What Would Happen if *gasp* an Anti-Trans Article had Good Points

I’ve evolved on gay rights over the years. Like anyone growing up in the 90s, I found the concept of gay people icky and unnatural. Most zoomers have no concept of this period. They could find material to cancel at least 80–90% of my high school population during this era if they were determined enough.

Before entering the era until identity politics took over until roughly 2015, I didn’t have any problem with gay rights. To be clear, I still don’t and I don’t like people in the LGBT+ population any less. If I know someone who identifies as such, I still listen to their firsthand accounts of struggle. The problem is the dialogue that surrounds them that becomes dogmatic. One of the most cancellable crimes today, likely behind grand larceny, bullying, or embezzlement is saying something remotely critical of the trans community.

This isn’t to suggest that the trans community isn’t oppressed beyond belief.

However, there are certainly valid points of discussion. I recently read this and found myself agreeing with much of it.

Every Gender Identity Is ‘Authentic’ — Until It Isn’t (quillette.com)

Even if the points are not good, I’d love to be proven wrong but in most cases that would never happen because it’s practically suicidal today to post anything remotely critical of transgenderism.

Fortunately, I’m socially suicidal enough to do so, but this is often labeled as “hate speech” or “violence.” In my humble opinion, using such extreme labels on open inquiry doesn’t do the problem any good because people don’t lose those views. They just push them more underground and opposing factions simply get solidified in their community. The only way things change is through dialogue and people need open permission to be wrong before potentially being right.

The truth is that people are at different points in their evolution of understanding these issues. There’s no guarantee that they will come around, but expecting people to think like you about all issues and not being accepting of diversity of thought closes a lot of doors. I 100% understand that not being supportive of ideas about transgender also closes a lot of doors too, but discernment between hate and holding different views strikes me as the thing that could help this country’s polarization greatly.

Another thing is that people need to stop hating on words just because it comes from a certain source. I was in the journalism world for over a decade. Plenty of people who worked for Breitbart and Fox News switched over to more reputable sources, I’ve personally written for The Federalist and American Conservative on relatively neutral topics while also writing for the Southern Poverty Law Center. I’ve written for the Washington Times and the Washington Post. The editorial standards for all of it are pretty much the same. The link is from Quilette but that doesn’t invalidate the words it says.