Apparently, gender is irrelevant and those who don’t agree should “die off”

That is the view of the exemplar of tolerance, Glenn Close, who plays a cross dresser in her new film.

From here:

Glenn Close is not a man. And she is not gay. But she so fully assumes the bizarre form of an Irish woman who hides her sex beneath stiff collars and black suits in the new film Albert Nobbs, that you have to recalibrate all notions of gender by the final credits.

Close says that was pretty much the whole idea behind bringing her Obie-winning role to the screen: “Gender is irrelevant. It basically should be irrelevant.”

[….]

Some people will change their point of view, and those who are either too old, or too blinkered, to accept the beauty of difference will just have to “die off,” she says.

Hiding one’s sexual identity by dressing as a member of the opposite sex expresses the irrelevance of gender as effectively as a man in a wig expresses the irrelevance of baldness.

And since cross-dressing seeks to disguise a difference, it’s difficult to see how it enhances the “beauty of difference.”

Perhaps it is Ms. Close’s brain cells that have died off.

In Australia you can now be male, female or X

From here:

Australian passports will now have three gender options – male, female and x.

The new category is only for use by intersex people – who are not biologically entirely male or female.

Trangendered passport-holders – who have changed gender but not had surgery – will be free to choose either male or female, but will not be allowed to select ‘x’.

[…..]

She said: ‘”X” is really quite important, because there are people who are indeed genetically ambiguous and were probably arbitrarily assigned as one sex or the other at birth.

‘It’s a really important recognition of people’s human rights that if they choose to have their sex as “indeterminate”, they can.’

In Western society, being inter-something is an increasing obsession. Interfaith services commemorating 9/11 were popular and were attended by people who believe that proclaiming their non-adherence to any specific religion is more virtuous than espousing the truth of one to the exclusion of the others. The objective reality that if one religion is true the others must be false, has to be resisted at all costs since that would foster exclusiveness and inequality – the antithesis of the only permitted absolutes, inclusiveness and equality.

As the article notes, it has become a human right to deny objective reality. Thus, to insist on the objective existence of a person’s gender is now gauche: a person’s sex is determined existentially. A person doesn’t behave like a man because he is one, he is a man because he behaves like one: behaviour precedes essence.

What next, I wonder: an interspecies category for those whose sexual excess is behavioural evidence of their being rabbits?

Toronto parents keep their child’s gender a secret

From here:

“So it’s a boy, right?” a neighbour calls out as Kathy Witterick walks by, her four month old baby, Storm, strapped to her chest in a carrier.

Each week the woman asks the same question about the baby with the squishy cheeks and feathery blond hair.

Witterick smiles, opens her arms wide, comments on the sunny spring day, and keeps walking.

She’s used to it. The neighbours know Witterick and her husband, David Stocker, are raising a genderless baby. But they don’t pretend to understand it.

While there’s nothing ambiguous about Storm’s genitalia, they aren’t telling anyone whether their third child is a boy or a girl.

[…..]

Witterick and Stocker believe they are giving their children the freedom to choose who they want to be, unconstrained by social norms about males and females.

By the time this poor child is old enough to “choose who he wants to be”, he will also be old enough to realise that he has been the victim of a grotesque experiment by parents more interested in sacrificing him on the altar of their crackbrained ideology than in loving him.

If he has any sense he will get away from them as far as he can as quickly as possible.

Just another day at the medical lab

El’Jai Devoureau, a woman who decided she was really a man, embarked on hormone therapy and surgery to release her inner man before starting a highly sought-after job watching other men urinate. After the discovery that Devoureau’s outer appearance didn’t entirely match her inner aspirations, she was fired because her employer only hires men to watch other men urinate. Devoureau is suing because her employer “discriminated based on birth gender”; Devoureau wants to continue watching men urinate.

El’Jai Devoureau’s lawyer commends her courage – not, as one might think, for taking the job in the first place – but for “drawing a line in the sand” on behalf of the all the other ex-women waiting to take up similar employment:

‘As our society becomes appropriately more tolerant, I hope that there are more brave people that are willing to endure the collateral problems by drawing a line in the sand and saying they won’t stand for discrimination,’

And a professor of law muses on unusual interview questions that lab employees may have to look forward to:

‘I would have absolutely told them to retain the employee and think about how to address transphobia and heterosexism in their environment.

You don’t ask someone: ‘What do your genitalia look like?” she said. ‘That was a very poor choice on the employer’s part.’

All of which makes me grateful that I work with computers.

 

UK: Government to produce Transgender Equality Action Plan

Here is Lynne Featherstone, Minister For Equalities to explain:

Those eager to complete the survey, will be able to opine about such things as “Police lack of understanding/sensitivity to my needs as a trans victim”.

And, of course, in the mass production chaos of genetic gender distribution, did you end up with two X’s when what you really want is an X and a Y? – Is your gender identity the same as the gender you were assigned at birth?

What does this all really mean? More five year-old boys will be painting their toenails pink.

Pink toenails and gender confusion

From here:

A recent feature in J. Crew’s online catalogue portrays designer Jenna Lyons painting her son Beckett’s toe nails hot pink. The quote accompanying the image reads, “Lucky for me, I ended up with a boy whose favorite color is pink. Toenail painting is way more fun in neon.”

Yeah, well, it may be fun and games now, Jenna, but at least put some money aside for psychotherapy for the kid-and maybe a little for others who’ll be affected by your “innocent” pleasure.

Is this the slippery pink slope to lipstick, eyeliner, high-heels and pre-teen gender reassignment? Personally, knowing the reaction it would have created in school, I wouldn’t have let my mother paint my toenails at that age however much she liked pink – and she did. But, unlike today, schools were sane in the middle-ages when I attended.