Introduction:
Recently, the now famed philosopher Kathleen Stock experienced the wraith of the unpleasant, and violent, radical mob, whom in the UK and around the world, are becoming more vicious within their actions and principles.
One may ask the reason behind this vicious attack upon philosopher, Kathleen Stock. The reason: namely, speaking truth, obeying the principle of rationality, and too recognising the objective reality of the world, specifically that of biological sex.
This was her hellish sin: stating that a biological man can never become – regardless of his feelings, surgeries, or dresswear – a biological women.
At first glace, one may trivialise the importance of this debate, pointing towards the comical nature of our society in which obsesses over “preferred pronouns”, and “gender identity”. However I state that this debate is far more important – philosophically speaking – in comparison to a trivial discussion over pronouns and gender identity. In fact, this debate has necessity based upon a few points:
- Truth & Rationality Matters
- Gender Ideology Is The Most Misogynistic Policy Of All Time
- The Cancel Culture Mob Can Not Win
Truth & Rationality Matters:
Firstly, let’s start with the importance of truth and rationality as fundamental principles at the foundation of societal flourishing. This all stems back to the Enlightenment Era, in which was characterised by a recognition of the necessity of rationality, truth and progress from a societal front. Prior towards this period of Enlightenment, society was in darkness: and instead of understanding the building blocks and mathematical mechanisms in which create the structure of the earth, and thus universe, instead society utilised the use of mysticism and irrationality in an attempt to understand and explain the universe. Some comical understandings and principles in which were held as ideological dogma prior towards the Enlightenment Era are as followed: namely, the use of superstition, including principles and belief within bad luck caused by breaking a mirror, walking under a ladder, or opening an umbrella indoors. Further, the belief in magic was too commonplace. People in the pre Enlightenment era believed that magic was real, and that it could be utilised to do things such as healing the sick, bringing good luck, or to harm enemies. Witchcraft was a regular practice and ritual during the pre Enlightenment Era, consisting of the belief that witches were real, and thus could utilise their powers to harm others.
Overall the pre Enlightenment era was a period of superstition, ignorance, and violence.
However, this changed during the course of the Enlightenment Era, ushering in a period of unprecedented societal science, technology and human rights. This was undoubtedly a major turning point for human history. Instead of focusing upon prior irrational superstitions and traditions, the embrace of science, reason and evidence based thinking fundamentally has led towards important advancements in technologies, the rise of democracy, and too the abolishment of slavery.
As reiterated by famed philosophers, including that of Immanuel Kant, the Enlightenment Era was the focus of human kinds emergence “from its self incurred immaturity”, its “lazy and cowardly” submission to the “dogmas and formulas” of religious or political authority. As Kant proudly declared, the Enlightenment Era is the period in which we “dare to understand”. Further, in order to ensure that society can progress forward – a notion that is deemed as the upmost good via Enlightenment ideals, is the utilisation of reason, as a non-negotiable when it comes to societal flourishing and progress. If there is anything that the Enlightenment thinkers had in common, this was an insistence upon the application of reason to understand the world, and therefore to not fall back upon generators of delusion, such as faith, dogma, revelation, and our gut feelings. This leads towards the second ideal, namely science, which acts as the application of reason, in order to understand the world. This consisted of the escape from ignorance, and superstition, in order to show how mistaken conventional wisdom can be, and therefore how methods of science – such as scepticism, fallibilism, open debate, and empirical testing – are necessary paradigms as to how we can achieve reliable knowledge.
Importantly however, the new wave of gender ideology as a political view, shamelessly flies in the face of the principles of the Enlightenment Era, in which lay at the foundation of society, and thus have gained us increased society progress, liberation from an economical front, and too the utilisation of technology and reason to counter the entropy of the universe.
Gender ideology has utilised this terminology of gender, as a means to avoid the principle of biological sex, in which exists within objective reality. In comparison to sex, gender is something which is a function of “how somebody feels”, and therefore seemingly can change arbitrarily – regardless of biological sex and genitalia. And this is what we have seen recently in Scotland, in which during the case of a biological man, whom suddenly – and comically – arbitrarily decided that he was now a biological women, this biological male rapist was placed within a female prison, in a cell with female inmates, because apparently his “sexual orientation” was that of a female.
This is a total and utter attack on science, reason and objective reality, and therefore threatens to diminish the Enlightenment Principles which have been foundational for societal flourishing and progress.
Gender Ideology Is The Most Misogynistic Policy Of All Time:
This too leads me towards my secondary point, namely the fact that gender ideology is the most regressive and – in many cases – misogynistic policy of all time. Comically enough, a grand portion of feminists, whom have been fighting for female rights over the past 100 years, now are seemingly in advocation for a policy in which not solely reinforces “gender norms”, but too dangerously impacts the rights of women. This is true when it comes to areas including that of private restrooms and lockers, sports, and prisons.
Firstly, the claim by the gender activists is that – if a biological male child – prefers the colour pink and likes to play with females, then this child is supposedly a female “trapped within a male body”. However, the feministic movement over the past 100 years has been in conspicuous advocation for removal of “gender norms”, in which are supposedly restrictive and a part of the patriarchal system that is ingrained within our societal fabric. These “gender norms” include that of females conventionally “liking the colour pink”, “working in the kitchen”, and “wearing dresses”. However, the point is that the gender ideology movement seems to base the whole notion of “being a woman”, upon the notion that one abides by the “conventional norms” or what is means to be a woman, namely that of “liking the colour pink”, “working in the kitchen”, and “wearing dresses”.
This is exactly what the conventional feminist movement has been in conspicuous advocation against, namely, the necessity to remove these conventional gender roles in which act as a restrictive mechanism for females.
Perhaps most evidently is the total abolishment of female rights, specifically in the case of sports and prisons. As we can see now, a wave of females are bravely speaking out within the sporting scene, in consideration of the clear unfairness and narcissistic behaviour of a biological man – namely Will Thomas – whom trampled over biological females within a swimming competition. Just to put into perspective the total absurdity of gender ideology and the damage this is doing to female rights specifically for sporting, the case of Will Thomas beautifully articulates the unfair nature of a biological man competing against a biological woman:
“At University of Akron’s Zippy International, Thomas completed the women’s 200 freestyle and 500 freestyle with the fastest national time ever recorded. In the 500 race, he beat his teammate by more than 12 seconds. That’s almost the full length of a pool. Later, in the 1650 freestyle, Thomas beat his female opponent by 38 seconds. You read that right. 38 seconds.”
In accordance with an article by Evie Magazine, Will Thomas was formerly ranked 462th for the male division, however once he seemingly arbitrarily decide that he was a “female”, his rank rocketed to 1st position, gaining his a Gold in Ivy League Women’s Championships.
This is why I state that this – in many cases – is the most misogynistic policy of all time. Since, this policy specifically is in advocation for allowing a male, to “identify” as a female, and therefore destroy and dominate in female sports, as well as in other areas of public life.
The Cancel Culture Mob Can Not Win
Finally, and perhaps most concerningly is the power of the vicious mob in today’s society, which proceeds to cancel people, violently attack, and too kicks people from their occupation and university if they dare proceed forward within stating the sin: namely, that a biological man – regardless of feelings, dresswear, or surgery – shall never become a biological female, and vice versa.
Free speech from a societal front is clearly under attack. Not solely was this present during the period of COVID-19, in which individuals whom spoke up, or against the consensus, these individuals were banished, or demonised majorly. Evidently, this led towards a considerable echo chamber of thought, thus resulting within incredibly absurd and tyrannical policy implementations, without any ability to question the status quo. The same unfortunately is true today within the case of the gender ideology debate, as anyone who questions or debate the new wave of gender ideology, unfortunately is met with a vast sum of accusations indicating towards transphobia, and bigotry.
The period of the Enlightenment involved the necessity and understanding to aim towards an upmost moral goal, namely progression from a societal front. In order to do so, as noted, the utilisation of free speech, free thought, debate and criticism was understood to be a way in which we can find the truth and too sack off with the falsehoods. The beauty of these Enlightenment principles from a societal view is that, we can together as a society, engage our ideas into the furnace of debate and criticism, in order to gauge as to which ideas are most rational for societal progress and good.
Yet, the wave of gender ideology seems to go against this. Specifically the radical cult and mob in which is closely associated with the gender ideology movement. These individuals utilise the Trojan Horse notion of “hate speech”, as a manner of masking their tyrannical desires. It seems evident that this concept of “hate speech” is solely utilised by those who want to control, impose tyranny, and thus avoid any alternative views which perhaps shall dispute their current ideology.
The issue is, as per the Enlightenment Era, in order to progress society forward, there was a clear understanding and acknowledgement that criticism in public in regards to potential ideas, and therefore the potential of offending one based upon their ideological views – this was viewed as a necessity to find truth and progress society forward. I would strongly argue that the dangers of offending one with their ideological view, is far less extreme in comparison to the dangers and threats which occur throughout a society when ideas are not debated, critiqued, and ridiculed.
You can find the full commentary by Christian, here:
