Gender Is Voluntary, But Somehow Political Consent Is Not

The irreplaceable Tom Woods offers an excellent observation that dovetails well with my post yesterday concerning the validity of social contracts. Recall that as typically described by statists, social contracts are implicit agreements that you consent to with or without your knowledge, contracts in which the terms are decided by a mystical, unspecified “will of the people.”

Yet how does this fit with the current propaganda we hear from these same people regarding gender binaries and other ridiculous concepts in which people can “choose” to defy biological and reality and others are required (for reasons never fully articulated) to embrace their identities?

It would seem that if you want to identify as the queen of England, feel free; but you don’t have a right to expect anyone to throw you royal welcome at Buckingham Palace. You can think you’re Napoleon or Alexander the Great, but no army is going to follow you into battle.

Woods writes:

So calling a female a female amounts to “coercively assigning” female.

Yet the very same people defend the idea of the social contract, and expressly say: sure, you didn’t individually consent, but we as a group made a majority decision!

So the state and its social contract aren’t coercive at all, even though they’re justified on precisely the same grounds to which these folks object when it comes to gender.

As I’ve written repeatedly over the years, there is no logical consistency to the modern leftist ideology. Whether something is coercive, aggressive, valid, or legitimate entirely depends on whether it fulfills The Vision™ they have for society.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in society, Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Gender Is Voluntary, But Somehow Political Consent Is Not

  1. This pisses me off for two reason your attacking the weakest form of this argument, and then have the gall to suggest the left (form of people) are only know inconsistent. People are very good at holding opposing idead, your mind is not some computer built for shifting out contradictions. To even get to the point of starting to do that is a semi-consistent way you tend to need to spend large amount of time over years on introspection and considering both your own and other peoples viewpoints. Is very difficult to hold consistent view point. In fact it a major reason why I’ve fallen into anacho-feminism and anarcho-communism because it has allowed me an easier time to be consistent in my view points.

    However, as someone in a relationship with a non-binary transperson, and good friends with several more. I have to say you really are presenting a strawman argument. First “Biological Reality” is actually pretty damn complicated, and once you start mixing hormones into the mix, the clean lines disappear, not that they where there in the first place. I am actually a biologist and while human biology is not my focus, I know way more then to talk about realities of sex in simple terms. IN the most simple terms when we are talking biological sex we are talking, Hormones, reproductive organs (primary sex characteristic), chromosomal composition (you can bee XX and be a fertile male rare but it exists and you can pass it down), secondary sex characteristics. With in each category there is a wide natural variety and once you start looking at intersex people that expand to basically any combination of those traits. The reality of sex is fucking complex one.

    This doesn’t even touch the issue of social genders which are quite fluid over history, and have always included more then 2 genders (although not in every culture at all times to be clear) your falling into a trap of gender existentialism which is quite rigidly enforced on us from birth, and is one of those social contract you’ve been calling out as of late.

    That said I assume what this really is about is a distain for identity politics. I get that it’s the popular fad being picked up by the capitalists and the general public and so more and more is just being used as a cudgel to enforce societal norms. It’s the bastardized form of the argument(s) and as such it’s garbage, and perhaps if I was not leading the life I am and have the opportunity to talk to people who actually live this stuff I’d be saying the same thing you are.

    By disrespecting a trans person right to identify their gender expression your forcing a sometime unwritten social contract on them. And sure They want you to use prefer pronouns. But it is a lot like them asking you to use their name. You just end up being a difficult asshole if you keep calling them bob instead of their real name. This isn’t to say there aren’t trans people who can take it way too far, but well that a people problem. There’s always some asshole who takes into too far.

    Withteeth

    [The Question: I am approving this comment if for no other reason than amusement. I can only conclude this is brilliant trolling.]

    Like

    • Or perhaps your entirely too stuck in your own niche of thought to recognize a different view point and rebuttal to the implicit assumption presented by several of your comments, but alas that must mean I’m a troll. Couldn’t possibly be anything of nuance in my previous comment pure misdirection. Or I misunderstood your point given your use of language and my implicit assumptions about your use of language, but I’m clearly a brilliant troll so clearly I’m just *really* attempting to draw you into a conversation what will waste your time. Clearly, since there’s no other options.

      Or maybe your falling into the same trap of social contracts you’re complaining about and being intellectual lazy in your response to me, but no that’s impossible.

      Like

      • The Question says:

        Or perhaps your entirely too stuck in your own niche of thought to recognize a different view point and rebuttal to the implicit assumption presented by several of your comments, but alas that must mean I’m a troll.

        You may rest well in the knowledge that your viewpoint has been recognized for what it is.

        Now, if you will be so kind, please recognize mine for what it is: An accurate reflection of what SCIENCE SAYS!

        Like

      • Oh? What does since say? Hum? I doubt you have any but the vaguest understanding of human biology, given your talking about the realities of sex as though they are simply and easy to understand human biology is like most biology far more complex then you’d ever first imagine and the rabbit hole goes deeper and deeper.

        But since you get your science form decades old movies and I get mine from a recent biology degree and from personal recent into the study perhaps I should probably go easier on you. Like what about Girl born without vagina’s and boys without penis’s? Hum? Happens fairly often even though in all other respects they would be consider female and male respectively (I’m ignoring trans issues for the moment).

        I am no longer trying to be charitable, but really I gave you many opportunities in my first post to respond yet you just tried to dismiss me out right, then you fell back on a literal childs argument about what biological sex is.

        Like

      • Like is there something as male and female, absolutely, but as I said it can only be broken simply into 4 major categories based on modern science? The primary pleasure giving parts of genitalia are not even the most important part, the most important bits are actually your gonads (at least for sex determination) begin the testes and ovaries. Although you can have a scrotum with ovaries in them in some cases so visual clues are not always enough.

        Like

      • The Question says:

        Although you can have a scrotum with ovaries in them in some cases so visual clues are not always enough.

        Apparently people can also have their head so far up their ass their nose is in their throat, and yet still manage to speak through it.

        Like

      • Sorry I couldn’t hear you clearly would you mind pulling your head out of there? 😉 Have a good day, I sincerely hope you can get a little more consistent with your anarchism, though I do understand how legitimately challenging it can be to apply intersectional thought.

        Good luck!

        Like

  2. Gunner Q says:

    “I doubt you have any but the vaguest understanding of human biology, given your talking about the realities of sex as though they are simply and easy to understand human biology is like most biology far more complex then you’d ever first imagine and the rabbit hole goes deeper and deeper.”

    Another illiterate product of the public school system. I’m so glad my tax money funds these kids’ ekzukaishenz.

    He must have a PhD to be this wrong about sex.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s