotle to the rescue.. father of western realism.
https://www.wordonfire.org/videos/the-great-debates-of-philosophy/aristotle-vs-kant-on-epistemology-and-ethics/

J. Hale
J. Hale
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

It’s also interesting that race is now considered a social construct. Nobody denies there are different breeds of horses, dogs, and pigs. But acknowledging sub species of humans is not allowed.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago

I am curious to know, how “trans” got hold of the idea that gender differences are just social constructs.
I wonder if they simply picked up the baton and ran with it.
Moral: Don’t leave batons laying about.

Last edited 1 year ago by polidori redux
nigel taylor
nigel taylor
1 year ago

Am I in the majority or minority for embracing the thought that trans advocates are a noisy grouping with mental and possibly physical abnormalities who contribute zilch to Society and should be kept out of the way for their own protection.

nigel taylor
nigel taylor
1 year ago

Am I in the majority or minority for embracing the thought that trans advocates are a noisy grouping with mental and possibly physical abnormalities who contribute zilch to Society and should be kept out of the way for their own protection.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago

Trust the author to stick it to the French. Certainly in terms of philosophy, she comes from fine Anglo-Saxon stock.

I wonder, are there signs of a denouement for trans activism? Whilst the movement required its philosophical basis, there seems to be emerging a philosophical basis by which its emergence can be readily understood, and therefore will presage its falling away from avant guardisme. It’s burning with too bright a flame to maintain the prominence it currently occupies in the social and political sphere.

Whilst it’s fine for adults consenting with themselves (i’ll let the French work that one out) to have their body parts guillotined, child disfigurement and encroachment on women-only spaces are starting to prove a barricade too far.

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve Murray
Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

IF only Jimmy Savil had known about Trans activism, I’m sure he could have got away with his version of abuse for even longer, the BBC would have been even more supine.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

” now then, now then”!!!

Barry Stokes
Barry Stokes
1 year ago

‘Ow’s about that then?

Barry Stokes
Barry Stokes
1 year ago

‘Ow’s about that then?

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

” now then, now then”!!!

harry storm
harry storm
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

The author isn’t “sticking it to the French” at all. From this article I’d say she is quite fond of the French.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

There’s a significant difference between admiring certain aspects of the way they present themselves to the world, in a visual sense, and their cultural/intellectual heritage.
It appears you’re unable to detect la difference between the two.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

Exactly.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

There’s a significant difference between admiring certain aspects of the way they present themselves to the world, in a visual sense, and their cultural/intellectual heritage.
It appears you’re unable to detect la difference between the two.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

Exactly.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

IF only Jimmy Savil had known about Trans activism, I’m sure he could have got away with his version of abuse for even longer, the BBC would have been even more supine.

harry storm
harry storm
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

The author isn’t “sticking it to the French” at all. From this article I’d say she is quite fond of the French.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago

Trust the author to stick it to the French. Certainly in terms of philosophy, she comes from fine Anglo-Saxon stock.

I wonder, are there signs of a denouement for trans activism? Whilst the movement required its philosophical basis, there seems to be emerging a philosophical basis by which its emergence can be readily understood, and therefore will presage its falling away from avant guardisme. It’s burning with too bright a flame to maintain the prominence it currently occupies in the social and political sphere.

Whilst it’s fine for adults consenting with themselves (i’ll let the French work that one out) to have their body parts guillotined, child disfigurement and encroachment on women-only spaces are starting to prove a barricade too far.

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve Murray
Osmo Vartiainen
Osmo Vartiainen
1 year ago

Merci Madame Stock!
Your clear and truthful argument has two issues I would like to clarify. One concerns Finland (home for me). We have been spearheading the woke movement in EU for years. We have an absolutely unequal socialist government run by inexperienced and incompetent “young” women occuping all major ministries (note! I have nothing against women in leadership, neither in politics nor in business, but I abhore quotas. I’m just bitter;)). Boys are struggling to cope with an education system rigged for girls in the name of “equality” for half a human life-time. Yet, there is light at the end of the tunnel! The non-gender-identifying social security ID did not happen! Eventually the centre to right political parties did come to their senses, just in time, as they realized that elections were approaching. It seems now, that we will have a radically different set of ministers by the end of spring. The nightmare is over!
The other thing that caught my eye, was your mention of Trans “religiousity”. If you mean their fervour and fanatism, I agree completely. It’s just that the way it’s expressed, leaves an uncomfortably nauseating fear, that there is some disturbed faction of Trans activists who claim affiliation to a religion proper? I suppose that would be quite far fetched, so guess I’m just misunderstanding…again.

Last edited 1 year ago by Osmo Vartiainen
Laney R Sexton
Laney R Sexton
1 year ago

I think Stock when referring to trans ‘religiosity’ is indeed referring to their fervor and fanaticism. However at least in the US there are many protestant preachers who wear rainbow vestments and claim that either or both Jesus Christ and God are transgender and autistic.

Congratulations on your government course correcting, I wish mine would.

Paul Nathanson
Paul Nathanson
1 year ago

What do the trans, woke (and feminist) ideologues in Finland say about conscripting only male citizens into the armed forces? That question will not easily be ignored in view not only of egalitarianism but also of transgenderism.
My field is comparative religion, and I think that all of these political ideologies, whether on the Left or the Right (to the extent that either label remains adequate), are “secular religions.” What puts them on the religious grid is not merely that they appeal to emotion, which all ways of life must do, but that they rely on a specific way of thinking. These ideologies are really secular forms of fundamentalism. For example, all have borrowed heavily from the dualistic philosophies (or gnostic religions) that originated in central Asia and began to spread throughout the Mediterranean world (including Judaism and eventually Christianity) approximately 2,500 years ago.
First and foremost, dualism is an “us” vs. “them” mentality. But it goes beyond that, because both “we” and “they” are identified in turn with good or evil.
In the trans context, consider the enduring dichotomy between flesh and spirit, body and mind, nature and culture (or “nurture”), which goes back much further than Descartes. The most extreme example in our time is surely the trans notion of some “essence” (or soul) that can somehow find itself in the “wrong” body.

Last edited 1 year ago by Paul Nathanson
Søren Ferling
Søren Ferling
1 year ago

I see it in such a way that one can meaningfully consider transideology as a religious phenomenon, because it is a thought construction that rests on some dogmas that cannot be doubted, that are counterfactual and antiscientific and inaccessible to facts and arguments.
If supporters respond to criticism at all, it is with dogmatic clichés or derogatory terms.
One works in a missionary way and follows a ‘either you are with us or you are against us’ logic – critics of the dogmas ‘are heretics’ – ‘untouchables’. (by the way, this is something generally left-wing).
You work towards an imagined ideal state, which will become possible by radically changing the way you live, act and think – a Paradise on Earth – an apocalypse.
I believe that the linear (as opposed to the more common circular in religions) apocalyptic shows that, just like with communism, we are talking about perverted Judaism and Christianity.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

I know what you mean. Did wonder about that. It would be interesting if god were brought into it. Would that be a gender or a sex issue? Can’t wait for the religious to wade in!! What a can of worms! Putin said god is a man and most religions think that, which a big part of men feeling superior (if god is a man all men must be gods) and misogyny.

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Transgender ideology runs counter to G*d’s plan. It is rooted in self-love and therefore a form of idolatry. Not sure what Putin and misogyny have to do with it, except that trans-ideology hurts both sexes.

0 0
0 0
11 months ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

Self love?? It is rooted in self hate!

0 0
0 0
11 months ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

Self love?? It is rooted in self hate!

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Transgender ideology runs counter to G*d’s plan. It is rooted in self-love and therefore a form of idolatry. Not sure what Putin and misogyny have to do with it, except that trans-ideology hurts both sexes.

Laney R Sexton
Laney R Sexton
1 year ago

I think Stock when referring to trans ‘religiosity’ is indeed referring to their fervor and fanaticism. However at least in the US there are many protestant preachers who wear rainbow vestments and claim that either or both Jesus Christ and God are transgender and autistic.

Congratulations on your government course correcting, I wish mine would.

Paul Nathanson
Paul Nathanson
1 year ago

What do the trans, woke (and feminist) ideologues in Finland say about conscripting only male citizens into the armed forces? That question will not easily be ignored in view not only of egalitarianism but also of transgenderism.
My field is comparative religion, and I think that all of these political ideologies, whether on the Left or the Right (to the extent that either label remains adequate), are “secular religions.” What puts them on the religious grid is not merely that they appeal to emotion, which all ways of life must do, but that they rely on a specific way of thinking. These ideologies are really secular forms of fundamentalism. For example, all have borrowed heavily from the dualistic philosophies (or gnostic religions) that originated in central Asia and began to spread throughout the Mediterranean world (including Judaism and eventually Christianity) approximately 2,500 years ago.
First and foremost, dualism is an “us” vs. “them” mentality. But it goes beyond that, because both “we” and “they” are identified in turn with good or evil.
In the trans context, consider the enduring dichotomy between flesh and spirit, body and mind, nature and culture (or “nurture”), which goes back much further than Descartes. The most extreme example in our time is surely the trans notion of some “essence” (or soul) that can somehow find itself in the “wrong” body.

Last edited 1 year ago by Paul Nathanson
Søren Ferling
Søren Ferling
1 year ago

I see it in such a way that one can meaningfully consider transideology as a religious phenomenon, because it is a thought construction that rests on some dogmas that cannot be doubted, that are counterfactual and antiscientific and inaccessible to facts and arguments.
If supporters respond to criticism at all, it is with dogmatic clichés or derogatory terms.
One works in a missionary way and follows a ‘either you are with us or you are against us’ logic – critics of the dogmas ‘are heretics’ – ‘untouchables’. (by the way, this is something generally left-wing).
You work towards an imagined ideal state, which will become possible by radically changing the way you live, act and think – a Paradise on Earth – an apocalypse.
I believe that the linear (as opposed to the more common circular in religions) apocalyptic shows that, just like with communism, we are talking about perverted Judaism and Christianity.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

I know what you mean. Did wonder about that. It would be interesting if god were brought into it. Would that be a gender or a sex issue? Can’t wait for the religious to wade in!! What a can of worms! Putin said god is a man and most religions think that, which a big part of men feeling superior (if god is a man all men must be gods) and misogyny.

Osmo Vartiainen
Osmo Vartiainen
1 year ago

Merci Madame Stock!
Your clear and truthful argument has two issues I would like to clarify. One concerns Finland (home for me). We have been spearheading the woke movement in EU for years. We have an absolutely unequal socialist government run by inexperienced and incompetent “young” women occuping all major ministries (note! I have nothing against women in leadership, neither in politics nor in business, but I abhore quotas. I’m just bitter;)). Boys are struggling to cope with an education system rigged for girls in the name of “equality” for half a human life-time. Yet, there is light at the end of the tunnel! The non-gender-identifying social security ID did not happen! Eventually the centre to right political parties did come to their senses, just in time, as they realized that elections were approaching. It seems now, that we will have a radically different set of ministers by the end of spring. The nightmare is over!
The other thing that caught my eye, was your mention of Trans “religiousity”. If you mean their fervour and fanatism, I agree completely. It’s just that the way it’s expressed, leaves an uncomfortably nauseating fear, that there is some disturbed faction of Trans activists who claim affiliation to a religion proper? I suppose that would be quite far fetched, so guess I’m just misunderstanding…again.

Last edited 1 year ago by Osmo Vartiainen