Trans Rights are Not Human Rights

Trans rights are not human rights, but trans people definitely deserve human rights. This should really go without saying. So then, why claim that “trans rights” are not human rights? Well, because they are not, well, not the current discursive package of trans rights, which clumsily and belligerently come into conflict with children’s rights, women’s rights and the two cornerstone human rights of freedom of thought and expression. If you are one of my long-time readers, you are probably sick of hearing me bang on non-stop about those two cornerstone human rights of freedom of thought and expression. Too bad. Here is why I go on about these two fundamental rights so much. Basically, these two human rights uphold and maintain the integrity of all the other human rights. The brilliant “edgelord” philosopher Voltaire once remarked:

But surely my feelings are more important than everyone’s right to freedom of thought and expression, no? No, they are really and truly not. Sorry. But this world has approximately 7.888 billion people living in it, and no, you are not Lizzo and this isn’t “your world” in which the rest of us are merely residents. We all share this planet and its respective societies. For these societies to operate freely and progressively, for there to be a steady movement upward towards an improved human condition for all, for individuals to be able to express themselves as liberal, conservative, religious, atheist, trans, gay, bi-sexual, etc., those two pesky cornerstone human rights must be the most protected rights of all. And rights are like muscles, if not frequently and proactively exercised, atrophy sets in and eventually they wilt away.

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS (1948)

This document, whilst certainly not perfect, represents the best universal document on human rights and liberties our species has created thus far. It was drafted at the closure of WW2 to ensure that the excesses in human depravity and violence, and hate, and general inhumanity might be wiped clean from the earth so we can work together as one human family to achieve our mutually beneficial goals, rocket backpacks. It is somewhat ironic that it was drafted in the same year as George Orwell published his most famous work, 1984, which painted a fictional picture of real human tyranny in the absence of staunchly protected human rights. According to the UN:

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a milestone document in the history of human rights. Drafted by representatives with different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world, the Declaration was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 (General Assembly resolution 217 A) as a common standard of achievements for all peoples and all nations. It sets out, for the first time, fundamental human rights to be universally protected and it has been translated into over 500 languages. The UDHR is widely recognized as having inspired, and paved the way for, the adoption of more than seventy human rights treaties, applied today on a permanent basis at global and regional levels (all containing references to it in their preambles). 

When I first entered the world of human rights activism over a decade ago, I took it upon myself to refresh the knowledge I had acquired at law school studying international law and I re-read the UDHR and its offshoots, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1976)(ICCPR), etc, and it was at that point the gravity of just how crucial this universal declaration of human rights was to the wellbeing of humanity in general. And through study and experience, I eventually learned that the beating heart of this declaration are two cornerstone human rights: Freedom of thought and freedom of expression. Without these two rights, the rest of our human rights rest on a bed of sand. Without the ability to think individually, freely, autonomously, and beyond the pressures of group-think and the oppressive psychological and social influences of authoritarian and totalitarian memes and regimes, and without the right to speak up when our brothers’ and sisters’ rights are infringed upon, civil society as we know it collapses into whichever brand of popular tyranny happens to be the malignant currency of the day. The Australian Human Rights Commission, under General Comment 34 on Article 19 of the ICCPR states:

‘General Comment 34 emphasises that freedom of expression and opinion are the foundation stone for a free and democratic society and a necessary condition for the promotion and protection of human rights.’

Any attack against freedom of expression must be seen as an attack against the integrity and sustainability of human rights overall. I cannot stress this enough. If any aspect of your particular cause or movement seeks to undermine one of these two human rights, then it is better for humanity that your cause/movement, whatever it may be, perishes swiftly and without mercy. You may see a quick win or temporary profit in taking the shortcut in advocating for the censorship of speech you find offensive or even potentially dangerous, but unless that speech incites immediate violence capable of being acted upon in the moment, then such speech should be deemed legal and even necessary, even if it is vulgar and deliberately offensive, hateful even. Remembering Voltaire’s wise words concerning the matter:

Yes, there are common-sense limitations on freedom of expression, such as yelling fire in a crowded Bud Light factory, or unjustly defaming someone, although in some jurisdictions even defamation laws are being rolled back to further open up the airways so that free speech may breathe more comfortably for the benefit of humanity. In her brilliant piece on why free speech is so important, Clariza Carizal lists and expounds upon 19 core reasons why free speech is so important. You can read her reasoning in the hyperlink above, but here are her 19 reasons:

Freedom of Speech Fosters a Civil Society

Freedom of Speech Develops Innovation Within Society

Freedom of Speech Holds the Government Accountable

Freedom of Speech Allows People to Engage in Meaningful Dialogs

Freedom of Speech Serves as a Safety Valve

Freedom of Speech Gives the Public the Ability to Speak Against Injustices

Freedom of Speech Is Valuable in the Academic Setting

Freedom of Speech Ensures Equal Access to Resources

Freedom of Speech Permits Journalists and Media Outlets to Provide Unbiased Reports

Freedom of Speech Encourages Creativity

Freedom of Speech Is Essential in Conducting Research

Freedom of Speech Allows the Expression of Opinions and Ideas

Freedom of Speech Allows One to Seek Out and Receive Information

Freedom of Speech Promotes Peace and Understanding

Freedom of Speech Is Essential for a Thriving Democracy

Freedom of Speech Promotes Open Dialogue and Debate

Freedom of Speech Is Advantageous for Marginalized Groups

Freedom of Speech Raises Awareness About Important Issues

Freedom Enables Culture to Flourish

The value of this human right cannot be overstated. So, what about when nasty people abuse this right and use it to spread hate? Well, the beauty of this human right is that it contains its own remedy for misuse. It is called free speech. Clever, isn’t it? All you need do is offer up what you deem to be better speech in the marketplace of ideas. So if you don’t like something someone has expressed, or you believe it to be potentially harmful to individuals, groups or the society at large, then use your freedom of expression to remedy such speech. But perhaps you eventually learn that your objections were misguided and that the speech you were objecting to was in fact correct to begin with. That’s no problem either, because free speech continues to exist and foster a self-correcting discourse amongst our relatively recently evolved species.

But what happens when moral panics grip a society and the society, through fear, start to think it may be a good idea to restrict certain speech on grounds of morality or offense? We’re fucked is what happens. Because, like its antithesis, censorship is also self-perpetuating and it doesn’t care to whom it lends its dark powers of oppression and tyranny. Censorship operates as the polar opposite to free speech, which is why it makes sense that its rotten fruits are the polar opposite of those ripe and nutritious fruits of free speech. It should come as no surprise to most, but the Nazis were quite fond of censorship for the sake of feelings and ultimately control. In 1933, the pre-Nazi German Constitution guaranteed freedom of expression and freedom of press, but in 1934, the Nazis outlawed these freedoms and it even became illegal to even joke about Hitler. Oh! That reminds me of a terrible joke!

‘Six million Jewish people walk into a bar. I lied. It was a gas chamber.’

See that? That was a joke about the mass murder of 6 million human beings, but as Ricky Gervais has repeatedly pointed out to those with more chromosomes than IQ points, the joke is not actually the bad thing that happened, it is a humorous take on the bad thing that happened, and it is okay to laugh at bad things because it is a peaceful and healthy way of dealing with trauma and unpleasant aspects of the human condition. It should also be noted here that there exists no human right to go through life unoffended. Sorry, but in the real world, the adult world, you need to develop coping mechanisms to peacefully deal with things that offend you and hurt your feelings.

TRANS RIGHTS VS FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

I have written a number of essays and articles on the insane impact that Wokeism has had on its targeted social justice causes. For those unfamiliar with the subject of Wokeism, those who still with doe-eyed innocence believe the meme that says “being Woke is just about being awake to the existence of social injustice” and that “it’s just about being a compassionate person,” yeah, you have some seriously disappointing homework to do. One of Wokeism’s core doctrines is that of ‘censorship.’ In my essay comparing Wokeism to religion, I describe this doctrine of Wokeism in the following words:

‘Ideological movements need to establish strict fences to maintain their structural integrity. These fences must be zealously policed and if a patroller notices someone climbing over the fence and attempting to live freely on the outside, sanctions must be swift, severe, and advertised to dissuade others from trying to live beyond the confines of the ideological compound. These fences also serve to divide humanity into two competing categories, insiders and outsiders. Woke ideological authoritarianism uses cancel culture as a punitive measure by which both escaping insiders and heretical outsiders are publicly punished to coerce widespread conformity. Here we encounter a prima-facie distinction between other cults like Scientology, who primarily seek to control insiders through fear of degradation and banishment. However, in similitude to Wokeism, Scientology is also notorious for harassing and litigating its critics.’

Dr Jordan B. Peterson first rose to fame/infamy when he openly and publicly resisted a proposed legal bill in Canada (Bill C-16) that criminalizes the cornerstone human right of freedom of expression to compel coerced speech, regardless of the speakers personal beliefs or opinions upon pain of punishment with respect to uttering people’s preferred pronouns. The summary of that well-intended yet misguided bill reads:

‘The enactment also amends the Criminal Code to extend the protection against hate propaganda set out in that Act to any section of the public that is distinguished by gender identity or expression and to clearly set out that evidence that an offence was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on gender identity or expression constitutes an aggravating circumstance that a court must take into consideration when it imposes a sentence.’

Define “hate” and define “propaganda.” Now define “hate propaganda.” This is essentially a secular blasphemy law. What could be considered “hate propaganda” is far too subjective to produce coherent legislation and case law, particularly in pluralistic societies. And as with blasphemy laws, abuse by the state is far too easy. “But the state would never do that!” Have you ever met any politician?! I immediately get the urge to run home, throw all my clothes in a rubbish bag and stand in the shower for 4 hours or so. Anyway, might a book critical of the Critical Social Justice religion with respect to the current state of the trans rights movement be “hate propaganda?” What about a book about sheltering kids from sexually explicit material now being pushed under the umbrella of trans rights? A YouTube video of young adults sharing their transition and subsequent de-transition stories? A comedian’s jokes? What if you are a Christian, or a Muslim, or a religious Jewish person whose personal religious faith prevents you from acknowledging this brand new gender ideology and its “sinful” utterances and consequences? Remember, freedom of religion and conscience are also inalienable human rights (See: Article 18, UDHR). And the irony of me having to defend the human rights of religious adherents after spending over a decade trashing their twisted, irrational and illogical ideologies is not lost on me. But human rights remain my North Star, which means I am forced to apply my principles and my logic consistently and with integrity.

What if you are a clinician, who, after years in the field have observed a sudden and exponential increase in young people identifying as trans due to the socially contagious nature of this movement via social and mainstream media platforms, and you speak up? How many doctors and experts in the relevant fields would risk being sued, mobbed or cancelled by Woke parents and friends, or prosecuted under this legislation for denying the child’s alleged gender identity? Think about the impact of that for a moment, because as humans we tend to be self-interested due to our survival instinct. What does this mean for a child whose parents/legal guardians essentially want their child to be trans for social rewards and take them to the doctor to begin treatment/chemical castration? Or perhaps the parent has watched one too many documentaries, sees little Timmy playing with his sister’s doll then decides it is in his interest to begin the transition process? And before you dismiss these as “just hypotheticals,” they are already beginning to happen and I predict this harmful phenomenon will increase with the increased emphasis in society placed on Wokeism’s ‘Oppression Matrix’ doctrine, which rewards expressions of victimhood and allyship to victimhood (My son is trans and this makes me a card-carrying ally. Reward me with Likes, Shares, Followers, praise, money, etc.). Leaving aside its imposition on freedom of expression, just what impact could the Woke impetus behind this stifling piece of law have on the welfare of children’s rights? Article 19 (1) of the UN’s Convention on The Rights of The Child reads as follows:

‘States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child.’

Surely convincing your 2-year-old or even your 7-year-old that they are trans just because they may not conform to outdated gender roles and behaviours - which then sets them on a path to harmful and inappropriate medical treatment - infringes upon the right of the child expressed above. In a recent scientific study entitled, Gender dysphoria in adolescence: current perspectives, it was convincingly shown that approximately 80% of children who meet the criteria for gender dysphoria (GD) at an early age later grow out of it and become gay (non-heterosexual). The authors of the study write:

Adolescence is a crucial time for identity and psychosexual development in young people with gender identity concerns. The outcomes of GDC have been discussed in terms of its persistence and desistence. For most children with GDC, whether GD will persist or desist will probably be determined between the ages of 10 and 13 years, although some may need more time. Evidence from the 10 available prospective follow-up studies from childhood to adolescence (reviewed in the study by Ristori and Steensma) indicates that for ~80% of children who meet the criteria for GDC, the GD recedes with puberty. Instead, many of these adolescents will identify as non-heterosexual.

You will notice that the authors prescribe caution in diagnosing and acting on cases of alleged gender dysphoria in young children because gender non-conforming behaviours are most commonly the result of homosexuality, not gender dysphoria. Is this study “hate propaganda?” It is literally erasing trans identity in favour of those pesky gays, who are so privileged, and who, in increasing numbers, want nothing more to do with the Woke TQIA+ aspect of the LGBTQIA+ “community.” Anyway, I digress.

The balance here is, however, studies also show that “gender affirming care” can be beneficial for those who actually suffer gender dysphoria, but now that Wokeism has latched onto and perverted the trans rights movement, such diagnoses are feverishly craved by parents who prostitute (‘exploit’ as per Article 19 (1) of the UN’s Convention on The Rights of The Child) their children on social media for selfish social rewards at the expense of their own children’s health, safety and wellbeing.

The Woke impetus behind Canada’s Bill C-16 I alluded to above refers to the social reward system Wokeism has established to reward ideological conformity concerning its ‘Oppression Matrix’ doctrine, and being the parent of a transgender child is one of the best ways you can get your videos and posts to go viral on social media and even mainstream media. This child exploitation carries with it social and financial rewards too alluring for some to pass up. Furthermore, to add class into the mix, it isn’t hard to see how a poor family might be more vulnerable to the temptation of such rewards than a more affluent one. Returning briefly to this bill’s infringement on freedom of expression, Mark Bonham at the Centre for Sexual Diversity Studies at the University of Toronto unpacks the present and future impacts of this bill:

‘In other words, pronoun misuse may become actionable, through the Human Rights Tribunals and courts.  And the remedies?  Monetary damages, non-financial remedies (for example, ceasing the discriminatory practice or reinstatement to job) and public interest remedies (for example, changing hiring practices or developing non-discriminatory policies and procedures).  Jail time is not one of them.’

No jail time for using the wrong pronouns. How liberal! This is the state-sponsored compelled speech that Jordan Peterson was correctly protesting on behalf of the crucial preservation of freedom of expression. So already we see that this part of the now Woke package of trans rights infringes on children’s rights and freedom of expression. I could rest my case here as I have already shown that trans rights are not human rights, because an individual’s human rights should not, when exercised, infringe upon anyone else’s human rights. Does that make sense?

PORNOGRAPHY FOR CHILDREN

For some weird reason, part of the trans rights movement now includes exposing children to sexually explicit content at younger and younger ages. Writing for the Washington Examiner, Tom Joyce explains:

‘A book such as Gender Queer: A Memoir by Maia Kobabe doesn’t belong in schools . The problem with Gender Queer isn’t that it’s an LGBT book. The problem is that the book is a graphic novel that features pictures of sex acts, including someone performing oral sex.

Similarly, It's Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex, and Sexual Health by Robie Harris doesn’t belong anywhere near minors. The book depicts children — a boy in one image and a girl in another — masturbating and tells them how to do it. The book also tells children that masturbation feels “sexy.” Plus, it depicts adults having sexual intercourse.’

What does the UN’s Convention on The Rights of The Child say about this type of harmful exposure to such adult material? Let’s take a look:

Article 17 (e) ‘Encourage the development of appropriate guidelines for the protection of the child from information and material injurious to his or her well-being, bearing in mind the provisions of articles 13 and 18.’

So again, I argue, trans rights are not human rights, because trans rights infringe on the rights of children to be sheltered from adult and sexually explicit material.

CHILDREN AT DRAG QUEEN SHOWS AND CHILD DRAG QUEENS

There is nothing too injurious about a child dressing up and dancing around for the pleasure and entertainment of adults, because if there were, child beauty pageants would be wrong, right? Right. I believe such pageants are frequently exploitative in nature. But here I am not addressing the more benign pageantry that takes place in these shows, but the increasingly sexualized performances by drag queens in front of children, and sexualized child drag queens being normalized and rewarded as part of the Woke trans rights package. Maybe I am just getting old and out of touch, but I would never allow my 13-year-old son to be exploited in the manner in which this young boy was in this video.

Another related issue concerns parents being swept up in the socially rewarding contagion of the Woke trans rights movement who are now taking their children to see sexual performances. This again is in contravention of children’s rights.

TRANS RIGHTS VS WOMEN’S RIGHTS

“Trans women are women.” This is another dogma of Wokeism, and it is a meme which has only recently entered the trans rights movement. Let me just quickly fix this meme: “Trans women are trans women, and there is nothing wrong with being a trans woman.” A growing number of feminists are currently fuming over the recent male colonization of women’s spaces, accolades and opportunities, and you do not want to piss off the feminists. Trust me! They will break your horse’s leg if they have to. Seriously though, women have only relatively recently won through bloodshed the right to participate in the public sphere along side men, and now men are reclaiming the public sphere via the trans rights movement. “You mean males, not men!” No, I meant men, as in adult human males, as opposed to adult male sharks, which are called sharks. Zoology is a hobby of mine. I can do that with males and females of pretty much every animal, insect and fish. Don’t believe me? An adult male dog is called a dog. An adult female cat is called a cat. An adult human female is called a woman. If you are Woke yet honest with yourself, you read that last sentence and found no controversy whatsoever until that ideological drive kicked in and told you that it was essentially blasphemy, or “bigotry” as you kids call reality these days.

Now, these adult human females are starting to notice that us adult human males are taking their sporting victories, Women of Year Awards, smashing them in cage fights like a hot knives through butter, beating them on the track and raping them in the prison yard. Yep, we men are back baby! Okay, maybe not raping them in the prison yard, but certainly locking up male rapists and sex offenders with females. And all of this insanity because of the Woke and factually incorrect meme that “trans women are women.”

One of the most reviled feminists of today, aside from J.K. Rowling, is Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull (Posie Parker), who organizes ‘Let Women Speak’ events. She doesn’t hate or fear trans people, she merely attacks the “trans women are women” dogma which is causing the encroachment of males into protected female spaces and the erasure from both society and our lexicon of “women.” They aren’t “chest feeders” or “birthing persons,” they are mothers. Now, for the slow kids in the back, a mother is an adult human female with a little human they take care of and nurture to adulthood, well, some of them do this. Here is how the last ‘Let Women Speak’ event went in New Zealand.

Apparently men have answered the statement “let women speak” with a rough and rowdy no, fuck off! And give us the number of your hairstylist while you are at it! It is clear that the “trans women are women” meme has been incorporated into the trans rights movement as the guiding backbone which informs how the current package of trans rights are interpreted and strived for, and this is causing a head-on collision with women’s rights. So again, trans rights are not human rights, because human rights do not operate in such a manner as to infringe upon women’s rights, because apparently women also have human rights. Bonkers, I know! What next? Women driving automobiles?! Utter madness! I could go on but I will end this piece on a positive note. A trans person’s rights are most definitely human rights, and the available data does show that trans people still experience heavy discrimination with respect to access to public services, private housing, etc. So, this being the case, it is more important than ever to detoxify the trans rights movement of the Wokeism which has infected it like a corrosive and degenerative fungus. We must do this now, for the welfare of trans people, children, women, men, and the integrity of human rights, which trans rights are not.