When I first started writing this blog, I promised to offend as many people as possible in the time I have left. This entry should go quite a ways towards doing just that.
On February 24, Illinois Rep. Marie Newman hung a pink and blue transgender pride flag outside of her office. Newman's daughter, Evie, is transgender. That same evening, in response, Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene hung a sign outside her office door, which is directly across the hallway from Newman. The sign said, "There are Two genders: MALE & FEMALE. 'Trust the Science!'" Greene had earlier tried to block the Equality Act, which bans LGBTQ discrimination.
I have neither the inclination, nor the time, nor the omniscience to say who is more correct or incorrect regarding transgender rights. But I am fascinated by the language used and the presentation of this material by (and I despise this phrase) "mainstream media."
As I said, I despise the phrase "mainstream media," so I'll address specifics. People.com displayed the headline "Lawmaker with Transgender Daughter Responds to Colleague's Transphobic Sign Outside Her Office." If Greene's sign had said, "There are Two sexes," then I would have found People's use of the word "Transphobic" problematic. Had Greene said, "There are Two sexes," she would have been technically wrong (chromosomally, there are at least half a dozen), but the phrase on the sign would not have been transphobic per se. Greene, however, with her usual judgement, chose to go full friction by saying "Two genders," which is indeed a clear cut diss of transgender people. Thus, upon review, use of the word "Transphobic" in the People headline is appropriate.
In People's opening paragraph, we then find "by mocking Newman's transgender daughter with a transphobic sign outside her office." The word "mocking" has recently become a default red flag go-to verb to boost readers' blood pressures. And sure enough, another default verb, "slammed," appears later in the piece. Writers can't ruffle readers' feathers without at least one "mocked" and a "slammed" per page these days.
In any event, Greene chose to say "Two genders" on her sign, which was both inflammatory and wrong, Even I know that gender is societally or individually defined, meaning there could technically be an unlimited array of genders.
As usual, what does NOT get said in an article tells you as much as what does. The People piece skipped what seemed to be the most logical of Greene's transgender concerns. A CNN piece covering this skirmish quotes Greene, "Biological women cannot compete against biological men. Biological little girls cannot compete against biological little boys and they shouldn't have to." Greene was referring to physical competition, specifically sports.
I have no idea how the transgender lobby, if there is such a thing, can respond to this. As a male who has been on the track and on the basketball court against females, I see any biologically born male competing in women's sports as completely inappropriate from a competitive standpoint.
Conclusion
Marjorie Taylor Greene is an out and out nutcase with zero respect for the scientific method. Having said that, the tone of both the People and CNN pieces seemed very Hulk-ish: "Trans good; anti-trans bad." I don't understand why ostensibly neutral news organizations should craft news pieces with such explicit tone. It echoes Fox News.
It's not as if we know that today's moral absolutism will stand the test of history regarding usefulness or humanistic consequences. On topics like transgenderism, both left and right are trying to make arguments by flexing purely authoritarian muscles.
Newman's daughter is a 19-year-old college freshman. She transitioned five years ago. How many 14-year-olds have the wisdom to choose their life arc or should be entrusted to do so? I have neither the inclination, nor the time, nor the omniscience to know. But, if pressed, I can hazard a guess.
Bob Dietz
February 3, 2021
