One thing I think people need to remember about the current state of the trans discourse is that it is being flooded with misrepresentations of the truth, and bad faith talking points, as a result of the politicized culture wars. This is being done by people on both sides with an agenda. This, in turn, is why we should never just accept what we read or hear when it comes to trans issues. I hope people think harder, and investigate at least a bit, about the various claims they come across.
Over the years, it has been noticed by many people that certain trans activists, especially those aligned with the postmodern left, have tried to shut down good faith concerns on various issues. Any deviation from their dogmatic point of view is treated with suspicion at best, and reflexively shut down as 'transphobic' at worst. The many trans people who are willing to listen to concerns and are willing to compromise are effectively left out of the debate, either because they are too afraid to speak up, or simply because they are not even invited to the table. This, in turn, has made some people think that trans people make unreasonable demands all the time, severely damaging our credibility.
On the other hand, culture warriors on the right have not been willing to work with moderate, good faith trans people who actually want to find a workable compromise to the various issues being raised either. I have been voicing my frustrations about this for over a year now, and the situation has only worsened, probably due to the need for the US Republican Party to score political points ahead of the 2024 elections. Everything that is pro-trans in any way is reflexively dismissed as 'woke', even though there are clearly a lot of trans people out there who aren't 'woke', who just want to be left alone to live their lives. Blatantly anti-trans figures like Michael Knowles and Matt Walsh are treated as 'anti-woke' heroes, notwithstanding the cruel and unreasonable approach they have to their fellow human beings. The most outrageous examples of trans activism are presented in right-wing media as representative of trans people, which has made their audience turn against the whole trans community over time. This is not only a distortion of reality, it is also very unfair to those trans people, like myself, who want to find a peaceful compromise to move forward.
All this means that, a lot of what is in the media about trans issues is actually such a misrepresentations of the truth that it is no better than outright lies, pushed in bad faith by people with an organized political agenda. The truth is, they don't want there to be good solutions to the conflicts between trans people and other parties. They want you to get outraged, so you support their outrageous politics, and stop being a caring and compassionate human being. Their propaganda is designed to turn decent, moderate people with reasonable concerns into hardened, inhumane extremists. Again, this applies to both sides. Don't let them succeed.
Welcome to the first article in a new series, where I will attempt to systematically apply the RIDE method to various cultural and political controversies. As I said last time, there is too much emotion, tribalism and irrationality in our discourse right now, and the RIDE method was developed to bring back calm, rational and evidence-based discourse. In this first attempt, I will apply the RIDE method to the warring culture war factions often known as 'woke' and 'anti-woke'.
In this first part, I will be applying the RIDE method to the set of beliefs commonly called 'woke'. But before that, I need to say this: I don't really want to use the word 'woke' if possible, but it is what people understand, so I continue to use it sometimes. When I, and many other people, talk about 'wokeism', what we are referring to is the praxis of postmodern critical theory, i.e. the activism rooted in a desire to apply the theory in the real world.
R for being Rational and Reasonable: FAIL. Identitarian critical theory force-fits everything into an us-vs-them, oppressor vs oppressed worldview, and is therefore irrational and unreasonable at least to some extent. Double standards are also a natural result of this worldview: for example, the 'progressive stack' speaking system, where the right to speak is rationed on the basis of immutable characteristics, results from the application of an oppressor vs oppressed worldview. Add in the influence of postmodernism, which is inherently skeptical of the notion of objective truth, and the irrationality is further magnified. This is why true believers of postmodern critical theory often have no interest in debating their opponents, especially when they think they can't win by normally accepted logic. Instead, they often resort to tactics like de-platforming or whataboutism. Scientific arguments are also often rejected by postmodernists. Postmodern critical theory is therefore neither rational nor reasonable.
I for Independent Thinking: FAIL. A worldview that sees people not as individuals capable of independent thought, but as members of oppressor vs oppressed groups based on immutable characteristics, is inherently bad for independent thinking. Those considered privileged are discouraged from speaking up, especially where their ideas are not in line with the theory. This is supposed to make room for other, less privileged voices. However, in practice, those considered oppressed are only encouraged to speak up if their ideas conform with the theory. If they voice any opposition to the theory, those ideas are quickly attributed to their privilege in another identity category. The intersection of multiple identity categories is fundamental to the model of intersectionality, which in practice means that almost anyone can be found to be privileged in some way. Therefore, ultimately, no matter if you are privileged or oppressed, you can only speak up if you agree with the theory.
D for Defending Freedom: MASSIVE FAIL. As previously analyzed, the privileged are discouraged from speaking up. Given the model of intersectionality, almost anyone can be considered privileged in some way. This ultimately allows gatekeepers to suppress ideas arbitrarily, only allowing people to speak up when it conforms to their worldview and their theory. Moreover, the postmodern distrust in the notion of objective truth means that ideas are seen as tools of powerplay. This leads to many ideas being arbitrarily labeled as harmful, often based on coincidental historical circumstances, even if they actually conform with the objective truth. Furthermore, in the real world, activists often resort to the set of tactics generally known as 'cancel culture', in order to suppress ideas they disagree with, justified by the aforementioned philosophical views. All this leads to people being unable to speak or think freely.
E for Evidence: MASSIVE FAIL. Proponents of postmodern critical theory have not been able to show, via objective evidence, that their interpretation of the world is fundamentally correct, and that other interpretations are less sound. I believe this is the bar that any philosophy seeking to influence our politics needs to clear. Postmodern critical theory is often built upon selected anecdotes that do not form a systematic, objective evidence base. This kind of selective cherry-picking of evidence is especially discouraged in science and medicine, for example, with methods in place to prevent it from happening in these fields. Postmodern critical theory is also ultimately an attempt to force-fit what is observed with selected philosophical theories developed in the past. Such force-fitting of observations into a pre-determined conclusion is also not allowed in scientific and medical research. Given that the 'evidence' for postmodern critical theory fails to meet the commonly demanded standards of science and medicine, I seriously don't think we should allow it to be applied to real world politics.
Next time, I will be applying the RIDE method to the arguments of the 'anti-woke' movement. Afterwards, I will be making some conclusions as to what we have learned.
TaraElla is a singer-songwriter and author, who is the author of the Moral Libertarian Manifesto and the Moral Libertarian book series, which argue that liberalism is still the most moral and effective value system for the West.
She is also the author of The Trans Case Against Queer Theory and The TaraElla Story (her autobiography).
You can also read and follow TaraElla's second substack, focused on political philosophy, here.
I like your stuff, but not this RIDE model. And I think your application of it in this case is lacking. A blanket statement that 'woke' discourse has not provided evidence, with no evidence to support the statement itself, surely doesn't meet your own criteria for reasoned discourse.