- Dołączono
- 24 Sie 2014
"My friend Chelsea Manning"
OK, let's see how The Void reeeees back.
Zach starts by giving Rowling the consolation prize, for having created a "beautiful fantasy world" that presumably runneth over with "transcendence, imagination, [and] humanist care for the well-being of others". Unfortunately, Rowling's "transphobic" blog post has nullified everything. Setting aside the question whether the world of Harry Potter is as utopic as Zach imagines (very doubtful), it beggars belief that a "muddled, meandering, hastily-assembled essay" can have the power to totally take down seven doorstopers.
If indeed "nothing distinguishes [Rowling's essay] from the ramblings of fools I’ve taken apart countless times over the years", one wonders why Zach tackles the task of "debunking" Rowling with such gusto. Zach's own essay typifies the traits he accuses Rowling of: it is vague, strong on opinion and weak on textual evidence. However many papers Zach cites, he rarely directly addresses the concern expressed by Rowling. Zach's lack of argument is evidenced by the part he bolded: "This [Rowling's essay] is nothing short of a manifesto calling for the total nonexistence of trans people". Whenever a troon says anything about "existence", you can be sure he is engaging in emotional release rather than reasoned argument, and as such he should be ignored.
On Rowling's specific concerns, Zach first tackles the recent rise in gender-confused girls seeking "affirmative" treatment, and the concomitant rise of detransitioners. Rowling believes that these girls are simply lesbians, who are only driven to transition because of systemic homophobia. Zach cites studies from Northern Europe to contest this claim, but the research he quoted (Dhejne et al. (2014) and Wiepjes et al. (2018 ) -- the famous Amsterdam Cohort Study) covers a very long time scale (1960 onwards in the case of Dhejne), hence they do not address the concern of Rowling, which is the recent upsurge of gender-confused girls. Neither paper was specifice to FtMs, and neither investigated the reason for their transition. The only thing that might be of relevance is that detransitioners are rare, at least when the transitioning process is adequately gatekept.
Rowling may believe that detransitioning is very common, and Zach provides some reassurance that it has not been so. Still, the phenomenon of "trans kids" is very new and we don't know what kind of fuckery the NHS is doing at Tavistock, hence we have no reason to take what happened in Northern Europe to be the indication of the future.
Zach is entitled to his doubt whether homophobia (familial or social or even "internalized") can provide the impetus for transition. He provides sociological evidence that homophobia and transphobia often go hand in hand. Still, one can argue that focusing on sociological research means ignoring the "lived experience" (phenomenological) aspect of transitioning. A man who is fully convinced that he is a woman will not be hounded by internalized homophobia even if he is exclusively attracted to men. The human mind is complicated, and on the matter whether transitioning can be a response to homophobia, I'd say the jury is still out.
Rowling is alarmed by the fact that, over the years, there has been a rise in the proportion of FtMs among troons. Zach glibly dismisses her legitimate worry, claiming there is no such thing as a "right ratio". Still, any drastic change in ratio or raw case numbers (especially a 44-fold increase) is a reason for investigation. One cannot simply dismiss it as "case numbers vary with time and it is the way it is". There is no "right" number for the incidence of cancer either, but I bet a 44x rise in lung cancer within a community will make the news.
Finally, Rowling points out how children on the autistic spectrum are "hugely over-represented" among young FtMs. Zach corrects Rowling's "hugely over-represented" among young FtMs to "an elevated prevalence" among troons of all flavors, while he, again, dismisses her concern with "So what?". "Rowling insinuates this is yet another cause for concern", Zach says, "again without bothering to explain why that would be so." One will never be able to explain "why that would be so" if one simply shoots down every uncomfortable question with "So what?". It is trivial to say, as Zach does, that "autistic people can be trans and trans people can be autistic", but this is not the thing we are interested about: we want to know why trans people are more likely to be autistic!
Did I say Finally? There are actually a Book 2 and a Book 3! I've enough of this shit for the time being.
OK, let's see how The Void reeeees back.
Zach starts by giving Rowling the consolation prize, for having created a "beautiful fantasy world" that presumably runneth over with "transcendence, imagination, [and] humanist care for the well-being of others". Unfortunately, Rowling's "transphobic" blog post has nullified everything. Setting aside the question whether the world of Harry Potter is as utopic as Zach imagines (very doubtful), it beggars belief that a "muddled, meandering, hastily-assembled essay" can have the power to totally take down seven doorstopers.
If indeed "nothing distinguishes [Rowling's essay] from the ramblings of fools I’ve taken apart countless times over the years", one wonders why Zach tackles the task of "debunking" Rowling with such gusto. Zach's own essay typifies the traits he accuses Rowling of: it is vague, strong on opinion and weak on textual evidence. However many papers Zach cites, he rarely directly addresses the concern expressed by Rowling. Zach's lack of argument is evidenced by the part he bolded: "This [Rowling's essay] is nothing short of a manifesto calling for the total nonexistence of trans people". Whenever a troon says anything about "existence", you can be sure he is engaging in emotional release rather than reasoned argument, and as such he should be ignored.
On Rowling's specific concerns, Zach first tackles the recent rise in gender-confused girls seeking "affirmative" treatment, and the concomitant rise of detransitioners. Rowling believes that these girls are simply lesbians, who are only driven to transition because of systemic homophobia. Zach cites studies from Northern Europe to contest this claim, but the research he quoted (Dhejne et al. (2014) and Wiepjes et al. (2018 ) -- the famous Amsterdam Cohort Study) covers a very long time scale (1960 onwards in the case of Dhejne), hence they do not address the concern of Rowling, which is the recent upsurge of gender-confused girls. Neither paper was specifice to FtMs, and neither investigated the reason for their transition. The only thing that might be of relevance is that detransitioners are rare, at least when the transitioning process is adequately gatekept.
Rowling may believe that detransitioning is very common, and Zach provides some reassurance that it has not been so. Still, the phenomenon of "trans kids" is very new and we don't know what kind of fuckery the NHS is doing at Tavistock, hence we have no reason to take what happened in Northern Europe to be the indication of the future.
Zach is entitled to his doubt whether homophobia (familial or social or even "internalized") can provide the impetus for transition. He provides sociological evidence that homophobia and transphobia often go hand in hand. Still, one can argue that focusing on sociological research means ignoring the "lived experience" (phenomenological) aspect of transitioning. A man who is fully convinced that he is a woman will not be hounded by internalized homophobia even if he is exclusively attracted to men. The human mind is complicated, and on the matter whether transitioning can be a response to homophobia, I'd say the jury is still out.
Rowling is alarmed by the fact that, over the years, there has been a rise in the proportion of FtMs among troons. Zach glibly dismisses her legitimate worry, claiming there is no such thing as a "right ratio". Still, any drastic change in ratio or raw case numbers (especially a 44-fold increase) is a reason for investigation. One cannot simply dismiss it as "case numbers vary with time and it is the way it is". There is no "right" number for the incidence of cancer either, but I bet a 44x rise in lung cancer within a community will make the news.
Finally, Rowling points out how children on the autistic spectrum are "hugely over-represented" among young FtMs. Zach corrects Rowling's "hugely over-represented" among young FtMs to "an elevated prevalence" among troons of all flavors, while he, again, dismisses her concern with "So what?". "Rowling insinuates this is yet another cause for concern", Zach says, "again without bothering to explain why that would be so." One will never be able to explain "why that would be so" if one simply shoots down every uncomfortable question with "So what?". It is trivial to say, as Zach does, that "autistic people can be trans and trans people can be autistic", but this is not the thing we are interested about: we want to know why trans people are more likely to be autistic!
Did I say Finally? There are actually a Book 2 and a Book 3! I've enough of this shit for the time being.
Ostatnio edytowane:
"
