In the past few weeks, my Twitter(X) feed has been fairly flooded by “trans” activist. These activists proclaim such slogans as,
“Trans rights are human rights!”
“Trans women are women.”
Certain politicians have joined the chorus, recently advocating a Trans Bill of Rights, a Congressional resolution (H.Res. 1058) which would advocate for gender affirming care and protections for “trans” individuals and “non-binary” people.
The Twitter (X) algorithm determined, mathematically of course, that I needed to see all these activists who used the same phraseology and politicians supporting them and adopting the same phraseology, sometimes with added invective.
“If you disagree, you are a bigot!”
When confronted with such activism, one has at least two options,
Ignore it.
Tell them they are wrong.
What to do?
I decided to ask a question.
Read the question in full. It is simple, but it is full of meaning.
“Do you believe that a biological man can become a woman through the ingestion of hormones and radical elective surgeries (and vice versa)?”
Now look at each part of the question.
“Do you believe…” The question begins with a questioning of belief. What we know of a “gender ideology” is a system of belief not based on objective evidence. It is, for all intents and purposes, a worldview.
“…that a biological man…” A man is an adult human male with XY chromosomes.
“…can become a woman…” The memes of phraseology on social media and political parlance of “gender ideology” suggests that sex is malleable, or changeable based on one’s self-perception.
“…through the ingestion of hormones…” “Gender-affirming care” also promises that troubled people can relieve that trauma through taking cross-sex hormones. This has amounted to experimentation on troubled youth and adults and puts those people down the path to life-long medication not to mention unforeseen complications.
“…and radical elective surgeries…” They are given the euphemistic names of “top” and “bottom” surgeries, but both amount to healthy tissue being removed. This is why the word “elective” was inserted.
“…(and vice versa)?” If the question can be applied with a biological man as the object, then it can be changed to biological woman with the same effect.
The question was devised to elicit a positive or negative response. If someone answers yes, then their denial of basic biology is laid out into the open. If the interlocutor answers no, then he undermines the very tenets of the ideology he sought to defend.
So far, no one has responded to the question I have asked. It is not a “gotcha” question, but one which seeks to bring a worldview out into the open.
Mark Riser - Apologist 