Recognizing a person's "gender identity" in law would be akin to recognizing a person's "spirit animal" in law. It would be an endorsement of a religious idea. People should have their gender identity beliefs treated like religious beliefs, and accorded the same protection that people receive for their religious beliefs and practices (at least in the US). Likewise, people who don't share those beliefs should be protected from coercion by government to affirm those beliefs.
And marriage, heterosexual or homosexual, shouldn't be a concern of the government at all. The government should simply enforce contracts among individuals and groups. "Marriage" should be the province of priests, pastors, monks, and shamans.
I do hope more voices who are opposed to the dominant trans ideology yet sympathetic toward trans people in general acquire a greater audience, rather than those voices that seem to be opposed and not particularly sympathetic, like Matt Walsh.
I see no moral problem with an adult making the decision to use hormones or perform surgeries to align their bodies to appear more like they desire them to be, but I am very wary of the encouragement of children and teenagers to adopt a particular perspective on their dysphoria which could more likely lead to potentially dangerous and life-altering choices. Jordan Peterson is wrong to suggest that a doctor performing re-assignment surgery on an adult is criminal, or immoral, but I do think it would be immoral to do so on a child or a teenager, when "identity" formation is at its most chaotic beginnings and risk assessment is generally immature.
Somewhere between California and Florida there is a reasonable and virtuous perspective that can be reached about trans issues.
I disagree that gender identity is like a religious belief, and the idea that it could be treated like a religious belief in law. Given that the gender identity of trans people arise out of gender dysphoria, a medical condition, rather than being rooted in philosophical commitments, I can't see how the parallel could be drawn. Either way, the right of trans people to access medical treatment needs to be protected in law, especially since people like Matt Walsh have said that they would support banning medical transition in their ideal world.
Otherwise, I totally agree that 'somewhere between California and Florida there is a reasonable and virtuous perspective that can be reached about trans issues'.
The notion of a “gender identity” is a religious belief. The idea that a person can choose their gender like a hat, is a religious belief. The belief that there is such a thing as “gender” which is independent of a person’s sex and that “gender” manifests itself in a way a person behaves and feels and pronouns refer to that and not a person’s sex is a philosophical commitment that is held not just by people who are gender dysphoric but by “cis gendered” people who are completely comfortable with the sex they were born. Indeed if it weren’t for a lot of people who are not trans, more than people who are in fact trans, who hold the belief that a person can change their gender, the statement “transwomen are women” would be belief held by a tiny minority of individuals. “Transwomen are women” is a confession of faith similar in purpose and validity as “Jesus has arisen.” -- and no sex or gender dysphoria must be experienced by the person making the affirmation.
A person who is dysphoric about the sex they were born with -- someone who is emotionally distressed that the body they have is not the body of the sex they would prefer is not inevitably going to come to the belief that they can change their gender by simply declaring it so, or that their distress comes from the fact that there is an internal gender that people have that can deviate from a person’s sex.
There are people who identify as trans and they are accepted by trans activists as trans but they are comfortable with their primary genitals and they don’t desire to have their genitals removed. The dysphoria that various trans individuals have varies in kind and intensity. Some people who are trans do nothing but wear stereotypical clothing of the sex they desire and that’s all they want to do.
Indeed, I myself would be happy to have the body of a female (preferably minus the periods) and would go about the process of transforming my body if I thought the technology was safe and effective. Ideally we would have the technology to just shape shift, because maybe I’d eventually have the desire to have a male body again. We don’t have that technology though, so I have what I have. It does not follow from my desire for a female body that I believe I can change my gender by saying so or even through hormones or surgeries that are currently available.
I agree that hormone treatments and surgeries and other medical procedures that people go through with the desire to become a different sex should be protected in law. This would ensure that the religious desires of people like Matt Walsh do not restrict the desires of people to alter our bodies in a way we believe will make us more happy with it and, for some, in accord with their religious beliefs about bringing their body in alignment with their gender. If some Christians had their way, people would be restricted from getting piercings and tattoos because it violates their religious beliefs about altering their bodies.
Recognizing a person's "gender identity" in law would be akin to recognizing a person's "spirit animal" in law. It would be an endorsement of a religious idea. People should have their gender identity beliefs treated like religious beliefs, and accorded the same protection that people receive for their religious beliefs and practices (at least in the US). Likewise, people who don't share those beliefs should be protected from coercion by government to affirm those beliefs.
And marriage, heterosexual or homosexual, shouldn't be a concern of the government at all. The government should simply enforce contracts among individuals and groups. "Marriage" should be the province of priests, pastors, monks, and shamans.
I do hope more voices who are opposed to the dominant trans ideology yet sympathetic toward trans people in general acquire a greater audience, rather than those voices that seem to be opposed and not particularly sympathetic, like Matt Walsh.
I see no moral problem with an adult making the decision to use hormones or perform surgeries to align their bodies to appear more like they desire them to be, but I am very wary of the encouragement of children and teenagers to adopt a particular perspective on their dysphoria which could more likely lead to potentially dangerous and life-altering choices. Jordan Peterson is wrong to suggest that a doctor performing re-assignment surgery on an adult is criminal, or immoral, but I do think it would be immoral to do so on a child or a teenager, when "identity" formation is at its most chaotic beginnings and risk assessment is generally immature.
Somewhere between California and Florida there is a reasonable and virtuous perspective that can be reached about trans issues.
I disagree that gender identity is like a religious belief, and the idea that it could be treated like a religious belief in law. Given that the gender identity of trans people arise out of gender dysphoria, a medical condition, rather than being rooted in philosophical commitments, I can't see how the parallel could be drawn. Either way, the right of trans people to access medical treatment needs to be protected in law, especially since people like Matt Walsh have said that they would support banning medical transition in their ideal world.
Otherwise, I totally agree that 'somewhere between California and Florida there is a reasonable and virtuous perspective that can be reached about trans issues'.
The notion of a “gender identity” is a religious belief. The idea that a person can choose their gender like a hat, is a religious belief. The belief that there is such a thing as “gender” which is independent of a person’s sex and that “gender” manifests itself in a way a person behaves and feels and pronouns refer to that and not a person’s sex is a philosophical commitment that is held not just by people who are gender dysphoric but by “cis gendered” people who are completely comfortable with the sex they were born. Indeed if it weren’t for a lot of people who are not trans, more than people who are in fact trans, who hold the belief that a person can change their gender, the statement “transwomen are women” would be belief held by a tiny minority of individuals. “Transwomen are women” is a confession of faith similar in purpose and validity as “Jesus has arisen.” -- and no sex or gender dysphoria must be experienced by the person making the affirmation.
A person who is dysphoric about the sex they were born with -- someone who is emotionally distressed that the body they have is not the body of the sex they would prefer is not inevitably going to come to the belief that they can change their gender by simply declaring it so, or that their distress comes from the fact that there is an internal gender that people have that can deviate from a person’s sex.
There are people who identify as trans and they are accepted by trans activists as trans but they are comfortable with their primary genitals and they don’t desire to have their genitals removed. The dysphoria that various trans individuals have varies in kind and intensity. Some people who are trans do nothing but wear stereotypical clothing of the sex they desire and that’s all they want to do.
Indeed, I myself would be happy to have the body of a female (preferably minus the periods) and would go about the process of transforming my body if I thought the technology was safe and effective. Ideally we would have the technology to just shape shift, because maybe I’d eventually have the desire to have a male body again. We don’t have that technology though, so I have what I have. It does not follow from my desire for a female body that I believe I can change my gender by saying so or even through hormones or surgeries that are currently available.
I agree that hormone treatments and surgeries and other medical procedures that people go through with the desire to become a different sex should be protected in law. This would ensure that the religious desires of people like Matt Walsh do not restrict the desires of people to alter our bodies in a way we believe will make us more happy with it and, for some, in accord with their religious beliefs about bringing their body in alignment with their gender. If some Christians had their way, people would be restricted from getting piercings and tattoos because it violates their religious beliefs about altering their bodies.