An in-depth essay in the Antioch College Review turns the tables on the Transgender debate and illuminates the liberal media’s attempt to normalize sexual disorders.
The comprehensive article, titled “The Sacred Androgen: The Transgender Debate” by Daniel Harris, starts off by acknowledging transgenders need protection under the law because their mental and emotional deficits “do not strip them of their humanity.”
But then the author delves into the heart of the current transgender bathroom bill debate. The idea that men can shape-shift into female form simply by expressing the belief that they were “born in the wrong body” — and that society should blindly accept this lie as fact.
“The political agenda of the transgender community often seems to demand that we be complicit in their convictions,
that we humor them,
pretend that we view them as the genuine article when in fact they seem to be staging a kind of masquerade, dressing in a costume, playing at make believe.”
Harris’ essay is a must-read for anyone who doesn’t believe the Trans bathroom issue poses a danger to women and girls.
The Trans expression “We just need to pee” is a smokescreen the transgenders and their allies hide behind as they bully society to subscribe to the mass delusion that men in dresses are no different from biological women.
And yet just as the issue has come to the fore of public awareness, TGs have ambushed the debate and entangled us in a snare of such trivialities as the proper pronouns with which to address them… They insult us with the pejorative term “cisgender,” which they use to describe those of us who accept, however unenthusiastically, our birth gender, as opposed to the enlightened few who question their sex. Moreover, they shame us into silence by ridiculing the blunders we make while trying to come to grips with their unique dilemmas, decrying our curiosity about their bodies as prurience and our unwillingness, or even inability, to enter into their own (often unsuccessful) illusion as narrow mindedness.
Harris goes on to analyze the double standard displayed by progressives.
“Why is it not only okay but valiant for Caitlyn Jenner to liberate [his] inner woman through rhinoplasties and laryngeal shaves while it is deplorable and pathetic for Michael Jackson to liberate his inner Caucasian through bleaching and cleft chin augmentation?”
“[When] Laverne Cox, star of Orange is the New Black, “slaps on a transdermal estrogen patch, [he] is lauded as a hero and role model.”
Harris says TGs promote “a whole range of socially subversive interpretations of gender, but even a glance at the advertisements on Craigslist reveals a clichéd image of a hyper-sexualized odalisque who exists solely” to attract heterosexual men who, Trans believe, will choose them because straight men are wholly dissatisfied with their plain Jane wives.
TGs do not model themselves on the average hipless, braless, triple-A-cup coed in jeans and T-shirts, but on such vacuous female fantasies as Kim Kardashian, Pamela Anderson, and the English singer and fashion model Katie Price.
In resolving one conflict, however, aren’t TGs creating another? In liberating the archetypal Andromeda from her chains, aren’t they in turn suppressing their male or female selves even more violently than they did their inner genders before they came out, creating an internal embargo as psychologically devastating as the one they suffered before they transitioned? Why is one gender more viable than the other? In being true to themselves, aren’t they being false to their own bodies?
If TGs initiated this journey to find mental health, there is no evidence whatsoever that they achieve it or, indeed, that they even marginally improve their lots in life.
The Trans community is an uproar over this enlightened article published in a scholarly newspaper.
A petition has been created to censor Harris and force the college to scrub the essay from its website.
The coordinated push back by the Transgenders and their allies pressured the college to denounce the article while preserving Harris’ Constitutional rights to his opinion.
Antioch College writes:
Daniel Harris’ views are his own, and based on the response of some readers, are deeply offensive to many transgender individuals and supporters. Antioch College does not condone or always agree with the ideas and viewpoints expressed in the Review. We do, however, have confidence in the Review’s editor and editorial process, and support a key Antiochian value—the free expression of ideas and opinions, even when they run counter to our own. As a college, we encourage our students, faculty, and the broader community to engage in critical thought and dialogue around important issues, including this one.
The Sacred Androgen: The Transgender Debate by Daniel Harris | Antioch Review
The comprehensive article, titled “The Sacred Androgen: The Transgender Debate” by Daniel Harris, starts off by acknowledging transgenders need protection under the law because their mental and emotional deficits “do not strip them of their humanity.”
But then the author delves into the heart of the current transgender bathroom bill debate. The idea that men can shape-shift into female form simply by expressing the belief that they were “born in the wrong body” — and that society should blindly accept this lie as fact.
“The political agenda of the transgender community often seems to demand that we be complicit in their convictions,
that we humor them, pretend that we view them as the genuine article when in fact they seem to be staging a kind of masquerade, dressing in a costume, playing at make believe.”Harris’ essay is a must-read for anyone who doesn’t believe the Trans bathroom issue poses a danger to women and girls.
The Trans expression “We just need to pee” is a smokescreen the transgenders and their allies hide behind as they bully society to subscribe to the mass delusion that men in dresses are no different from biological women.
And yet just as the issue has come to the fore of public awareness, TGs have ambushed the debate and entangled us in a snare of such trivialities as the proper pronouns with which to address them… They insult us with the pejorative term “cisgender,” which they use to describe those of us who accept, however unenthusiastically, our birth gender, as opposed to the enlightened few who question their sex. Moreover, they shame us into silence by ridiculing the blunders we make while trying to come to grips with their unique dilemmas, decrying our curiosity about their bodies as prurience and our unwillingness, or even inability, to enter into their own (often unsuccessful) illusion as narrow mindedness.
Harris goes on to analyze the double standard displayed by progressives.
“Why is it not only okay but valiant for Caitlyn Jenner to liberate [his] inner woman through rhinoplasties and laryngeal shaves while it is deplorable and pathetic for Michael Jackson to liberate his inner Caucasian through bleaching and cleft chin augmentation?”
“[When] Laverne Cox, star of Orange is the New Black, “slaps on a transdermal estrogen patch, [he] is lauded as a hero and role model.”
Harris says TGs promote “a whole range of socially subversive interpretations of gender, but even a glance at the advertisements on Craigslist reveals a clichéd image of a hyper-sexualized odalisque who exists solely” to attract heterosexual men who, Trans believe, will choose them because straight men are wholly dissatisfied with their plain Jane wives.
TGs do not model themselves on the average hipless, braless, triple-A-cup coed in jeans and T-shirts, but on such vacuous female fantasies as Kim Kardashian, Pamela Anderson, and the English singer and fashion model Katie Price.
In resolving one conflict, however, aren’t TGs creating another? In liberating the archetypal Andromeda from her chains, aren’t they in turn suppressing their male or female selves even more violently than they did their inner genders before they came out, creating an internal embargo as psychologically devastating as the one they suffered before they transitioned? Why is one gender more viable than the other? In being true to themselves, aren’t they being false to their own bodies?
If TGs initiated this journey to find mental health, there is no evidence whatsoever that they achieve it or, indeed, that they even marginally improve their lots in life.
The Trans community is an uproar over this enlightened article published in a scholarly newspaper.
A petition has been created to censor Harris and force the college to scrub the essay from its website.
The coordinated push back by the Transgenders and their allies pressured the college to denounce the article while preserving Harris’ Constitutional rights to his opinion.
Antioch College writes:
Daniel Harris’ views are his own, and based on the response of some readers, are deeply offensive to many transgender individuals and supporters. Antioch College does not condone or always agree with the ideas and viewpoints expressed in the Review. We do, however, have confidence in the Review’s editor and editorial process, and support a key Antiochian value—the free expression of ideas and opinions, even when they run counter to our own. As a college, we encourage our students, faculty, and the broader community to engage in critical thought and dialogue around important issues, including this one.
The Sacred Androgen: The Transgender Debate by Daniel Harris | Antioch Review
