Walsh: How, precisely, does a biological male come to the conclusion that
he is really a woman? How does this process work?
If he arrives at this conclusion based on the fact that he feels like a woman,
how does he know what it feels like to be a woman if he's not one?
Is it not circular logic to say that he knows what it feels like to be a woman
because he feels like one and, therefore, is one?
That's circular logic, and it makes no sense.
What exactly is a female feeling?
Maybe some of the ladies here can help me out with that.
Even if it made sense to speak of female feelings and female thoughts,
and even if it were possible for a man to know that he was experiencing one,
why would that mean that he is a woman instead of just a feminine man?
We use to have those. Those used to exist.
The Left tells us that gender is a social construct.
They reject the idea that women must necessarily have any particular
feeling or thought or taste or preference.
If gender is an artificial construct and our physical features have
no bearing on our identity as man or woman,
then what the hell is a woman, anyway?
A woman, in that case, would not be defined by her feelings, her thoughts,
her ideas, her preferences, her body, her reproductive organs, her DNA,
or her chromosomes. What is she defined by? What is she?
Can anyone answer that?
When a man says that he's a woman, he's now made it so that that phrase
means nothing. It doesn't mean anything to be a woman.
He might as well say that he's a whosawhatsit or a thingamadoodle.
It's just a word. It means nothing anymore.
This is the real harm that this transgenderism nonsense has caused.
Not only does it foment confusion in the minds of children,
but it also cheapens womanhood by turning it into some kind of abstract
concept that we theorize about. So you women in the audience,
you're not even people. You're just these abstractions,
according to the LGBT folks. Or, if not that, then womanhood
is a costume that you can put on and wear.
This is especially ironic given the concern for cultural appropriation
that you find these days. If it is appropriation for a white man to dress
like a black man, is it not appropriation for a man to dress
like a woman? Why doesn't anyone ever talk about female appropriation?
That is real appropriation. You've got drag shows with men dancing around
in women's clothes making a mockery and a parody of womanhood.
It is like a female minstrel show. It is female blackface,
and feminists just sit back and take it most of the time.
Speaking of irony, the Left for so long has tried to tear down gender constructs,
but transgenderism only enforces the constructs that they were trying to
tear down. We used to say that a boy who plays with dolls is girly.
That's what we used to say back in the bad, old days.
The way to tear down that construct is to say that it's okay for a boy to be
girly. Or you could say, alternatively, that it's not girly to play with dolls.
So a boy with dolls used to be girly, now he's literally a girl, we say.
If a boy who exhibits womanly characteristics is, therefore, a girl,
then those gender constructs that the Left was trying to tear down?
They have just made those constructs into something far more potent and
powerful than any conservative ever imagined that they could be.
That is why I object to redefining gender.