Category: Gender Ideology - Lindsey Neal Photography + Fine Art

ALARMING Gender Ideology

3/29/2022

“In the -debate about the wisdom- of medicalised gender change for the -young- there is a common refrain meant to expose the moral panic and ignorance of sceptics. No young person, we are told, gets any medical -intervention- before puberty. This may be -true- but it -obscures the more telling- fact that -very young children- at school are exposed to influences that may put them on a -one-way path- to -lifelong- medicalisation.

In a Canadian primary school, a six-year-old girl was reportedly -upset and puzzled- after her teacher showed the class a YouTube video entitled He, She, and They?!?—Gender: Queer Kid Stuff #2. The video stated that “some people aren’t boys or girls.” Another day, the teacher asked the children to “place themselves on a gender-spectrum diagram.” The -six-year-old- put herself at the “girl” end of the spectrum, only to be told by the teacher that “girls are -not real- and boys are not real.”

The girl’s family say school ~authorities refused to take any action over these lessons~ which were given in 2018. Although the family -moved- the daughter to -another- school, they say the ~disorienting effect~ of having her ~foundational identity~ as a girl —-undermined-— has been

“severe and long-lasting.”

A human-rights complaint brought on the girl’s behalf -finally reached a full- tribunal -hearing- this month.”

https://quillette.com/2022/03/29/gender-idoelogues-alarming-campaign-to-get-kids-while-theyre-young/?fbclid=IwAR2i5A2QQ7BweF_11pLFesZ3bMbn1rfirmImYQDW59yUR9ic68R4R3bmjzo

Gender is...

9/18/2019

We live in a confused and fallen world, and that confusion extends everywhere, so that even the most basic questions, like “what gender am I?” become difficult for some people to answer. Some people claim they were born as the wrong gender, or at least in the wrong body. A man may believe he is actually a female, but his soul is “stuck” in a male body. Such claims receive support from others who advocate a “gender-neutral” society. But those who view gender distinctions as nothing more than arbitrary labels or a “box” to be broken out of are actively rejecting God’s design in creation.

Fundamental to our understanding of human sexuality is that God created two (and only two) genders. Currently, the world likes to consider gender (based on a social construct) as having nothing to do with sex (based on physicality), but the Bible makes no such distinctions. The Bible cuts through the world’s confusion simply: “Male and female He created them” (Genesis 1:27). All the modern-day speculation about multiple genders—or even a gender “continuum” with unlimited genders—is unbiblical. An individual may claim to be transgender or “gender-fluid,” but that doesn’t nullify God’s design and purpose in creating him or her.

Children growing up in this confused world are bombarded with messages of confusion. Little boys are told they don’t have to be boys; girls are told they might not really be girls. Whatever they feel they are is what they are—boy, girl, or a mixture of the two. The world tells them it doesn’t matter. The confusion and ambiguity are reinforced in many ways: gender-neutral days at school, the banning of terms such as boys and girls in the classroom, the proliferation of unisex restrooms, curricula that promotes homosexual marriage, etc. It’s little wonder that some people grow up struggling with their sexual identity. But our Lord warned against leading children astray: “Jesus said to his disciples: ‘Things that cause people to stumble are bound to come, but woe to anyone through whom they come. It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble’” (Luke 17:1–2).

Some people today state that they have “felt like the opposite gender since they were children.” But how would one know that? To what are they comparing their feelings? How people feel is all they know, and, for each person, how he feels is “normal” for him. Any comparisons to other people’s feelings would only be an assumption. Some people may become convinced that they “felt like the opposite gender” at some point in their lives, but they don’t truly have a baseline comparison.

Given enough conditioning, any one of us can be convinced that we identify more as the opposite gender. Too often, certain individuals are labeled as cross-gendered because of natural differences in mannerisms and responses, and those individuals “back-paint” the concept into their understanding of their childhood.

But this reimagining of one’s childhood is different from wishing to be another gender. A person can wish he was the other gender for many reasons, but that doesn’t make it internally so. A parent can instill that desire in a child, or a child can observe benefits enjoyed by the other gender and desire them. The child can also desire to be seven feet tall, but it doesn’t change reality.

The Bible says that God created “male and female” and He pronounced His creation “very good” (Genesis 1:27, 31). God’s plan was perfect, but, as with everything in mankind’s sphere, perfection was corrupted by sin. Sin negatively impacted the entirety of creation, hurting not only humanity's relationship with God, but with one another and the rest of the created order. Our world is fallen, and the effects of sin permeate everything. Diseases, birth defects, natural disasters, sinful acts, and the negative results of others' sin and our own sin can all be traced back to the fall. Sometimes these negative effects come in the form of naturally occurring anomalies; other times they are more directly traced to specific sin. Could an anomaly sometimes occur in gender, physically or mentally? We acknowledge that a person can be born with a combination of male and female organs—although one’s true, biological sex can be determined through medical tests.

This we know, that we are involved in a spiritual battle for our souls. The world seeks to conform us to its mold, which is why we must be transformed by the renewing of our minds (Romans 12:1–2). Satan attempts to deceive us and urges us to question God’s plan. One of the devil’s ploys is to make us dissatisfied with how God made us. To some he whispers, “You’re fat and ugly.” To others, “You’re stupid and clumsy.” And to still others, “You look like a boy, but you’re really a girl.” In each case, the underlying message is the same: “God messed up on you.”

This we also know, that the whole creation groans for release from the curse and damage of sin (Romans 8:20–22). The ruin wrought by sin is addressed through the redemption of Christ. Through salvation, Jesus Christ grants us forgiveness of sin, reverses the effect of our poor choices, and compensates for our brokenness.

Each of us faces a different set of battles. Yet Christ sets us on the path to victory. Hebrews 12:1–2 states, “Let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.” The cross is key. Jesus pioneered our faith, and He will perfect it. His victory will be ours as well.

Some may battle heterosexual temptation, greed, pride, anger, or any number of sins. Someone else may battle gender confusion. Regardless of the battle with sin and the devil’s lies, the question we must answer is, “Is Christ and His redemptive work sufficient for our battles?” Jesus definitely claims to be sufficient for any and all of our battles, and He desires to sanctify us through His Word of truth (John 17:17).

As children of God, we should be content in this life (Philippians 4:11; 2 Corinthians 12:10). We realize that we all have limitations, physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually. But through Christ those limitations will not interfere with the plan God has for us to honor Him and serve Him. “Do not be afraid, little flock, for your Father has been pleased to give you the kingdom” (Luke 12:32).

If a person feels he or she has been born as the wrong gender, the answer is not gender-reassignment surgery, hormone therapy, cross-dressing, etc. Those are simply worldly ways of acquiescing to the devil’s lies. “Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth” (1 Corinthians 13:6). And God does not make mistakes. The one who feels he or she was born in the wrong body needs, first and foremost, to experience the transformative power of Christ. When we “participate in the divine nature,” we escape “the corruption in the world caused by evil desires” (2 Peter 1:4).

Contradicting Ideology for our youth?

2/22/2018

Transgender Ideology Is Riddled With Contradictions. Here Are the Big Ones.

https://www.heritage.org/gender/commentary/transgender-ideology-riddled-contradictions-here-are-the-big-ones?fbclid=IwAR2wmAR99oFRQa8Jn4o_CrjKamICCFtWO4w7WkBH_2RjqmcjtKGb8hxwIqQ

The challenge for the transgender activist is to articulate some -conception of truth- as the basis for how we understand the common good and how society should be -ordered- among beliefs that determine reality. If gender is a social construct, how can gender -identity- be innate and immutable? How can one’s identity with respect to a social construct be determined by biology in the womb? How can one’s identity be unchangeable (immutable) with respect to an ever-changing social construct? And if gender identity is innate, how can it be “fluid”? The claims of transgender activists are confusing because they are philosophically incoherent. These notions about sex and gender (being separated) are now being -taught- to young children. Activists have created child-friendly graphics for this -purpose- such as the “Genderbread Person.” The Genderbread Person teaches that when it comes to sexuality and gender, people have five different characteristics, each of them fall-ing along a spectrum. However, activists claim the gingerbread person -looked- too male. The Gender Unicorn is the graphic that children are likely to -encounter- in school. These are the dogmas they are likely to be catechized to profess. While activists claim that the possibilities for gender identity are rather expansive—man, woman, both, neither—they also insist that gender identity is innate, or established at a very young age, and thereafter immutable. Gender identity can sound a lot like religious identity, which is determined by beliefs. But those beliefs don’t determine reality. Determining -reality is the heart- of the matter, and here too we find contradictions. On the one hand, transgender activists want the authority of science as they make metaphysical claims, saying that science -reveals- gender identity to be innate and unchanging. On the other hand, they deny that biology is destiny, insisting that people are free to be who they want to be. And if gender identity is self-created, why must other people -accept- it as reality? If we should be free to -choose- our own gender reality, why can some people impose their idea of reality on others just because they identify as transgender? A transgender future is not the “right side of history,” yet activists have convinced the -most powerful sectors of our society- to acquiesce to their demands. Its in our public education system, media, politics, laws, medicine, movies, Disney… While the claims they make are -manifestly- false, it will take -real work- to prevent the spread of these harmful ideas. Biological Exceptions occur in innersex, but its not the norm, its extremely rare. Their life journey and inherent value are no less, no different, and are of course equally worthy of all love, acceptance, and worth. While inclusion and unconditional love and acceptance of all -people are equal- in importance, the bottom line is this: though the “intentions” may be noble, pushing falsehood among the -created order- always -leads to more disorder- suffering and -chaos- not peace or love. Peace can only be -found- in that which is true- and truth is not defined by ideologies, beliefs, or identities. When what is true is understood- peace in humanity is found.

“At the heart of the transgender moment are radical ideas about the human person—in particular, that people are what they claim to be, regardless of contrary evidence. It’s understandable why activists make these claims. An argument about transgender identities will be much more persuasive if it concerns who someone is, not merely how someone identifies. And so the rhetoric of the transgender moment drips with ontological assertions: People are the gender they prefer to be. That’s the claim. Transgender activists don’t admit that this is a metaphysical claim. They don’t want to have the debate on the level of philosophy, so they dress it up as a scientific and medical claim. And they’ve co-opted many professional associations for their cause. Thus the American Psychological Association, in a pamphlet titled “Answers to Your Questions about Transgender People, Gender Identity, and Gender Expression,” tells us, “Transgender is an umbrella term for persons whose gender identity, gender expression, or behavior does not conform to that typically associated with the sex to which they were assigned at birth.” Notice the politicized language: A person’s sex is “assigned at birth.” Back in 2005, even the Human Rights Campaign referred instead to “birth sex” and “physical sex.” The phrase “sex assigned at birth” is now favored because it makes room for “gender identity” as the real basis of a person’s sex.

In an expert declaration to a federal district court in North Carolina concerning H.B. 2, Dr. Deanna Adkins stated, “From a medical perspective, the appropriate determinant of sex is gender identity.” Adkins is a professor at Duke University School of Medicine and the director of the Duke Center for Child and Adolescent Gender Care (which opened in 2015). Adkins argues that gender identity is not only the preferred basis for determining sex, but “the only medically supported determinant of sex.” Every other method is bad science, she claims: “It is counter to medical science to use chromosomes, hormones, internal reproductive organs, external genitalia, or secondary sex characteristics to override gender identity for purposes of classifying someone as male or female.”

This is a remarkable claim, not least because the argument recently was that gender is only a social construct, while sex is a biological reality. Now, activists claim that gender identity is destiny, while biological sex is the social construct. Adkins doesn’t say if she would apply this rule to all mammalian species. But why should sex be determined differently in humans than in other mammals? And if medical science holds that gender identity determines sex in humans, what does this mean for the use of medicinal agents that have different effects on males and females? Does the proper dosage of medicine depend on the patient’s sex or gender identity? But what exactly is this “gender identity” that is supposed to be the true medical determinant of sex? These notions about sex and gender are now being taught to young children. Activists have created child-friendly graphics for this purpose, such as the “Genderbread Person.” The Genderbread Person teaches that when it comes to sexuality and gender, people have five different characteristics, each of them falling along a spectrum.

There’s “gender identity,” which is “how you, in your head, define your gender, based on how much you align (or don’t align) with what you understand to be the options for gender.” The graphic lists “4 (of infinite)” possibilities for gender identity: “woman-ness,” “man-ness,” “two-spirit,” or “genderqueer.”

The second characteristic is “gender expression,” which is “the way you present gender, through your actions, dress, and demeanor.” In addition to “feminine” or “masculine,” the options are “butch,” “femme,” “androgynous,” or “gender neutral.”

Third is “biological sex,” defined as “the physical sex characteristics you’re born with and develop, including genitalia, body shape, voice pitch, body hair, hormones, chromosomes, etc.”

The final two characteristics concern sexual orientation: “sexually attracted to” and “romantically attracted to.” The options include “Women/Females/Femininity” and “Men/Males/Masculinity.” Which seems rather binary.

The Genderbread Person tries to localize these five characteristics on the body: gender identity in the brain, sexual and romantic attraction in the heart, biological sex in the pelvis, and gender expression everywhere. A more serious fault in the eyes of many activists is the use of the term “biological sex.” Time magazine drew criticism for the same transgression in 2014 after publishing a profile of Laverne Cox, the “first out trans person” to be featured on the cover. At least the folks at Time got credit for trying to be “good allies, explaining what many see as a complicated issue,” wrote Mey Rude in an article titled “It’s Time for People to Stop Using the Social Construct of ‘Biological Sex’ to Defend Their Transmisogyny.” (It’s hard to keep up with the transgender moment.) But Time was judged guilty of using “a simplistic and outdated understanding of biology to perpetuate some very dangerous ideas about trans women,” and failing to acknowledge that biological sex “isn’t something we’re actually born with, it’s something that doctors or our parents assign us at birth.”

Today, transgender “allies” in good standing don’t use the Genderbread Person in their classrooms, but opt for the “Gender Unicorn,” which was created by Trans Student Educational Resources. It has a body shape that doesn’t appear either male or female, and instead of a “biological sex” it has a “sex assigned at birth.” According to Trans Student Education Resources, “Biological sex is an ambiguous word that has no scale and no meaning besides that it is related to some sex characteristics. It is also harmful to trans people. Instead, we prefer ‘sex assigned at birth’ which provides a more accurate description of what biological sex may be trying to communicate.”

The Gender Unicorn is the graphic that children are likely to encounter in school. These are the dogmas they are likely to be catechized to profess. While activists claim that the possibilities for gender identity are rather expansive—man, woman, both, neither—they also insist that gender identity is innate, or established at a very young age, and thereafter immutable. Most people who suffer from gender dysphoria are not activists, and many of them reject the activists’ claims. Many of them may be regarded as victims of the activists. Many of those who feel distress over their bodily sex know that they aren’t really the opposite sex, and do not wish to “transition.” They wish to receive help in coming to identify with and accept their bodily self. They don’t think their feelings of gender dysphoria define reality. But transgender activists do. Regardless of whether they identify as “cisgender” or “transgender,” the activists promote a highly subjective and incoherent worldview.

On the one hand, they claim that the real self is something other than the physical body, in a new form of Gnostic dualism, yet at the same time they embrace a materialist philosophy in which only the material world exists. They say that gender is purely a social construct, while asserting that a person can be “trapped” in the wrong gender. They say there are no meaningful differences between man and woman, yet they rely on rigid sex stereotypes to argue that “gender identity” is real, while human embodiment is not. They claim that truth is whatever a person says it is, yet they believe there’s a real self to be discovered inside that person. They promote a radical expressive individualism in which people are free to do whatever they want and define the truth however they wish, yet they try ruthlessly to enforce acceptance of transgender ideology. It’s hard to see how these contradictory positions can be combined. If you pull too hard on any one thread of transgender ideology, the whole tapestry comes unraveled. But here are some questions we can pose: If gender is a social construct, how can gender identity be innate and immutable? How can one’s identity with respect to a social construct be determined by biology in the womb? How can one’s identity be unchangeable (immutable) with respect to an ever-changing social construct? And if gender identity is innate, how can it be “fluid”?

The challenge for activists is to offer a plausible definition of gender and gender identity that is independent of bodily sex. Is there a gender binary or not? Somehow, it both does and does not exist, according to transgender activists. If the categories of “man” and “woman” are objective enough that people can identify as, and be, men and women, how can gender also be a spectrum, where people can identify as, and be, both, or neither, or somewhere in between? What does it even mean to have an internal sense of gender? What does gender feel like? What meaning can we give to the concept of sex or gender—and thus what internal “sense” can we have of gender—apart from having a body of a particular sex? Apart from having a male body, what does it “feel like” to be a man? Apart from having a female body, what does it “feel like” to be a woman? What does it feel like to be both a man and a woman, or to be neither?

The challenge for the transgender activist is to explain what these feelings are like, and how someone could know if he or she “feels like” the opposite sex, or neither, or both. Even if trans activists could answer these questions about feelings, that still wouldn’t address the matter of reality. Why should feeling like a man—whatever that means—make someone a man? Why do our feelings determine reality on the question of sex, but on little else? Our feelings don’t determine our age or our height. And few people buy into Rachel Dolezal’s claim to identify as a black woman, since she is clearly not. If those who identify as transgender are the sex with which they identify, why doesn’t that apply to other attributes or categories of being? Do all of these self-professed identities determine reality? If not, why not? And should these people receive medical treatment to transform their bodies to accord with their minds? Why accept transgender “reality,” but not trans-racial, trans-species, and trans-abled reality? The challenge for activists is to explain why a person’s “real” sex is determined by an inner “gender identity,” but age and height and race and species are not determined by an inner sense of identity. Of course, a transgender activist could reply that an “identity” is, by definition, just an inner sense of self. But if that’s the case, gender identity is merely a disclosure of how one feels. Saying that someone is transgender, then, says only that the person has feelings that he or she is the opposite sex. Gender identity, so understood, has no bearing at all on the meaning of “sex” or anything else. But transgender activists claim that a person’s self-professed “gender identity” is that person’s “sex.”

Gender identity can sound a lot like religious identity, which is determined by beliefs. But those beliefs don’t determine reality. Someone who identifies as a Christian believes that Jesus is the Christ. Someone who identifies as a Muslim believes that Muhammad is the final prophet. But Jesus either is or is not the Christ, and Muhammad either is or is not the final prophet, regardless of what anyone happens to believe. So, too, a person either is or is not a man, regardless of what anyone—including that person—happens to believe. The challenge for transgender activists is to present an argument for why transgender beliefs determine reality.

Determining reality is the heart of the matter, and here too we find contradictions. On the one hand, transgender activists want the authority of science as they make metaphysical claims, saying that science reveals gender identity to be innate and unchanging. On the other hand, they deny that biology is destiny, insisting that people are free to be who they want to be. Which is it? Is our gender identity biologically determined and immutable, or self-created and changeable? If the former, how do we account for people whose gender identity changes over time? Do these people have the wrong sense of gender at some time or other? And if gender identity is self-created, why must other people accept it as reality? If we should be free to choose our own gender reality, why can some people impose their idea of reality on others just because they identify as transgender? The challenge for the transgender activist is to articulate some conception of truth as the basis for how we understand the common good and how society should be ordered. the claims of transgender activists are confusing because they are philosophically incoherent. Activists rely on contradictory claims as needed to advance their position, but their ideology keeps evolving, so that even allies and LGBT organizations can get left behind as “progress” marches on.

At the core of the ideology is the radical claim that feelings determine reality. From this idea come extreme demands for society to play along with subjective reality claims. Trans ideologues ignore contrary evidence and competing interests, they disparage alternative practices, and they aim to muffle skeptical voices and shut down any disagreement. The movement has to keep patching and shoring up its beliefs, policing the faithful, coercing the heretics, and punishing apostates, because as soon as its furious efforts flag for a moment or someone successfully stands up to it, the whole charade is exposed. That’s what happens when your dogmas are so contrary to obvious, basic, everyday truths. A transgender future is not the “right side of history,” yet activists have convinced the most powerful sectors of our society to acquiesce to their demands. While the claims they make are manifestly false, it will take real work to prevent the spread of these harmful ideas.”