Tag: Gender Identity

Posted on

Defining Sex Precisely: Return To Normal

I just read an excellent article by Jay Richards: Why States Must Define Sex Precisely.

He argues for a return to the biological understanding of sex, rejecting the subjective notions of gender ideology. Also, he calls for precise legal definitions of sex that are rooted in biology and that can withstand the ideological pressures of the current age.

The once uncontested definitions of “male” and “female” are now under siege due to the growing influence of gender ideology. This ideology seeks to redefine sex in federal laws and regulations to include “gender identity,” a move that threatens to undermine all preexisting legal references to sex.

Among other things, this blog has pointed out that Title IX advancements in the area of Women’s Sport has been negatively impacted by this move.

Legal Matters

Richards criticizes the vague and general definitions of sex proposed by some state legislators, arguing that they fail to provide a clear distinction between males and females.

Vague legal definitions create openings for gender ideology to gain a toehold.

He highlights the need for precise definitions of sex in state law, citing the ongoing debate in Montana as an example.

As I have done on this blog, Richards criticizes the misuse of disorders of sexual development, often mislabeled as “intersex” conditions, to argue for the existence of more than two sexes or fluidity of sexes. He points out that these disorders occur in a minuscule percentage of the population and do not justify the claims of gender ideology.

The main way gender ideologues have confused the public is by falsely claiming that disorders of sexual development, often mislabeled “intersex” conditions, prove that there are more than two sexes—or that the sexes are somehow fluid or mere endpoints on a spectrum.

Rather these conditions are disorders…

For instance, we know that humans are bipeds—that they naturally have two legs. But if a child is born without one or both legs, do we conclude that the newborn isn’t human, is a member of another species, or is “interspecies”? Of course not. We recognize that the child suffers from some sort of disorder—some disruption in development involving, say, chromosomes or an event in utero. Note that we’re engaged in counterfactual reasoning. We infer that the newborn would have had two legs except for some event or abnormality that prevented this from happening.

The article concludes by advocating for precise definitions of sex that capture the central concept of biological sex, account for normal development and disorders, and accommodate different stages of development. For example:

A human female is, minimally, a member of the human species who, under normal development, produces relatively large, relatively immobile gametes—ova—at some point in her life cycle, and has a reproductive and endocrine system oriented around the production of that gamete.

For the discussions ahead, legislative or otherwise, learn these arguments!

Companion Post

DSD’s and “Sex Assignment” – Podcast

+++

Sex Matters

Posted on

Ontario Elementary Principal to Parent: Human Rights Code Doesn’t Require Parental Consent

Grade 5-8 Workshop on Gender and Queer Identity

Eye opening report by a parent of a student attending an Elementary Public School in Ontario province.

Display at the door of Grade 2 (age 7) daughter’s classroom.
[click image to enlarge]

I’m a parent at an Elementary-aged Public School in York Region District in Ontario. 

Sometime at the end of February, without parents’ knowledge, the school invited Canadian Centre for Sexual and Gender Diversity to give a workshop on gender diversity and queer identity to students from Grade 5 to 8. The title and content of this workshop and by what organization were all vague. Some parents heard something from their children but no one had a clue what happened. 

Until March 1st. 

At the school parents council meeting, while the school showed previous activities at the school, I noticed this workshop for Grade 5 to 8 and asked what it was about and if parents’ consent were obtained. The Principal stated that this topic falls under the Human Rights code, thus parents acknowledgement or consent are not required. Two other council members stated that they wanted to be educated on the same topic so parents can help promote gender equity. The school thought it would be a great idea to bring in speakers to give a gender diversity session to parents. On April 21, the school sent out the following invitation to all parents at the school: 

Read about the whole episode here. She took photos of the training session and presentation slides are provided.

Don’t think this is just a Canadian issue!

+++

Posted on

The Catholic Understanding of Human Anthropology

“Children know that their mothers and fathers love them, and they trust their guidance. Now children are told that their parents’ judgment about them should not be trusted — that parents may have been mistaken from birth about ‘who’ the child really is.”

Although not a Roman Catholic, as a Christian I affirm their view of body and soul integration. And with them I recognize the creational givens of “sexual identity” over and above “gender identity.”

Here is more about the Catholic understanding.

To understand why the Church warns about gender ideology, it is critical to examine the deceptive anthropology underlying gender ideology. Perhaps the easiest way to understand the anthropological claims made by gender ideology is to look at the “gender-affirming” or “transgender” resources widely used in schools, universities and popular culture to explain “who we are.” Colorful cartoonish graphics like the genderbread person or the gender unicorn depict androgynous figures with labels proposing new categories of identity. Lesson plans designed by activist organizations teach students the vocabulary and core concepts of this new belief system that conflicts with Christian anthropology.

Rather than recognizing the truth that each person, created by God as male or female, is a unity of body and soul, gender ideology claims “the person” is a random assortment of dimensions: “gender identity” (self-perception, regardless of the body), “gender expression” (how you present yourself to others), “sex assigned at birth” (a guess about your identity made by doctors and parents), sexual attraction or emotional attraction (feelings and desires), and anatomical parts (body parts that can be replaced at will). Each of these categories is typically represented as a “spectrum” or as fluid and changeable.

These graphics encourage the child to decide his identity for himself, using these categories to shape his understanding of “who he is.” According to gender ideology, the defining or core aspect of identity of the person is “gender identity.” Human Rights Campaign’s Welcoming Schools “LGBTQ inclusivity” program, for example, describes “gender identity” as “who you know yourself to be in your heart and mind” and teaches children that “our bodies do not determine our gender identity.” This directly contradicts the truth, known by reason and revealed by God, that each of us is created with a unity of body and soul, embodied as male or female. The Catechism of the Catholic Church uses the term “sexual identity” to describe embodiment as male or female and teaches that “everyone must acknowledge and accept his [or her] sexual identity” (No. 2333).

Children are taught to believe that because identity is self-defined, there is an infinite array of gender identities. In Portland’s public schools, for example, social emotional learning lessons (SEL) instruct children that there are as many different “gender identities” as there are stars in the sky. Every person has a “gender identity,” and only the individual child can say what his or her identity is. The child who declares a transgender identity must be believed and affirmed and cannot be challenged. According to gender ideology, it is normal to be “transgender” (an umbrella term for a person whose “gender identity” does not align with his body), just as it is normal to be “cisgender” (a person whose “gender identity” matches his body). This undermines the child’s natural knowledge of human nature, that human beings are embodied as either male or female, and in its place substitutes a new “binary” premised on the belief that some persons are born in the wrong body. In contrast, the Catholic Church teaches that the person is created at conception as a male or female person, with a unity of a human soul and either a male or female body. In other words, God creates you, uniting your soul with your male or female body.

But how does a child discern his or her “gender identity”? The child is taught to compare his or her own behavior and feelings to exaggerated stereotypes of what it means to be male or female. Interests, feelings and preferences are presented as reliable indicators of “gender identity,” while the sexed body is not…..

There’s more. So read the whole thing.

+++

Respecting our God-given nature

“What is true of creation as a whole is true of human nature in particular: there is an order in human nature that we are called to respect. In fact, human nature deserves utmost respect since humanity occupies a singular place in the created order, being created in the image of God (Gn 1:27). To find fulfillment as human persons, to find true happiness, we must respect that order. We did not create human nature; it is a gift from a loving Creator. Nor do we ‘own’ our human nature, as if it were something that we are free to make use of in any way we please. Thus, genuine respect for human dignity requires that decisions about the use of technology be guided by genuine respect for this created order.”

— “Doctrinal Note on the Moral Limits to Technological Manipulation of the Human Body,” March 20, 2023

Wisdom from Pope Francis

“It needs to be emphasized that ‘biological sex and the socio-cultural role of sex (gender) can be distinguished but not separated.’ … It is one thing to be understanding of human weakness and the complexities of life, and another to accept ideologies that attempt to sunder what are inseparable aspects of reality. Let us not fall into the sin of trying to replace the Creator. We are creatures, and not omnipotent. Creation is prior to us and must be received as a gift. At the same time, we are called to protect our humanity, and this means, in the first place, accepting it and respecting it as it was created.”

— Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia, No. 56

+++

For The Good Of Our Families