Thursday, June 14, 2018

The latest from The Aviator, Michael Brown

“Reducing people to their gender identity is to ignore their full potential.”
Michael Brown
I have said that Christian crusader Michael Brown has the same mindset as the crazy people who flew airplanes into buildings for their god. He is free of a terrorist's bloodletting but, in his own way, Brown does violence to LGBT people every day. Brown's shtick is to assert that he is not a bigot and then he proceeds to demonstrate appalling bigotry.

Thursday's offering is titled: “When Parents Push Back Against Transanity.” Give it a shot Mr. Brown:
We've been saying for years that there will be a pushback against LGBTQ extremism. And it's not because people are uncaring. Or intolerant. Or bigoted. Or unfair. Instead, the pushback comes as a rational reaction to the rising tide of transanity.
So let's see. We are extremists and trans folks are insane. There is nothing about these claims that is, in Brown's own words, uncaring, intolerant, bigoted or unfair and this is all quite rational. Do tell!

Brown gives it a second try:
For those not familiar with my use of the term "transanity," I'm not demeaning the struggles of those who believe they are trapped in the wrong body. Rather, I use the term to describe the denial of biological verities, the idea that reality is whatever you perceive it to be, and the extremist agenda that flows from this mindset.
So let's see. Trans people are crazy extremists who are delusional. None of that is “demeaning.”

In addition to the intellectual dishonesty, Brown is substituting his religious judgment for the judgment of medical professionals. Brown's beliefs are based on faith while those medical scientists are reliant on evidence. Just who is delusional in this equation? And I assure you that I am not demeaning the struggles of religious conservatives who are frustrated that the world does not conform to scripture.

Attempt drei:
So, while I have compassion on those who struggle, I stand against the extremist agenda.

For example, I have compassion on a six-year-old boy who feels tormented by his male organ and sees it as some kind of birth defect. How can we not have compassion on such a child?
“Compassion on” is an odd construction. Usually we say “compassion for.” More importantly Brown is asserting that there is some extremist agenda at work. Furthermore, a six-year-old with gender dysphoria probably doesn't perceive a problem with female gender and male equipment. It all seems perfectly natural at that age. Adults are required for the kid to become neurotic or insecure.

Compassion is usually defined as sympathetic pity. In this case compassion is irrelevant. Morality is found by considering the best interests of the child; first, last and always. Those best interests are served by the best available science. Veering from the science to conform to scripture is little different from efforts to drive out the evil demons that cause certain conditions. But I am not demeaning religious zealots. Nor am I calling them immoral. Right?

Brown drops the pretense:
At the same time, I have zero sympathy for parents who choose to raise their children as gender neutral until the child determines its sex. And I have less than zero sympathy for those who now refer to their littles ones as "theybies" rather than "babies." (The "they" is because these parents refer to their infants as "they" rather than "he" or "she.") This is a classic example of transanity.
Every parent would prefer to have heterosexual, cisgender children. If a child has gender dysphoria (as evaluated by a competent and experienced medical professional) his or her parents are compelled to act in the best interests of their child. My kid? I want a second opinion. Then I want the very best medical advice available. Research repeatedly demonstrates the enormous benefits of gender affirmation. I want to know, from the experts, what they recommend. I could not care less about the opinions of religious zealots when it comes to a medical issue.

I am also unaware of circumstances requiring a parent, as Brown describes, to raise their child as “gender neutral.” Similarly, I am unaware of anyone (other than Brown) using the term “theybies.” These terms construct a straw man which — at least to me — means that a guy with a legitimate PhD is treating his audience like idiots.

As long as he is at it, Brown presents another intellectually dishonest construction:
I witnessed a pushback against transanity a few years ago in Charlotte, North Carolina, where the mayor and city council were poised to pass a bill effectively declaring all public bathrooms and locker rooms gender neutral.
The Charlotte bill did no such thing. It permitted people to use facilities according to their gender identity. In doing so it accommodated a very small percentage of the population. It was aimed primarily at public schools. A transgender girl using a girl's bathroom does not render that facility gender neutral.

Later on:
Now, parents and students are saying enough is enough when it comes to sports competitions. Enough with biological males competing against biological females. It is unfair and it is unmerited, regardless of the feelings of the trans-identified boys.
A trans girl taking puberty blockers might not have an advantage over other girls. I honestly do not know. I also do not know what a “trans-identified boy” is. I am pretty sure, however, that a trans girl taking hormones does not have an unfair advantage. The International Olympic Committee says that a trans female does not have an unfair advantage if her testosterone levels are reasonably consistent with those of natal sex females.

I am also reasonably sure that Brown is using athletics to undermine matters of gender identity. I am also pretty sure that neither he nor I are qualified to answer this question. Nevertheless, I am certain that educators in consultation with medical professionals and sports scientists can come up with a rational policy. Doing so will not require the approval of religious zealots. Of course I am not accusing any individual of being a religious zealot?

Brown goes on and on, ad nauseum, about trans girls competing in athletics as girls. Then he reverts to form for his conclusion:
This will not continue without a pushback.

May the opposition rise up and do the right thing. And may we continue to study the question of transgender identity, working for a compassionate solution to help people find wholeness from the inside out.
He means “push-back.” I do not know what he means by finding “wholeness from the inside out.” This is Brown's fourth attempt at claiming to be compassionate when he is expressing bigotry towards transgender people, particularly trans youth and their parents. At the same time he is demonstrating contempt for medical science and utter disregard for the critical thinking skills of people.

Rather than compassion what transgender and gender nonconforming youth need is understanding and fairness. Pity is unwarranted and does them no good whatsoever.

I have often written that these kids are vulnerable and fragile. Yet they seem to have an enviable inner strength. Maybe it is the result of all the counseling that they receive. They seem to be very comfortable in their own skin. Avery Jackson, who was on the cover of National Geographic, certainly demonstrates those qualities. I would love the opportunity to sit down and talk with her. I could learn a great deal from Avery who is now 11. I could gain additional perspective.

Mr. Brown, for his part, would do well to meet some of the people he routinely denigrates. Perhaps that would permit him to replace pity with respect and understanding. Reducing people to their gender identity is to ignore their full potential. People are so much more than their sexuality. Michael Brown seems incapable of understanding that. Therefore, Michael Brown remains The Aviator.

Related content:



No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.