Wow, I didn’t get far writing this before I was already “corrected.” Just typing the title, auto-correct, speech-predicted algorithms thought the appropriate verb form should be “threatening” not “threatened.” And see what a difference that makes. The subtle, or not, assumption being that some speech is dangerous, rather than the censoring of it being dangerous.
As speech and expression in general has become increasingly under attack, to extreme lengths I honestly can’t believe are real, I have decided to start posting to my long-dormant blog again. Do people still blog?? Maybe I should start a Substack. Soon.
There are so many things that I think are wrong these days, it’s hard to even know what to write about first. But I think at the core of everything, is free speech, freedom of expression. If we can’t speak freely and share our thoughts, our ideas, our feelings, and our fears, what do we really have? To me, all other things can’t be either maintained or changed, if we cannot first speak. Other rights gained can be lost, and others never come to be, if only the in-fashion, officially acceptable narrative of the day is allowed space. And the pendulum always swings both ways. Something it feels like the extreme woke, censoring left of today has forgotten. Those of us who speak for free speech are fighting for that right for everyone. As the saying goes, free speech isn’t for speech you like or agree with, it’s for speech you hate or disagree with.
The classic and wise exceptions to absolute free speech, like no “yelling ‘fire’ in a crowded theatre,” have now given way to trying to censor any speech that someone doesn’t like or disapproves of, or where feelings may be hurt. The ironic thing is that just about anything could be termed hate speech under that criteria, but given where the pendulum currently is, only one side is being censored and hated on. I’m not saying one should disregard others’ feelings and be mean for the sake of it, but neither should such words be a crime of any sort. We all have different opinions and beliefs, and shared non-violently, we are all entitled to our own views. A right I believe that is immutable and innate for us all, just by our very existence. And it’s why I so strongly believe we must speak, and never accept being silenced. But it’s scary and utterly insane to me, that that simple action has become such an act of courage and bravery, given how wide ranging the ramifications can be now.
Too many of our Western governments, employers, certain activist groups etc., are making the very act of speaking so very difficult (if not impossible) for so many. The things I’ve experienced, and others’ stories I’ve heard, make me sick. And as my mother used to say, “makes my skin crawl.” I can’t believe how far our so-called free and democratic societies have fallen so fast. Countless refrains of the same chorus, how is this real, up is down down is up, the left is now against free speech?, 1984 wasn’t supposed to be an instruction manual, make Orwell fiction again, we’re doing what now to children?, sex is changeable? (as per that Australian judge recently), a woman can be a man, a man can be a woman, not just identify as, but actually be…
Those last few may bother some, and while that’s not my intent, I will not apologize for speaking to and supporting objective, biological, physical reality, and the rights of women to have certain single-sex spaces. And this is where I currently see one of the biggest threats to free speech. If we can’t even say “biological man who identifies as a woman” without it now being considered hate speech, then we are in real trouble. Which we are.
It’s not about ignoring someone’s feelings, but when we can’t describe an absolute biological reality, we aren’t just considering someone’s feelings, we are saying those feelings are the ONLY thing that matters. Feelings not facts. And we all have different feelings about all kinds of things; those are changeable. But facts are not. They’re objective points of reference. And for good reason. Just like single-sex spaces were created for a reason.
And our slide down this very slippery slope increases with every dangerous precedent set when we change, as many jurisdictions frighteningly already have, the very definition of certain words, like woman or female. Merriam-Webster, for example, has quietly already changed the definition of the adjective “female” to include “having a gender identity that is the opposite of male.” And the adjective “male” is “having a gender identity that is the opposite of female.” Talk about circular logic. And which would you prefer? Defining one thing only in terms of it being the opposite of the other? Or with scientific, chromosomal, biological fact that there are two sexes where females are designed to produce large gametes, and males are designed to produce small gametes. There is no third reproductive anything that is produced by anyone. And intersex, to me, is an unfortunate misnomer, giving the wrong impression that there is somehow another type of sex, as opposed to the more scientific term of DSD (Disorders of Sexual Development). DSD describes abnormal gestational development to either a male or female baby in utero, and who remains, despite any variations in appearance, male or female. All I’ve read confirms they are still XY or XX, still male or female. Not some new kind of sex, or designed to be capable of producing some brand new type of gamete.
I realize there are some who will say they are talking about gender being a spectrum not sex, and so my talk of gametes is irrelevant. But given recent rulings like the Giggle/Tickle case in Australia, too many are actually saying sex is changeable. And thus as I see it, they’re saying someone’s sex is not bound by physical laws and gamete-production design of the two sexes.
Also, I haven’t heard anyone adequately define, or even really try to define, what being a woman (or man) “feels” like, in objective terms, and not sexist stereotypes like pink and dolls, or blue and trucks. Of course, that may be because we are told it’s hateful to even ask such a question. But it’s funny how I’ve never heard an actual explanation of how gender identity isn’t sexist? And for that matter homophobic. For all the memes and jokes now about “what is a woman?” I’d like to hear the answer to that from the side insisting self-ID is sufficient, that gender is a spectrum, one can choose one’s gender, that gender is changeable. Just what defines that gender feeling? Because all I’ve seen and heard, sounds like those sexist stereotypes I thought we had finally moved away from. And yet many who oppose what I’m saying, insist they are the ones actually fighting for women’s rights with their demand to include transwomen in women’s single-sex spaces. Except the way I see things, that’s the last thing they are doing. For they are ignoring, dismissing, and aggressively arguing against the concerns and rights of an objective, biological, physical reality…women.
I’m surprised my head hasn’t fully shaken off my body from all the head shaking I’ve done the last few years. On that note, I’ll say bye for now. And thanks for reading. Here’s to more and more speaking for us all! We are not alone. Take care.
