Category: Gender Ideology

Posted on

Defining Sex Precisely: Return To Normal

I just read an excellent article by Jay Richards: Why States Must Define Sex Precisely.

He argues for a return to the biological understanding of sex, rejecting the subjective notions of gender ideology. Also, he calls for precise legal definitions of sex that are rooted in biology and that can withstand the ideological pressures of the current age.

The once uncontested definitions of “male” and “female” are now under siege due to the growing influence of gender ideology. This ideology seeks to redefine sex in federal laws and regulations to include “gender identity,” a move that threatens to undermine all preexisting legal references to sex.

Among other things, this blog has pointed out that Title IX advancements in the area of Women’s Sport has been negatively impacted by this move.

Legal Matters

Richards criticizes the vague and general definitions of sex proposed by some state legislators, arguing that they fail to provide a clear distinction between males and females.

Vague legal definitions create openings for gender ideology to gain a toehold.

He highlights the need for precise definitions of sex in state law, citing the ongoing debate in Montana as an example.

As I have done on this blog, Richards criticizes the misuse of disorders of sexual development, often mislabeled as “intersex” conditions, to argue for the existence of more than two sexes or fluidity of sexes. He points out that these disorders occur in a minuscule percentage of the population and do not justify the claims of gender ideology.

The main way gender ideologues have confused the public is by falsely claiming that disorders of sexual development, often mislabeled “intersex” conditions, prove that there are more than two sexes—or that the sexes are somehow fluid or mere endpoints on a spectrum.

Rather these conditions are disorders…

For instance, we know that humans are bipeds—that they naturally have two legs. But if a child is born without one or both legs, do we conclude that the newborn isn’t human, is a member of another species, or is “interspecies”? Of course not. We recognize that the child suffers from some sort of disorder—some disruption in development involving, say, chromosomes or an event in utero. Note that we’re engaged in counterfactual reasoning. We infer that the newborn would have had two legs except for some event or abnormality that prevented this from happening.

The article concludes by advocating for precise definitions of sex that capture the central concept of biological sex, account for normal development and disorders, and accommodate different stages of development. For example:

A human female is, minimally, a member of the human species who, under normal development, produces relatively large, relatively immobile gametes—ova—at some point in her life cycle, and has a reproductive and endocrine system oriented around the production of that gamete.

For the discussions ahead, legislative or otherwise, learn these arguments!

Companion Post

DSD’s and “Sex Assignment” – Podcast

+++

Sex Matters

Posted on

Trans Center Whistleblower Admits To Tearing Families Apart

Jamie Reed is a 42-year-old former caseworker at the Washington University Transgender Center at St. Louis Children’s Hospital from 2018 to 2022. She has described herself as a queer woman married to a trans man and “politically left of Bernie Sanders,” the U.S. senator from Vermont.

She became a whistleblower after alleging that she had witnessed “morally and medically appalling” treatment of transgender children and their parents during her four years working at the center. Reed has called for the center to be shut down and detailed her allegations in a sworn affidavit to Missouri’s attorney general, who launched one of three investigations into the center now underway.

She’s written a substack piece about a system that tore families apart. Don’t call her a hero, she says. For she waited too long to speak up.

Her account is a stark revelation of the practices within the gender center. She confesses to having been complicit in a system that prioritized affirmation over questioning, and in doing so, often tore families apart. The protocol followed by the center, she says, sides with affirming parents and maligns those who ask for more time or caution in the process of gender transition for their children.

She admits to using shaming tactics against non-affirming parents and disregarding their legal rights.

Mothers & Fathers Differ

Reed’s account reveals a notable difference in the reactions and approaches of mothers and fathers in the context of their children’s gender transition. She observed that it was often the fathers who were more skeptical and resistant to the quick affirmation of their children’s gender transitions. These fathers, she says, fought for more time in therapy, sought deeper exploration of their children’s desires to transition, and desired more comprehensive mental health assessments.

Conversely, she noticed that some mothers seemed more invested in the gender transition process than in the children themselves. She even suggested that some mothers showed signs of Munchausen syndrome by proxy, a psychological disorder where a caretaker seeks medical help for made-up or exaggerated symptoms in their child to gain attention or sympathy.

These mothers, Reed says, often stood against fathers who simply wanted their children to have access to real assessments and therapy. This created a significant divide within families, often leading to legal battles and further strain on the family unit.

Read the whole thing.

+++

Posted on

Saint John Paul II’s Gratitude Toward Women

June 29 was the 28th anniversary of St. John Paul II’s “Letter to Women.” ( A MUST READ)

Some reflections on the uplifting importance of that letter….

Reflection 1

John Paul II’s first, and arguably, most profound point, is his expression of gratitude. Whether you’re a mother, wife, daughter, sister, employed in the workforce, consecrated virgin, or an educator (in whatever capacity), he thanks YOU. He doesn’t only thank you for the work you do, but for your very existence as a woman.

Reflection 2

As St. John Paul II continues in his reflection, he rightly brings awareness to the marginalization and lack of progress women have experienced. While it’s easy to see drastic progress in something like Title IX, we are simultaneously experiencing a “relapse” of this progress, spearheaded by lawmakers, organizations, and activists rushing to dismantle a law that has protected so many women. This is not the only deterioration we are seeing.

We live in a culture that no longer understands what it means to be a woman. We live in a culture that changes words like “breastfeeding” to “chestfeeding” or “women” to “wimmin” in the name of affirmation and inclusivity. We live in a culture where biological men compete in women’s sports. And we live in a culture that tells little girls they are boys because they enjoy wearing cargo shorts over dresses and prefer trucks over dolls. The list continues. So, what happened?

We not only forgot to thank women, but we also forgot to address that women are inherently different and unique, made in the Image and Likeness of God, with a specific vocation that only women can fulfill, to help. I’m not claiming the world became corrupt for this reason alone, but how are we expected to flourish in a culture that doesn’t respect or appreciate God’s given design for our bodies, let alone His plan for our lives?

Further reflections found here. But I’ll finish with this one.

“Let us remind our daughters, “tomboys” or not, that they are loved as a child of the Lord and are no less of a woman because they choose dirt over dolls, or dolls over dirt. Let us remind our friends that they can still be “mothers” by guiding their students, peers, or nieces/nephews toward the truth, single or not.”

Saint John PAul II’s “Letter to Women”

+++