The construct “transphobia,” like “Islamophobia,” is a propaganda term and ad hominem tactic designed to delegitimize criticisms of an ideology, in the case of transphobia, trans activism and so-called gender affirming care or GAC. While “homophobia” is itself an objectionable term because, like all constructions of its sort, it pathologizes antigay bigotry, it is not a propaganda term in the same sense, albeit a much better term for this phenomenon exists, namely heterosexism, better since antigay discrimination operates much the same way as does sexism.*
By hitching its wagon to the gay and lesbian rights movement, trans activists accuse those critical of the doctrine and the destructive practices of the medical-industrial complex not only of “transphobia,” but also of “homophobia.” I have been hit with this smear despite a lifetime of advocacy for gay and lesbian rights. For this reason, that smear concerns me more than the smear of transphobia. In fact, the latter smear doesn’t really concern me much at all, certainly no more than the smear of Islamophobia, which I have also experienced given my strident opposition to Islamic doctrine and practices. I make no apologies for my criticisms of gender ideology (or Islam). And the smear of homophobia (like the smear of racism), cannot be reasonably applied to me.
I raise the matter in this essay not to complain about a false smear, however, but to observe that this is one of the ideological function of the LGBTQ-plus acronym: to prepare the ground for falsely painting those who defend the rights of sexual minorities as inimical to those rights when they resist the inclusion of other groups. But my stalwart support for gay and lesbian rights does not oblige me to accept the ambitions of the queer project. Indeed, the Pride Progress flag represents a political movement and praxis I cannot accept. The movement is destructive to child safeguarding, including the right of gay and lesbian children to be who they are (see The Story the Industry Tells; Wait Until You’re Older; Why Aren’t We Talking More About Social Contagion?; The Body as Primary Commodity: The Techno-Religious Cult of Transgenderism; Mystification in the Marketing of “Live-Saving Gender-Affirming Health Care”; Making Patients for the Medical-Industrial Complex; The Persistence of Medical Atrocities: Lobotomy, Nazi Doctors, and Gender Affirming Care; Thomas Szasz, Medical Freedom, and the Tyranny of Gender Ideology; The Function of Gender Ideology in Rationalizing Physician Harm).
The trans rights praxis exposes girls and women to special risks by seeking trespass into activities and spaces reserved for females (see The Thomas-UPenn Episode: A Textbook Case of Institutional Gaslighting; The Rapidly Approaching Death of Sex-based Rights; Decoding Progressive Newspeak: Equity and the Doctrine of Inclusion; No, The International Powerlifting Federation Did Not Strike a Blow for Women’s Rights;Why Are There Sex-Segregated Spaces Anyway? NPR, State Propaganda Organ, Reveals Who and What have Captured the State Apparatus; The Casual Use of Propagandistic Language Surrounding Sex and Gender; Is Title IX Kaput? Or Was it Always Incomprehensible? Should Trans Identifying Women Go to Men’s Prisons? Burned at the Stake: Another Victim of the Gender Cult).
It moreover reifies gender stereotypes while denying the intrinsic differences between men and women that result from natural history (see yesterday’s Gender Roles and Stereotypes), and it is antithetical to rational humanist and scientific materialist commitments (see The Pelvis Tells the Story: Archeology and Physical Anthropology are Most Unkind; Bubbles and Realities: How Ubiquitous is Gender Ideology? Separating Sex and Gender in Language Works Against Reason and Science; Scientific Materialism and the Necessity of Noncircular Conceptual Definitions; The Science™ and its Devotees).
If my standpoint is to be given a name, then “gender critical” is acceptable since it conveys the critical standpoint I have assumed on this issue. It indicates, for example, that I do not accept the false distinction between gender and sex. This is for the simple reasons that I am a materialist (The Four Domains of Reality: Sketching an Analytical Model of Emergent Complexity) and oppose the propagandistic manipulation of language for political-ideological purposes. (I have written a lot on the latter matter. See, e.g., Gender and the Gender Role; Gender and the English Language; Manipulating Reality by Manipulating Words; Sex = Gender Redux: Eschewing the Queer Linguistic Bubble; There’s No Obligation to Speak Like a Queer Theorist. Doing so Misrepresents Reality; Denying Reality: The Tyranny of Gender-Inclusive Language; Sex and Gender are Interchangeable Terms; Gender and Sex. Once More for People in the Back.)
Beyond term quibbling and pedanticism (while recognizing their importance in clarity of conveyances), it needs to be said loudly and often that gay and trans are qualitatively different things. Gay is behavioral, an objective relation between individuals of the same gender. A man, i.e., an adult male human, is attracted to other men. A woman (an adult female human) is attracted to other women. Such a woman is a lesbian. Trans, on the other hand, is a self-identification indicated by the subjective claims of individual who assert that he is another gender, more than one gender, or no gender at all. All of these claims refer to impossibilities. As a scientific matter, gender is binary and immutable. Even in the case of intersex, or disorders of sexual development, the individual can be only one of two possible genders. A trans woman cannot be lesbian since lesbians are women who are attracted to women and men cannot be women (see Lesbians Don’t Like Penises, So Our Definitions Must Change).
The opinion that gay people should be discriminated against for their behavior is heterosexist, or homophobic. There is no rational reason for restricting sexual behavior between consenting adults whatever their gender. To be sure, there are religious prohibitions, but these should have no purchase in a secular society. Moreover, homosexuality, while not normative, is natural, occurring across mammalian species. However, while a man can engage in sexual relations with another man, a man cannot be or become a woman. No mammal can change genders. If a man believes this about himself, then he wrong. If somebody believes that men should not enter women’s spaces or that doctors should not chemically or surgically modify individuals without valid medical reasons, there is no valid term analogous to heterosexism or homophobia to apply to him. He is not “phobic.” He does not fear and loathe trans identifying persons. He merely accepts reality. He is not a “bigot.” He does not hate or seek to oppress trans identifying persons. He’s may not even be necessarily opposed to a man believing he is a woman. He recognizes that people believe all sorts of things about themselves and about the world that are not true. He himself may believe in gods and devils. Rather, he is critical of the doctrine of gender identity and its harmful results in a way similar to his criticism of Islam or any other religious or quasi-religious system.
The gender critical man is certainly not automatically homophobic. On the contrary. Those who are gender critical are safeguarding gay and lesbian children by criticizing queer doctrine and medical industry practices that groom vulnerable members of society for chemical and surgical alteration of their bodies, to induce them into undertaking at great expense a form of conversion therapy that in the end can only simulate the gender stereotypes others believe the patient’s attitudes and behavior convey (Simulated Sexual Identities: Trans as Bad Copy). What is more, trans activists use deceptive mimicry to trespass upon occupations and spaces exclusive to females; queer praxis is not only about transgressing the norms that safeguard children; trans activists work to transgress the norms that safeguard women, as well (The Queer Project and the Practice of Deceptive Mimicry; Magical Thinking and Perception Management in Gender Ideology’s Imperial Ambitions).
Endnote
* Sexism is the attitude that individuals are validly subject to discrimination, prejudice, and unequal treatment based gender. It manifests in biases, stereotypes, and social norms that perpetuate gender inequalities. These discriminatory practices occur in education, employment, politics, and personal relationships, leading to systemic disadvantages for the affected gender. Likewise, heterosexism is the attitude that individuals are validly subject to discrimination, prejudice, and unequal treatment based on their sexual orientation. It manifests in biases, stereotypes, and social norms that perpetuate sexual orientation inequalities. These discriminatory practices occur in many areas of life, such as employment, education, politics, and personal relationships, leading to systemic disadvantages for those who are not heterosexual.
freedom and reason 