My Thoughts on Dr. Debra Soh (and Ben Shapiro) | An Asian Trans View

NOTE: I strongly disagree with 'Blanchard typology' because I don't think it's good science.

Welcome back to TaraElla TV, where we examine cultural and political issues from a truth-orientated and constructive problem solving perspective. Today, I want to talk about my thoughts on Dr. Debra Soh, who has written a book about gender issues including trans issues, and has been going to many media outlets to talk about her views on these matters. I haven't read the book, so I will focus on her media appearances.

I have been following Dr. Soh's media interviews for a while, and I honestly have mixed thoughts so far. On one hand, I appreciate that she is basing everything in the science and the facts, and is not refering to any sociological theory or postmodern philosophy. While there are still scientific disagreements in some areas, and I don't necessarily agree with all of Dr Soh's views, her basic facts appear to be sound. I totally agree with the need to stress that reproductive sex and gender are both biological, they are not social constructs. I also agree with starting from the fact that, for the vast majority of people, their genetic sex accurately predicts their gender, so it's clearly very related, the existence of trans people notwithstanding. Furthermore, I strongly appreciate the assertion that, even though trans people have a gender identity that is opposite to their genetic sex, this is still a biological phenomenon, not a social construct. I think these statements are all very clear reflections of the empirical facts. Coming from an Asian cultural background, I especially appreciate people basing their arguments on the facts, because scientific facts, especially those coming from experts, are very well respected in modern Asian culture. Philosophical fluff, on the other hand, is generally dismissed in our culture. Talking about the science certainly helped to bring my family along, back when I had to come out to a family who didn't even know that trans people existed at all.

On the other hand, I am slightly concerned that Dr. Soh has been mainly talking to conservative media outlets, some of whom are known for not being very trans friendly, and that she hasn't been pushing back much in those interviews. For example, what I got out of her interview with Ben Shapiro, was that while she plainly stated her differences with Shapiro, she also sort of minimized them, and didn't go on to further explore those differences enough, which could have been educational for his audience. If I were in that interview, I would probably have challenged Shapiro a bit on his views, which certainly don't make any sense to me.

I mean, I respect Shapiro's right to free speech, and hence his right to believe that pronouns must be based on biological sex, but I really don't see the point of this. On the other hand, I really can't fathom why someone would be so reluctant to do some ultimately harmless accomodation to a small minority of suffering individuals, to allow an exception to the rigid rules that are making a few people suffer. It certainly doesn't mean agreeing that gender is a social construct, or giving up on the biological facts. Perhaps it's an imaginary slippery slope thing. But then, the slippery slope argument was applied to gay marriage, and it scared people for a while, but guess what, there's been gay marriage in the majority of the West for several years now, and the sky hasn't fallen in. Similarly, reasonable accomodation for trans people are a very rational thing to do, they certainly make society function better, so why not?

The TRUTH About Trump vs Trans Community | Re Blaire White | Skeptic TaraElla 2020

Welcome back to Skeptic TaraElla. Today, I'm going to sort of respond to a recent Blaire White video titled 'The Truth About Trump and the Trans Community'. In the video, Blaire discussed her views about President Trump's trans policies. She noted that the trans community seems to be used by both sides of politics as a political football, and that trans issues should be seen as a medical issue, not a political issue. This, of course, I totally agree with. In fact, I think I can speak for the majority of the trans community when I say that we are sick and tired of the over-politicization of everything trans. There's clearly something very wrong when, as a trans person, I felt more comfortable with the state of society back in 2007 compared to now! I really don't know how I would have handled coming out in this toxic environment. Looking back, I'm glad that I did it more than a decade ago.

I think the reason for this politicization is because there are groups with shady agendas gaining ground on both sides of politics, and they want to use the trans issue as a wedge to advance their projects of social control over the wider community. On the Right side, there are signs that the authoritarian right is gaining ground again, due to the weakening of libertarianism over the past few years. We see it in things like the big Ahmari vs French debate of last year. On the Left side, there is a radical critical theory faction that is essentially pushing a feeling of oppression onto trans people, as well as other minority groups, in order to both recruit and radicalize these groups. Furthermore, both sides also appear to want to increase the level of cultural conflict in society, which they believe will help achieve their goals. The authoritarian Right is probably thinking of using trans people as a wedge issue for their benefit like they used gay marriage 15 years ago, and the Marcusean Left is probably trying to use trans issues, in combination with other cultural issues, to create a sense of extreme social struggle, to create the oppressor vs oppressed dynamic that is needed to fulfill their own theories. Trans people are simply caught in the middle of these two camps. A real trans ally, I think, would condemn both camps equally, and encourage a rational conversation, which would put the emphasis back on the genuine needs of trans people, and how society can best accomodate those needs, while also considering the concerns of other people.

The Trump administration is one site where both sides want to play the game to their advantage. Based on my own assessment, I actually agree with Blaire that Trump is likely neutral in regards to LGBT issues. He has never shown much care, positive or negative, regarding LGBT people and issues. However, there are undeniably elements within his administration that are not LGBT friendly, because they have a more authoritarian or religious right politics. I think this is where quite a few of the anti-trans proposals have originated, but most were ultimately not adopted by the Trump administration. In fact, I sense that the religious right is not very happy with Trump not doing most of the anti-LGBT things they want. The trans military ban was probably the minimum he had to do to satisfy this group, but they apparently don't think it's enough. I think we shouldn't have illusions about the clearly anti-LGBT agenda of this group.

On the other hand, the radical critical theory faction of the Left, which is overrepresented in LGBT activism these days, have latched onto every one of these leaked anti-LGBT proposals, as if they were actual Trump policies being implemented. It's a pattern I've also been seeing in other Western countries with conservative governments. This has actually been bad for the trans community, because it means that trans people are having unnecessary worries about what may happen to them. As Blaire said in the video, there was widespread fear about a leaked 2018 policy that would have prevented trans people from updating their documents, which was simply never implemented, and a lot of trans people were essentially made to feel severe anxiety over nothing. My thinking is, there really is no point in exaggerating the harm being done to LGBT people by conservative administrations, because at the end of the day, this is essentially making people feel oppressed, at the expense of their own health and wellbeing. The truth is, there is often a tug of war between the authoritarians and the libertarians on the right, which means that some things are simply rumors that will never become actual policy.

Furthermore, the radical critical theory Left doesn't just exaggerate the harmfulness of conservative politicians to LGBT people. They also often encourage LGBT pessmism about left-leaning politicians. Throughout last year, during the Democratic primaries, there were people playing up Tulsi Gabbard's previous stance against gay marriage, something she clearly changed her mind on several years ago. In fact, all the evidence points to her being completely LGBT friendly nowadays. Early this year, they even attempted to sow doubts about Bernie's allyship, simply because he accepted an endorsement from Joe Rogan. More recently, they have turned their attention to Joe Biden, painting him as not a true ally of the LGBT community because he voted for the Defense of Marriage Act in the 1990s. Of course, Biden has changed a lot too, he was the first to support gay marriage in the Obama administration, and he talked about trans rights in 2012, way before most people out there were even aware of this issue. Just like there really wasn't any reason to worry about Tulsi's past record, there really isn't any reason why we shouldn't think of Biden as anything but a strong ally. Similarly, British Labour leader Keir Starmer has shown himself to be a strong ally, and has committed to trans rights, but some in the far-left in Britain are still sowing doubts about his allyship. I think the truth is, the Marcusean Left would prefer LGBT people to not have any feeling hope at all, so all their negative energies can be directed into Marcusean Left activism, whatever that entails at the time. What they are essentially doing is making LGBT people feel oppressed, at the expense of their own health and wellbeing, to serve a political agenda. This is actually highly immoral, in my opinion.