Transgender? That’s so yesterday. Now, meet the ‘transabled.’

Ideas have consequences. We used to understand this.

Examples of the truth of this are everywhere. Once we accepted the premise that the pre-born child in the womb is of no value, then we saw wide-spread slaughter, regardless of whether those legislating this premise intended abortion to be “safe, legal, and rare.”

Once we accepted the premise that sex is not intended to be both unitive and procreative in its purpose, then, as one writer dryly put it, society accepted that “any orifice will do.”

Once we accepted that monogamy is outdated and unrealistic, regardless of our intentions in doing so, we soon saw – and are seeing – any number of bizarre couplings, throuplings, and polyamorous relationships validated and celebrated.

And so it is too with the idea, most recently celebrated on the cover of Vanity Fairwith Bruce Jenner posing as his new alter-ego, Caitlyn Jenner, that how we feel should trump what we are.

And it is these arguments that are being used by a community that is just starting to make its voice heard: The “transabled.”

The National Post ran a feature on “transabled” people yesterday, beginning their story with a shocking account of a man who intentionally cut his right arm off. “One-Hand Jason,” as he calls himself, is apparently not the only one. From the Post:

“We define transability as the desire or the need for a person identified as able-bodied by other people to transform his or her body to obtain a physical impairment,” says Alexandre Baril, a Quebec born academic who will present on “transability” at this week’s Congress of the Social Sciences and Humanities at the University of Ottawa…

“The person could want to become deaf, blind, amputee, paraplegic. It’s a really, really strong desire.”

[Within this community] Many people, like One Hand Jason, arrange “accidents” to help achieve the goal. One dropped an incredibly heavy concrete block on his legs — an attempt to injure himself so bad an amputation would be necessary. But doctors saved the leg. He limps, but it’s not the disability he wanted.

We instinctively feel that this is a form of mental illness, or some cognitive malfunction. And indeed, this is how the “transabled” were originally approached. But things are changing:

The transabled are very secretive and often keep their desires to themselves, Baldwin says. One 78-year-old man told Baldwin he’d lived with the secret for 60 years and never told his wife.

Some of his study participants do draw parallels to the experience many transgender people express of not feeling like they’re in the right body. Baldwin says this disorder is starting to be thought of as a neurological problem with the body’s mapping, rather than a mental illness.

“It’s a problem for individuals because it’s distressing. But lots of things are.” He suggests this is just another form of body diversity — like transgenderism — and amputation may help someone achieve similar goals as someone who, say, undergoes cosmetic surgery to look more like who they believe their ideal selves to be.

It should be no surprise to anyone that the language of tortured, secret desire as well as bodily autonomy and the right to self-expression are being co-opted here by yet another “community.” They feel that they are perfectly normal—that it is reality that must be bent to fit to suit their desires, regardless of how ill-fated and self-mutilating those desires might be.

But we have, to a large degree, already accepted the idea that people can use surgery to slice and snip and alter themselves into different genders, so why would we deny this community those same rights?

For those who might be angry that I would draw that connection, I have to point out that it has already been drawn:

As the public begins to embrace people who identify as transgender, the trans people within the disability movement are also seeking their due, or at very least a bit of understanding in a public that cannot fathom why anyone would want to be anything other than healthy and mobile.

And, just as those seeking to redefine marriage reacted quite angrily to those who pointed out that identical arguments could be – and already have been – used to support polygamy, transgender activists are not pleased with the fact that their logic is being applied to a community they – at least for the moment – disagree with:

But this has been met with great resistance in both the disability activist community and in transgender circles, argues Baril, a visiting scholar of feminist, gender and sexuality studies at Wesleyan University in Middletown, Connecticut.

“They tend to see transabled people as dishonest people, people who try to steal resources from the community, people who would be disrespectful by denying or fetishizing or romanticizing disability reality,” Baril says, adding people in both transgender and disabled circles tend to make judgmental or prejudicial statements about transabled people. “Each try to distance themselves.”

Of course they do. As the sexual activists of all stripes have opened the Overton window wider and wider, they pause only to claim that the logic they use will never be co-opted by a group a bit further outside the boundaries. And yet, once those arguments are accepted, society is forced to apply them to increasingly bizarre manifestations of “self-expression.” And when it comes to the arguments that “transabled” activists are beginning to make, we have painted ourselves into a corner. After all, our society has already accepted virtually all of the premises that they will surely use to make their case.

Ideas have consequences, and those consequences impact more people than just the small minorities speaking into gigantic microphones. If self-harm, for example, were to become considered legitimate self-expression, what do we say to teenagers who engage in the same activity—especially if they say they do it because it makes them feel good? Some might scoff, and say that this is a bizarre slippery slope argument. But the same was said about euthanasia, when critics pointed out that enshrining in law the right to die because of “interminable suffering” could easily be applied to those suffering from depression—and in Belgium and the Netherlands, it already has. The originally hypothetical question of whether to send someone who is suicidal because of severe depression to an “assisted dying” facility or a suicide-watch facility is already one that is very real, and very terrifying.

We have lost the ability to trace premises to their logical conclusions. That is probably because the logical conclusions that can be drawn from much of the radical new experiments our society is embarking on seem so ludicrous. But unfortunately, those conclusions are not just fantasies created by moral panic in the deluded minds of social conservatives. They are predictions that are, one by one, turning out to be prophecies.

Comment: You all know that I think that this is a positive. Euthanasia could have prevented the sad case of David Reimer, who made the whole trans-movement possible. Hell is eternal…

Trans activists are effectively experimenting on children

8 April 2015 15:45
A boy who plays with dolls is not trans or dysphoric - he's just a boy who plays with dolls

A boy who plays with dolls is not trans or dysphoric – he’s just a boy who plays with dolls

Can you think of anything more cruel than telling a five-year-old boy who likes Lady Gaga that he might have gender dysphoria? Or telling a nine-year-old tomboy who hates Barbie and loves Beckham that she might really be male – in spirit – and therefore she should think about putting off puberty and possibly transitioning to her ‘correct gender’?

Saying such things to kids who are only doing what kids have done for generations – messing about, discovering their identity – turns playfulness into a pathology. It convinces boys who aren’t boyish and girls who aren’t girly that they must have some great gender problem, a profound inner turmoil that their tiny minds must address, when in truth they’re just having fun. What an awful trick to play on children.

It’s being played on them more and more. ‘Transgender kids’ – the quote marks are because I’m not convinced that toddlers are capable of thinking – are in the news. On Sunday, BBC 2 aired Louis Theroux’s documentary on trans kids in America. Like all of Theroux’s work, it was objective, observant and humane. It introduced us to Camille, a five-year-old, pink-loving, Gaga-admiring boy who daftly thinks he is a girl, and even more daftly is indulged by psychologists and his parents; Cole/Crystal, a boy who can’t decide whether he is male or female (Cole, buddy, you’re male) and whose confusion was heightened by the conflicting responses of the adults around him; and, saddest of all, Nikki, born Nick, a troubled 14-year-old boy who is taking drugs to put off puberty because, according to experts at least, he’s transgender.

The trend for diagnosing gender dysphoria or transgenderism in kids who a couple of decades ago would simply have been seen as camp (boys) or unladylike (girls) is spreading. This week the BBC reported that the number of British kids under the age of 10 who are being referred to the NHS because they have ‘transgender feelings’ has quadrupled in six years. Forty-seven of these kids were aged 5 or under. Your four-year-old boy loves dancing in leggings to old Madonna songs? Quick, get him to the doctor! It’s bizarre.

The NHS now prescribes puberty-blocking drugs to so-called trans kids when they turn 10 or 11. This seems especially cruel, to deny children that tough but essential transitionary period, that biological burst that turns girls into women and boys into gruff-voiced scallywags who might one day mature into men. We do not ask 10-year-olds to make major decisions in relation to their schooling, where they live, smoking or sex; and yet we now invite them to make the terrifying existential choice to offset adulthood itself, to keep their hormones locked in limbo, to determine what sex they are. What a terrible burden to put on a human being who probably isn’t allowed to walk to the shop on his own or to stay up past 9pm.

We all now recognise that it was wrong and wicked to have castrato singers, males who were castrated before puberty in order to preserve their pure and feminine dulcet tones. The last-ever castrato died in 1922. Yet are we not doing something similar today, using drugs to keep boys (and girls) in a puberty-avoiding state, a childish limbo, having convinced them with psychobabble that they are dysphoric?

The treatment of non-conforming or plain funny kids as ‘transgender’ strikes me as a stunning abdication of adult responsibility. It is the job of adults to correct childish confusions, to guide kids through weird or rough patches, and ensure, to the best of our abilities, that they come out the other end as rounded, hopefully happy adults. But now, the cult of relativism runs so deep that adults even balk from making that most basic of all judgements – that a child with a penis is a boy and a child with a vagina is a girl – and instead we accommodate to the child’s own fads and silliness.

What about children who want to be dogs, or dinosaurs, or racing car drivers? Should we indulge them? ‘Transgender kids’ aren’t at fault at all here – the problem is an adult society that has so profoundly lost the plot that it can no longer steer and socialise the next generation, and can’t even bring itself to say ‘boys will be boys and girls will be girls’ because to do so in our Queer Studies-saturated era is apparently to be discriminatory, judgemental, oppressive.

There’s one more, seriously dark element to the promotion of the ‘trans kids’ phenomenon: it’s being pushed by adult trans activists as a way of pursuing their own interests and agenda. More and more trans campaigners are using ‘trans kids’ effectively as a moral shield, hoping that if they can convince the world that transgenderism is something that emerges as early as three or four then it must be natural, good, healthy, and thus should be insulated from criticism.

That is, they’re effectively experimenting on children, both socially and medically, both through filling kids’ heads with nonsense about dysphoria and offering them drugs, in order to advance their own adult demands for greater recognition. This is repulsive, the creation of a new generation of castratos who are paraded and praised in public by self-serving trans activists who only want more political clout and respect. Stop it. Let kids be kids. A boy who plays with dolls is not trans or dysphoric – he’s just a boy who plays with dolls.

Comment: They took away my comments at the site. Talking about age of consent and FGM gets you into trouble…