Jenn[d]er and Other Confusions
By Clarice Feldman in the AmericanThinker
Bruce Jenner’s decision to takehormone treatment, wear a wig, call himself Caitlyn, get tarted up and pose ina corset for the cover of Vanity Fair has created a mediaavalanche, despite the fact that transgendered folk make up a truly smallpercentage of Americans. It’s been estimated that 700,000 or 0.03 percent of Americans are transgendered and most but not all ofthese are what’s called transitioning to another sex. Ifthis confuses you, it’s because the terms “gender” and “sex” have themselvesbeen undergoing transition, as Grammarist explains:
Gender was traditionally used mainly in grammar, language, andlinguistics contexts to refer to the sex assigned to nouns (especially innon-English languages). For example, the gender of the French noun maison(house) is feminine, while the gender of livre (book) ismasculine. Words of the same gender tend to have similar endings, and theyaffect the forms of some of the surrounding words. Sex,meanwhile, was traditionally the term for males or females viewed as agroup.
In recent decades, the meaning ofsex has narrowed, and the word is now mainly confined to uses having to do withsexual intercourse and sexual organs. Gender, meanwhile, is increasinglyused to refer to a person’s maleness or femaleness. For instance, we tend tosay that a boy’s gender is male and a girl’s gender is female. Ofcourse, the term is more complicated than that, and gender identity isnot always tied to one’s sex organs. This at least partially explains why gender isnow preferred in this extended use; gender denotes identity,which can be fluid and complicated, whereas what sex organs one has is prettystraightforward.
Sex is still sometimes used in its traditional senses. No oneconsiders it wrong, but it tends to give way to gender for thereasons mentioned above and also because gender is considered moreappropriate in contexts where sex and sexuality are not to be brought up.
With the greater acceptance ofgender fluidity and availability of surgery to add something or subtractsomething external (genital reconstruction and breast implantations), manyjurisdictions have included transgenders as a protected class in laws againstvarious kinds of discrimination .A whole army of helpers for pay have notsurprisingly also arrived on the scene. The Washington Post stylesection notes that in addition to lawyers and surgeons who work withtransgenders there are voice coaches, therapists, and feminine-imageconsultants, voice and hair-removal specialists.
The Motherless Child (RadicalFeminists versus Transmen)
Female transgenders who haveundergone such surgery are called transmen. Male transgenders who have arecalled transwomen. (Figures are sketchy but there are about 3 times moretranswomen than transmen.)
In either case they have only thenew outward appearance of the opposite sex, none of the internal workings of the opposite sex. Transmen, that is women who have adopted a male identityand undergone hormone and surgical treatments to alter their appearance, stillhave the internal equipment they were born with and on rare occasions --perhaps 41 -- with another switch in hormone treatments have been able to give birth, Transwomen never can.
All of this makes the statement ofthe Nation’s Michelle Goldberg quoting young radical feminists utterlyludicrous. On “All In With Chris Hayes” this week, she said:
...that many young feminists"no longer want to use the word 'woman' in relation to abortion because itexcludes trans men." There's a lot of "conceptual murk to clearaway," she added with admirable understatement, "but among youngerpeople that I've talked to, it almost seems amazing to them that anybody wouldquestion the need to have gender-neutral language."
The primary sources of abortion datain the US -- the CDC and the Guttmacher Institute -- don’t collectinformation on the gender identity of those who seek abortion, butconversations with abortion providers and others suggest the number oftransgender men who want to end a pregnancy is very low. I don’t see how itdenies “the existence and humanity of trans people” to use language thatdescribes the vast majority of those who seek to end a pregnancy. Why can’treferences to people who don’t identify as women simply be added to references towomen? After all, every year over 2,000 men get breast cancer and over 400 die,and no one is calling for “women” to be cut out of breast-cancer language sothat men will feel more comfortable seeking treatment. If there was such acall, though, I wonder what would happen. Women have such a long history ofminimizing themselves in order not to hurt feelings or seem self-promoting orattention-demanding. We are raised to put ourselves second, and too often,still, we do.
Maybelike the People’s Front of Judea dolts in Monty Python’s The Life of Brian theyoung feminists should all just agree that while men actually can’t havebabies no matter their outward appearance, as a symbolic move “againstoppression”, these men have the right to have babies or abort the onesthey can’t actually have.
B. Elsewhere in Media andAdministration Silliness
Meanwhile, the media is ignoringissues of far greater consequence and otherwise beclowning themselves.
1) Relishing Being a BeheadingTarget
CNN’s Erin Burnett interviewedPamela Geller after it was learned that she was the initial target of the manwho tried to behead a Boston cop.
Referring to the Draw Mohammedcontest Geller sponsored (of course Burnett used the honorific “The ProphetMohammed” though she certainly would never refer to the Prophet Moses or the“Savior Christ”) she asked: “Do you on some level relish being the targetof these attacks?”
Geller responded to this absurdquestion, “Relish being the target? Who self-promotes to get killed?” She saidshe has recruited an “an army of security” for protection and criticized themedia for siding with “those that would target me.”
2) Paying Illegal Immigrants TaxRefunds for Taxes They Didn’t Pay
Instapundit bringsto our attention something the media is too busy with transgenderabortions and aides to note:
EXECUTIVE AMNESTY WITH BENEFITS: TheIRS has confirmed to Congress that individuals granted amnesty by PresidentObama’s unilateral lawmaking ”executive action” will indeed qualify for arefund of back taxes, even if they never filed a tax return:
IRS lawyers have ruled thatonce illegal immigrants get numbers, they can go back and re-file for up tothree previous years’ taxes and claim refunds even for time they were workingillegally.
The lawyers said since the EITC is arefundable credit, that’s allowed even when the illegal immigrants worked offthe books and never paid taxes in the first place.
Terrific -- so the President cantake executive action that not only transforms individuals whom our lawclassifies as “deportable” into “not deportable,” he can simultaneously conferupon them multiple benefits, including work permits and now, tax refunds, whichwill be funded by law-abiding individuals who are present in the countrylegally.
The conferral of benefits -- noweven more significant than previously believed -- is a key indicator thatPresident Obama’s executive actions on illegal immigration are not, in fact,mere “prosecutorial discretion,” as he asserts. Prosecutorial discretionallows the executive branch to prioritize enforcement given the reality oflimited resources; it does not grant the executive branch authority to gofurther and grant benefits to lawbreakers.
3) TSA Continues to Foul Up
Last week even though I passed asecurity clearance for a global entry pass I was prohibited by TSA frombringing a circular thread cutter onboard or a stick blender,neither of which I can figure out how to weaponize. On the other hand, theTransportation Security Administration failed to stopundercover agents in 67 out of 70 recent probes of TSA screening. These agentscarried fake weapons through checkpoints at major airports across the country andwere not stopped.
4) Harvard Law Professor and the Atlantic Illustrate Foggy Thinking
Try not to laugh, but LawrenceLessig thinks inevitable Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton wouldbe a great “champion” for abolishing political corruption by way of“campaign-finance reform.” Writing for the Atlantic, the Harvard law profargues in the spirit of the old Vulcan proverb: “Only Nixon can go to China.”
5) Time Magazine’s Miss Piggy Editorial
Perhaps inspired by the verywell-paid Chelsea Clinton, known for her hard hitting interview with the Geicogecko, Time ran an op-edby the Muppets’ Miss Piggy entitled “Why I am a Feminist Pig”. Maybe nextweek they’ll interview her on whether trans men should be included in the abortiondebate.
6. The New York Times and the Rubios’ Traffic Tickets
Undoubtedly as important to them asthe never-ending Clinton Foundation payoff scandals and record destruction orthe administration stonewalling on the IRS targeting of administration criticsand political opponents, the paper assigned three people -- Alan Rappeport,Steve Eder, and Kitty Bennett -- to report on Marco Rubio and his wife’straffic infractions since 1993. (He had all of 4, his wife had more.) Worsethan giving space to such nonsense it turns out that they got the story fromClinton opposition researchers and then, when caught outmegaphoning them, pretended they’d dug this up themselves.
"In order to make this hit onRubio work, [the] reporters
had to combine Marco Rubio’s drivingrecord with someone who is not Marco Rubio. Namely, his wife.
This would be like claiming thatHillary Clinton and her husband had sexually assaulted numerous women. I mean,it’s true in one sense, but it’s a totally weird thing to group together."
7) Elsewhere in the real world
In case you find what the mediacovers distracting and idiotic, here are some of the many matters that reallyshould be of concern.
We should begin with a totaleconomic blockade on ISIS-controlled areas, notifying all governments that theUnited States will cut off economic intercourse with any country from whosejurisdiction persons or goods reach ISIS, or within which any ISIS-relatedfinancial transactions occur. Air patrols over the desert access routes canfinish starving the cutthroats as a U.S. expeditionary force moves in aroundthem. Never again must Americans be sacrificed in house-to-house fighting.Artillery and bombs from B-52s should do the bulk of the killing. Theexpeditionary force would finish off survivors. No prisoners. The GenevaConvention does not apply to pirates or cutthroats.
U.S. forces should come home quickerthan they left, having minded our business by showing what happens to those whoharm America.
3. Iran Continues to Ignore itsObligations and the Administration Doesn’t Care
In one of his many emails for The Israel Project Omri Ceren notes that Iran isincreasing its enriched uranium stocks and the administration is laughing thisoff:
On a policy level, the ISIS analysisemphasizes that Iran's refusal to meet its obligations "show the riskposed by relying on technical solutions that have not yet been demonstrated byIran." Tehran is under sanctions and in the middle of negotiations -- andstill can't be relied upon. The risks of Iranian intransigence post-sanctionsrelief are straightforward.
Politically, observers may worryabout the seriousness with which the Obama administration will take Iranianviolations of the future nuclear deal, given that they're literally laughingoff concerns of current Iranian cheating that one of the world's best expertssays are “legitimate questions” .
4. The Feds Still Have Insecure DataStorage And Critical Information Continues to Be Stolen
Chinese hackers seem to have hacked into Interior Department Office of Personnel managementrecords and stolen three decades of security clearance information (includingthat of intelligence agents), this is the second known hack of federal recordsin recent years and though it occurred in December this major security breachwas not discovered until April.