Loving your child unconditionally is hateful

Recently a friend had to write a response to a commenter who was actually offended that she planned to support and love her son who likes to wear dresses. The reason for the offense was, of course, that she did not wish to teach her son that he is a girl. Her responses are so well-written and thoughtful that I wanted to draw attention to them.

LETTER TO A “TERF” by Yolande

“Thank you so much for taking the time to comment. It’s interesting to me that you seem to take offence to my pointing out biological facts about my son’s body.  He does indeed have a penis and testicles, that will, at some stage in his life (I assume, as all signs point to his body being healthy and functional) produce sperm.  My understanding of science is admittedly rudimentary, but he is clearly a male human and as such, he will never become pregnant through sexual intercourse, or give birth spontaneously to a child.  How could such a simple observation be contentious?”

Indeed. The folks who believe that biological sex is a social construct but wearing a dress magically turns a boy into a girl think it’s downright hateful to point out that a male human produces sperm and might someday become a father.

Yolande is a very good writer who can summarize clearly the difference between sex and gender.

“I see evidence of increasingly compulsory heterosexuality in our society, and that troubles me.  I want my children to be free to love who they love whether they are attracted to people of the opposite sex, or the same sex as they are.

What our bodies *do* dictate, however, is our sex.  And sex is significant because it in turn dictates our reproductive capacity.  And sadly, it is on the basis of sex roles, and reproductive ability and vulnerability, that females are oppressed and discriminated against in this world in which males hold and enforce so much privilege and often oppression, over females. My view is that sex and gender are distinct, and as I mentioned above, humans are mammals, and almost all humans fall into one of two reproductive biological sex categories: male and female.  Of course, there are a small percentage of people on the planet who are intersex, or who are born with genitals or secondary sex characteristics that are very different from the more usual variations among individuals. And that’s fine! But this doesn’t negate basic mammalian reproductive biology, just as those humans who are sometimes born with missing limbs do not negate the rule that generally humans have two arms and two legs.”

Her post clearly demonstrated that she supports and loves her children for who they are and that she will support them no matter what sorts of clothes they like to wear or who they may fall in love with someday. Every kid deserves this kind of love from their parents.

However, in the comments, she is accused of being “harmful” and “misogynist” and she is referred to a preposterous article that accuses those of us who understand mammalian reproduction of being “transmisogynist.”

When the actual facts of science seem “hateful” to you, that’s how you know your beliefs are not based on reality and are actually based on religious faith.

It’s unbelievable to me that someone who explains herself so well and who is so kind and friendly gets told she is being harmful.

One commenter hilariously writes: “Your characterization of reproduction as happening between a “male” and “female” of a species is no longer the current accepted language in the circles.” Really? I hate to break it to the sparklequeers, but even if you outlaw talking about the facts of reproduction, they will remain the same. No matter how much you buy into gender theory, it still requires a sperm from a male and an egg from a female to make a baby. Feminists did not invent this system out of an evil desire to oppress trans people, this is the way humans are, and it’s also true of a large portion of the animal kingdom.

Another commenter writes:

“I always wanted to have children, and I couldn’t. People like to say to us “you’re no less of a woman because you can’t have kids.” And yet here you are, boiling womanhood down to reproduction.

Your words are harmful. Thanks for once again for further marginalizing those of us who cannot have kids, as if it’s been such a fucking rosy road all along.”

It is a complete mystery to me why stating the facts of mammalian reproduction means reducing womanhood to reproduction or harming women who can’t have kids. I am a lesbian who has no interest in reproducing, however, being female, my body still prepares to create a new life each month by releasing an egg and filling my uterus with menstrual blood. I respect this process and view the female body with reverence for having this ability, however, my reproductive capacity is not all that I am. I am many things, such as a writer, a musician, a thinker and a dreamer, a friend and a lover, a worker and a feminist. At no point does my understanding of female biology reduce me to nothing but reproduction. Understanding how babies are made does not harm people who are infertile. In fact, the reason that treatments for infertility exist is because of our understanding of biology.

Despite the fact that Yolande wrote thoughtful, well-reasoned and kind answers to the people who left unnecessarily hateful responses to her post, an entire hate-post was written about her on Tumblr. I considered responding to it but it was so incoherent there really is no way to respond. How do you argue against a postmodern word salad that attempts to erase what we know about human beings?

When you compare the writing of gender critical feminists and trans activists, it’s quite clear who is telling the truth and who is not. It’s also clear who is supporting their children and who is not. Thank goodness there are still parents in the world who allow their children to wear the clothing they enjoy and play with the toys that interest them without rushing them off to the gender clinic to have them sterilized. Those are the type of parents who will raise children who feel comfortable with who they are.

Advertisements

35 thoughts on “Loving your child unconditionally is hateful

  1. It’s unbelievable to me that someone who explains herself so well and who is so kind and friendly gets told she is being harmful.

    She’s a woman saying no to a particularly perverted group of men. Of course she’s being harmful! /s

    Liked by 8 people

  2. A woman writes about her son and how she does not feel the need to pathologize his gender nonconformity, and all of a sudden she has inexcusably insulted some person who was not able to bear children. This is just so narcissistic on the latter’s part.

    I never assume they’re women unless they are clearly identified public figures or otherwise have a consistent identifiable Internet presence. Trans dudes are always going around looking for women to imitate.

    Liked by 10 people

  3. Yikes. Yeah, I’ve been pretty taken aback by the vitriol I’ve been met with online. It really doesn’t take a lot for people to feel justified in telling you you’re a worthless piece of shit that deserves to die a horrible death. Repressed much? But that’s where we’re at, can’t say two words without being burned at the stake. Glad there’s still reasonable folks out there.

    Liked by 6 people

  4. While reading this I honestly felt like parts of my cranium were falling off to allow my brain to seep out and escape the insanity.

    I do think the whole “biological sex is a social construct, you can’t call anyone male or female based on their body” is a last resort defense, because it is so utterly nonsensical. Some people still seem to be clinging to the “brain sex” thing but the more that is publicly debunked in the media the more desperate they become.

    The forces pressed upon these women to believe in so much drivel and defend it with such vitriol are incomprehensible to me, though. I understand the kind of blindness and desperate loyalty a person feels while believing in the trans narrative for themselves personally, but I have no idea why critical thinking goes out the window with these people who are “supporters” of the movement, unless they really are just that afraid of children being gay.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Also, now that I’ve read your friend’s blog, too, I have to mention how meaningful the experiences of those with eating disorders/body dysmorphia are to this whole thing, and I hope her critics learn something from what she said. The tales of women who struggle with anorexia are so close in narrative to women who go through transgender experiences, and I’ve read more than one account of the two issues coexisting. With the social confusion of “sex vs gender” and all the moral issues of homosexuality removed from the equation, maybe they can help people see what is really going on here.

    All I know is that for years and years and years I absolutely hated the fat at the top of my thighs and would have done anything to get rid of it, tons of obsessive dieting and exercise, and when I read about T causing body fat redistribution I thought it was the best thing ever. (with bonus promises of male privilege! Loose the saddle bags and have people listen to you for once! What a deal!) How people cannot see the relationship between the two impulses to change the body is beyond me.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Yes I have an SJW friend who is OCD, ADHD, depressive, genderfluid and has an eating disorder.

      She demands that people use the proper pronouns in online forums.

      She hates her birth sex – hates her hourglass figure and the ability to, as a female, get pregnant. So she has taken on this genderfluid identity and tried to starve away her hips.

      Her parents have tried to talk to her about the trans thing, but of course she thinks that they simply “don’t get it”.

      She is a privileged white girl. Upper middle class family. I notice that a lot of the people who are calling themselves ” queer” on social media these days are not from poor families

      Liked by 3 people

  6. The SJWs and their like-minded allies are out of control at this point. Since when is biological sex an opinion? With the rare exception of the intersexed, humans are a sexually dimorphic species. We also don’t reproduce asexually. Even if we become single parents by choice through sperm donation instead of heterosexual intercourse, there’s still a male and female involved in creating that child.

    By saying certain sex organs make one a man or woman, we’re not engaging in biological essentialism or reducing people to walking sex organs and their associated functions. We’re just saying those are the physical markers distinguishing the sexes. The comment from the woman who felt slighted because she couldn’t have kids reminds me of the insulting dogpiling I got back in the days of aohell, in my early twenties, on Jewish.Community, when I made some kind of comment about how most people nowadays only have two or three kids. I was then accused of insulting people with fertility problems and people who don’t have big families, when I’d never said anything of the sort. It turned into a huge, ugly dogpile, with lots of insults aimed at my age, and I was basically chased away from an online community I’d been a valuable part of since age seventeen.

    Like

    • “By saying certain sex organs make one a man or woman, we’re not engaging in biological essentialism”

      Human sexual dimorphism is a massively solid and undeniable scientific fact, like the fact that the earth is round and water is wet.

      Speaking for myself, I wouldn’t even argue with people like that. I don’t have the energy. They are like creationists. Or flat-earthers.

      I would just tell them that I’m not about to reject scientific facts. They can pretend biological reality doesn’t exist, but their delusion changes nothing about nature. Facts of nature remain stubbornly facts in the face of human denial. A person can deny the force of gravity all they want, but the result when they walk off a cliff remains the same.

      Liked by 1 person

      • One of the things they do is argue that most people haven’t had their chromosomes checked and have stealth chromosomes of the opposite sex. Because chromosomes just do that, produce opposite sex sexual organs.

        Like

        • Sure, they just need to tell me a few things… Where is the scientific evidence that:

          (a) there is such a thing as stealth opposite-sex chromosomes in any human body
          (b) if it does occur, that it occurs in “most people”
          (c) if it occurs, that it produces detectable physical characteristics of the opposite sex

          Show me the peer-reviewed studies.

          People are entitled to their own beliefs but they’re not entitled to their own facts.

          Like

        • I think the argument is that these stealth chromosomes give a man a laydee brain. Since no one but men with laydee brains know what it’s like to have one, and you haven’t had your chromosomes checked, your opinion is invalid.

          I have yet to be convinced there is any point in engaging with these guys at all. Men say words, so what?

          Liked by 1 person

  7. If biological sex is a social construct, then why do tigers (solitary animals) have female and male sexes? And moss. How about moss? It does things a bit differently, but eventually male and female germ cells are produced and result in a new generation of moss. I didn’t know mosses had a society or invented constructs. Interesting.

    Seriously, I don’t know if these people have “male” or “female” brains, but I’m absolutely certain they have jello brains.

    Liked by 3 people

  8. Loved your post! I feel appeased with your words and that they help navigate through these current volatile and spiteful groups. Thank you 🙂

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s