The Transgender Abolition of Man

How C. S. Lewis foresaw the implications of transgender activism.

By Tom Gilson Published on March 25, 2018

Mankind has been trying for centuries to conquer nature. Now we’re trying to conquer not just nature but human nature. How? Look at the transgender movement.

C. S. Lewis explored this conquering impulse in The Abolition of Man, his brilliant analysis of mankind’s impossible quest to re-engineer mankind. It’s our grand project to free ourselves from the constrictions imposed upon us by human nature. And not just human nature, but that to which human nature looks: “the Tao,” Lewis’s chosen term for moral principles recognized by people the world over.

Here’s how he saw it unfolding when he wrote in the middle of the twentieth century. Human nature has to be wiped clean of its “flaws,” both physical and mental. Someone must manage and correct everyone’s thoughts and attitudes through propaganda and behavioral conditioning. Only one all-controlling, all-wise State could have that “conditioning” power.

That inevitably leads to tyranny. That is its first, most obvious problem, illustrated masterfully in Lewis’s novel That Hideous Strength. But there’s much more wrong with this project: The tyrant seeking to control Nature will always find himself controlled by nature.

Nature Always Wins

Lewis summarized it well in The Abolition of Man. With the secularist’s Nature-debunking philosophy in mind, he wondered, “In what sense is Man the possessor of increasing power over Nature? When all that says ‘it is good’ [the Tao, that is] has been debunked, what says, ‘I want’ remains.”

That is, if you can’t say, “This is right,” you can only say, “This is what I want.” So then, Lewis concludes: “The Conditioners, therefore, must come to be motivated simply by their own pleasure.”

And from where does that all-controlling pleasure motivation come? From the same human nature the Conditioners seek to overpower — still intruding, still overwhelming. “By the logic of their position,” Lewis says, ”they must just take their impulses as they come, from chance. And Chance here means Nature. It is from heredity, digestion, the weather, and the association of ideas, that the motives of the Conditioners will spring.”

Nature is never conquered; it only hides in ambush. In the end it always wins.

The Conditioner may think he has driven Nature into the bushes, but Nature is never conquered; it only hides in ambush. In the end it always wins. Man seeks to rule, but the weather does instead. Or what he had for lunch or some random thoughts.

Or heredity, as Lewis did not fail to point out — which certainly includes, “I was born this way.”

Nature Still Wins

But that was then, as they say, and this is now. Technology? Conditioning? That’s so twentieth century! Who needs that, when we can control nature through the raw power of the mind? A man decides he’s a woman, and by that declaration he becomes one. His decision rules all. His nature is his to choose. Each individual runs reality now.

We can forgive Lewis for not seeing today’s “transgender moment,” as Ryan Anderson calls it in the subtitle to his new book, When Harry Became Sally. No one else saw it coming either, not even as recently as five or six years ago. But Lewis did foresee quite accurately how far Man would go in his quest to conquer Nature: All the way, until he collided with reality.

No Escape for the Transgendered

The sad thing? Even when modern man collides with reality, he won’t admit it. He just doubles-down on the idea that he can make reality bend to his wishes. But he can’t; especially not according to the philosophy that would allow a man the choice to be a woman. That same philosophy, you see, also insists that his choices are determined by Nature. Everything is determined by natural law, period. The mind, as Lewis noted, is ruled by the weather or by digestion. Even the LGBT “born this way” defense is an admission that the mind has no power over Nature after all.

The transgender person born male wishes to abolish his manhood; the transgender movement carries forward the abolition of Man.

So in the world of transgender activism the mind controls all, yet in that same world the mind controls nothing. Physical nature determines nothing, yet physical nature determines everything. Or as Lewis put it, “Man’s conquest of Nature turns out, in the moment of its consummation, to be nature’s conquest of Man” — meaning, all that is distinctly human.

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »

The transgender person born male wishes to abolish his manhood; the transgender movement carries forward the abolition of Man. And all humanity — or so it seems, at least — is stumbling over itself racing to throw itself on the fires of its own destruction.

Humans and Nature Both Have Limits

To be human is to rise above Nature, but not in that way. We’re unique beings: firmly situated in nature, yet having a Nature of our own that can rise above nature. Yes, there’s a tension here, but it’s not a contradiction of reality; it’s a recognition of it. We have our limitations and must live within them; but nature has its limitations, too, and it meets them wherever there are human beings — creatures made the image of God. Nature’s control over the rocks and trees is absolute. Over us, however, it shapes but not dictate what, by grace, we can become..

Yet the limits work both ways. We can choose who we are in terms of our character and our relationships. Nature still decides who and what we are in our bodies. The wise person knows what he or she has control over within the bounds of reality, and is content to live with that. Or to struggle with it, as we all must do in different ways.

How Transgender Activism Diminishes Humanity

The wiser, saner battle to fight is the one that takes place within the mind.

So transgenderism doesn’t just deny sex “assigned at birth.” Lewis’s Abolition of Man shows how it denies humanness itself. Its freedom is tyranny, no less than the freedom of Lewis’s Conditioners. Its attempt to rise above Nature is subjugation instead. This quest to give individuals control over reality cannot help but diminish humanity.

Therefore, while I have nothing but empathy for the gender dysphoric, who cannot feel comfortable in their own bodies, I have nothing good to say for the movement that tells them their best answer is to defeat their bodies. These activists are urging them — and all of us, really — to fight a fight on the wrong field, trying to overcome Nature where Nature simply cannot lose.

The wiser, saner battle to fight is the one that takes place within the mind. Victory isn’t easy there; if it were, it wouldn’t be the battle it is. It isn’t always easy even to define what victory means. But if it means anything at all, it must include this: holding firm to humanness, resisting the abolition of manhood and womanhood — and with it, also resisting the abolition of Man.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Best man

    We are God’s trash.

  • Trilemma

    This article is based on the philosophy that transgenderism is a choice. If it’s not a choice, then it’s conservative Christians who are the conditioners trying to get people to go against nature. The shockingly high suicide attempt rate among people who are transgender tells me that it’s not a choice. I don’t think they would choose suicide if they could simply choose to be cisgender.

    • ImaginaryDomain

      The high suicide rate tells me that deep down they know they’ve made a huge mistake, but just can’t figure a way out. They can’t figure a way out because they have kicked God out of their life.

      • Amanda Hunter

        site references for this please

        • Ken Abbott

          Okay, how about John 8:34 and Ephesians 2:1-3, 12?

        • It’s not allowed in these comments to post links. Look up “pubmed ‘Long-term follow-up of transsexual persons undergoing sex reassignment surgery: cohort study in Sweden.'” Also “LA Times ‘Transgender study looks at ‘exceptionally high’ suicide-attempt rate.'” Also

          • swordfish

            The Swedish study you cite compared post-operative transsexuals to the general population, which doesn’t seem like a valid comparison to me.

            On the other hand, a much larger meta-study published in 2011 “Hormonal therapy and sex reassignment: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of quality of life and psychosocial outcomes”, concludes:

            “Very low quality evidence suggests that sex reassignment that includes hormonal interventions in individuals with GID likely improves gender dysphoria, psychological functioning and comorbidities, sexual function and overall quality of life.”

          • GPS Daddy

            Quality study there dude:

            All the studies were observational and most lacked controls

            Very low quality evidence

          • swordfish

            Your criticisms would also apply to the Swedish study mentioned in the article. The fact that you only want to criticise studies which disagree with your pre-determined position is noted. An honest assesement of the available evidence would probably conclude that ‘further research is needed’, it wouldn’t quote one study as this article does.

          • GPS Daddy

            Hmm, your the one who presented studies that are “very low quality” as a counter to Tom. I’m just pointing out the obvious. Studies like this have the phrase “confirmation bias” as a good description of them.

          • swordfish

            Your criticisms would also apply to the Swedish study mentioned in the
            article. The fact that you only want to criticise studies which disagree
            with your pre-determined position is noted. An honest assesement of the
            available evidence would probably conclude that ‘further research is
            needed’, it wouldn’t quote one study as this article does.

            (I’m repeating my previous comment as it appears you didn’t understand it.. In particular, the Swedish study would also be classed as “low quality”.)

          • He didn’t understand it because you didn’t say it.

            So tell us what the high quality studies say, and which ones they are.

          • swordfish

            I don’t know what high quality studies say, nor did I claim to know that. I just pointed out that there are studies other than the Swedish one which reach different conclusions. I said “An honest assesement of the available evidence would probably conclude that ‘further research is needed'”, which seems reasonable.

          • GPS Daddy

            Well, as far as I can tell that Swedish study did a normal study with a control group in how one would study such cases. Its not based on feelings or the researcher’s bias as is the studies you posted. So it looks to be a superior study to those others and because of this its finds stand.

          • swordfish

            You only support the Swedish study because it confirms your opinion. If the meta-study of 28 other studies confirmed your opinion, you’d support that one instead.

            What about the study which concluded prayer didn’t work? That used a control group, but I suspect you won’t agree with its findings.

          • GPS Daddy

            >>You only support the Swedish study because it confirms your opinion

            Hmm, I though you were a man of science. What science did you use to determine this?

            >>What about the study which concluded prayer didn’t work?

            How did the study control for those praying that their prayers were offered up in faith? How do you control for a ‘no’ answer to prayers? How do you control for the “enemy” blocking prayer? Did those being studied also fast while praying? How do you control for a prayer being answered but not now? How do you control for a deeper prayer being answered verses the one that was prayed for?

      • Trilemma

        What do you mean they’ve made a huge mistake? The attempted suicide rate is less for those who have completed gender confirmation surgery. The suicide attempt rate for people who are transgender is shockingly high for those who have not started confirmation surgery. If transgenderism were a choice, these people could choose to be cisgender easily enough rather than choose suicide. There are Christian children in Christian homes who are transgender. They didn’t kick God out of their life and they didn’t choose to be transgender.

        • GPS Daddy

          Sorry, Trilemma, the paradigm you are using assumes that there is no choice. There is no science that confirms that there is a transgender biological component. What your promoting is Mr. Gilson’s core point in the article: matter over mind. By that fact that your have declared there is no choice then there is no choice for you or those who accept your view. You have decided that there is no choice.

          Is not as easy as just deciding differently. The battle of the mind is real and its is difficult. But it can be won. However, you have declared the enemy the winner. Do you know what I mean by that?

          • Trilemma

            There’s no science that confirms that Jesus rose from the dead yet you believe he did. The paradigm you are using assumes that there is choice. What you’re promoting is the idea that the mind can determine reality. You assume all a person who is transgender has to do is simply choose not to be transgender. But many of them can’t. Do you really think they choose to be bullied, harassed, discriminated against, abused, assaulted, molested, etc., if they could simply choose to be cisgender? Why is the attempted suicide rate so high if they could simply choose to be the way you think they should be?

          • GPS Daddy

            Now your just grasping at straws, Trilemma. How can the scientific method be applied to Jesus rising from the dead? Yet, has not the scientific community been searching for the “gay” gene? If you claim that its not a choice, then it must have a biological basis just like gender does.

            >> What you’re promoting is the idea that the mind can determine reality

            Tom covered this in the article.

            >> You assume all a person who is transgender has to do is simply choose not to be transgender

            Now your putting words into my mouth. I made no such claim. There is a serious battle of the mind that we all fight. But I am saying that this is one of those battle and I am saying that is it a battle that can be fought and won.

            >>Do you really think they choose to be bullied, harassed, discriminated
            against, abused, assaulted, molested, etc., if they could simply choose
            to be cisgender

            Now your extrapolating to what you do not know. Do some endure this? yes. Do all who commit suicide endure this? That you do not know.

            You have made the choice, Trilemma, that its no long a choice. However, the good news is that your can make a choice that it is a choice.

            For the scientific basis of what Tom and I are talking about please see drleaf(dot)com. She will provide all the research your heart desires on the topic of healthy thinking and she has a proven plan and approach to dealing with toxic thinking.

          • Trilemma

            If the scientific method can’t be applied to the resurrection, then what evidence do you have that it actually happened and is not a made up story?

            Here are some of the findings of the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey from the Executive Summary.

            Respondents reported high levels of mistreatment, harassment, and violence in every aspect of life. One in ten (10%) of those who were out to their immediate family reported that a family member was violent towards them because they were transgender, and 8% were kicked out of the house because they were transgender.

            The majority of respondents who were out or perceived as transgender while in school (K–12) experienced some form of mistreatment, including being verbally harassed (54%), physically attacked (24%), and sexually assaulted (13%) because they were transgender. Further, 17% experienced such severe mistreatment that they left a school as a result. In the year prior to completing the survey, 30% of respondents who had a job reported being fired, denied a promotion, or experiencing some other form of mistreatment in the workplace due to their gender identity or expression, such as being verbally harassed or physically or sexually assaulted at work.

            In the year prior to completing the survey, 46% of respondents were verbally harassed and 9% were physically attacked because of being transgender. During that same time period, 10% of respondents were sexually assaulted, and nearly half (47%) were sexually assaulted at some point in their lifetime.

            Nearly one-third (29%) of respondents were living in poverty, compared to 14% in the U.S. population. A major contributor to the high rate of poverty is likely respondents’ 15% unemployment rate—three times higher than the unemployment rate in the U.S. population at the time of the survey (5%)

            No wonder the attempted suicide rate is so high for people who are transgender.

          • GPS Daddy

            Oh knock it off, Trilemma. You know very well that the scientific method of investigation does not apply to historical claims. If you want evidence for the resurrection there is plenty of good Christian sites that cover this. Your also going off topic to my comment and not dealing with what I posted.

            As far as the survey, yup, I’d expect a survey done by transgenders to conclude and find what they have found. This does not change anything I posted. It is still a choice, it is still a battle of the mind, and it is a battle that can be won.

          • Trilemma

            I never claimed that the suicide rate was not high.

            A common argument for the resurrection is that the apostles would not have endured persecution even unto death if the resurrection were not real. Likewise, people who are transgender would not endure persecution even unto death if it were not real.

            Tom wrote.

            The sad thing? Even when modern man collides with reality, he won’t admit it. He just doubles-down on the idea that he can make reality bend to his wishes.

            When some Christians are confronted with the reality of transgenderism, they double down on the idea that they can make reality bend to their wishes and keep chanting the mantra, “It’s a choice.”

          • GPS Daddy

            I have never claimed that transgenderism is not real. Of course it is real. The question in debate is, are those who deal with transgenderism do so because they have no other choice. You claim that its not a choice. I disagree with this. The burden of proof is on you to show that it is not.

            The LGTB movement promotes a huge lie that if one has an attraction to the same sex then they are same-sex attracted and this defines who they are. This is a huge lie. However, if a person, or even a child, accepts this in any way they are making a decision on that. Children growing up can have all kinds of feelings. They do not define who you are. However, if you believe these and focus on these then they can grow and they can become that “reality”.

            I have only touched on a very surface example where due to time.

            Dr. Leaf deals with all of these kinds of things. Have you looked at her stuff on brain plasticity and toxic thinking?

          • Trilemma

            You’re doubling down.

            Is transgenderism real or is it a lie?

          • GPS Daddy

            No, not at all, Trillema. Your using a strict view of transgenderism. In your view IF someone is transgender then it is something they cannot change or choose. I’m not using the word in that way. I’m using the word to mean that there are those who think that their birth gender is not their gender. This is real. There really are people who think this. Their personal sense of identity is different from their physical gender. But that does not mean that this cannot change or that they had no choice in the matter.

            You do the same thing with scripture. You use strict views that, if true, would lead to there being an error in the bible. Even if you have no warrant for such a view.

          • Mikhail Ramendik

            I’ll give you some support for your decision theory. In Obergefell vs. Hodges, the right to choice in personal intimate identity and beliefs is affirmed. So it is legally a choice – in a celebrated pro-LGBT decision, no less.

            And because it is legally a choice, you certainly have a right to preach your option (as long as you do not pretend it is therapy, which is a licensed activity).

            But you do not have the right to restrict people who disagree with you.

          • Mikhail Ramendik

            > It is still a choice, it is still a battle of the mind, and it is a battle that can be won.

            That last one is basically a statement of faith, and thus impossible to argue. But why should your faith dictate the secular law for people who do not share it?

          • Bryan

            Tri, all of the data in the study you quoted is circumstantial and subjective from the perspective of the transgendered person. Take the section about school age respondents for example. The study concluded that 54% of transgendered children in K-12 schools were “verbally harassed”. For the reason they were verbally harassed, the study concluded that it was because they were transgendered. But this is based on questions that were answered, probably only by the transgendered person based on what they perceived. As you know from any interaction involving conflict between two persons, what is said and what is perceived are often very different, otherwise there would probably not be a conflict. When my wife & I argue, she thinks some I said means one thing when I really meant something entirely different. In this context, something as innocent as trying to understand the transgendered person can be perceived by that person as an attack on their transgenderness. That type of situation cannot be deduced from this type of study.
            In addition, if you were to ask a group of K-12 students if they had ever been “verbally harassed” I think you would get at least 50% if not 100% of the students claiming that had happened to them before. My point is not that it’s not happening. Rather that there are factors that cannot be understood by this sort of study. I’m not sure there is any scientific type of study that could understand or control for the myriad of factors that go into every human interaction with another human. However that probably shows my own limitations in understanding scientific research more so than anything else.
            As for the resurrection evidence, as GPS said, there are plenty of credible resources out there can walk you through the evidence for the resurrection. You’re right that we don’t have physical scientific evidence of a resurrected Jesus but we do have testimony, witnesses, and like you said, the public deaths of many of the apostles. It’s not scientific, but it’s no less evidence. I can’t scientifically prove that the sunset last night was beautiful. But I can know that it was from my own observation.
            As for the death of the apostles, you mentioned somewhere in your back and forth with GPS that the suicide of transgendered persons is similar to the death of the apostles who believe Jesus rose from the dead. I disagree. Dead is dead, so in that there is a similarity. However this is where the similarity stops. The manner of death is extremely important in this case. The apostles did not choose to take their own lives, their lives were taken from them. The person who takes their own life, does so out of desperation and distress. It is no less tragic that the person whose life is taken from them, but it is not evidence of fighting for what one believes to be true. Suicide is evidence of giving in to what one believes is impossible to overcome. In other words, if one believed that there was hope either that the circumstance would change or they would change the circumstance, one would not take their own life.

        • Bryan

          ” If transgenderism were a choice, these people could choose to be cisgender easily enough rather than choose suicide.”
          The only part of your comment that I want to focus on in my own comment is the part about “easily” choosing to not be transgender. I do not think in many cases there is anything easy about it. Just as there are those who will argue they have had same-sex attraction since they were born, there are those who believe they are in the wrong gendered body. It’s been described as a feeling of wrongness in ones own skin. Now on a light-hearted note, it could be argued that any teenager feels that about some aspect of themselves at any given time during their adolescence and that it is normal. While that feeling for the adolescent goes away in time generally, that didn’t mean it was an easy transition. It just happened naturally on it’s own for various reasons.
          On a more serious note, those who suffer from a feeling of having an extra body part and of not feeling “whole” until it is removed, are in a similar position to those who feel they are the wrong gender. You wouldn’t suggest, nor do I think it is appropriate, that they can easily accept that they are really whole with the body part and lacking without it. There is a mental issue there that can be overcome but it is certainly not easy.
          Our minds are masters of ourselves. We can trick, train, rewire, etc. our brains to do some incredible things. We can ignore pain, we can separate ourselves from the reality of an abusive situation, even to the point of siding with the abuser (ie Stockholm Syndrome). We can overcome obstacles that would have been impossible in a different context (ie the mother who lifts a car off her child in a desperate, adrenaline-fuel act to save her child’s life). So if our mind tell us something is wrong and we trust our mind (which we do almost implicitly because we have always done so), we will believe our mind almost without question. Even in our doubts we still believe what our minds tell us.
          So it is not easy to choose something contrary to what our brains believe to be true, even if it is demonstrably proved false. In that case, when reality and what we believe about ourselves is different, one response can be to give up which could lead to suicide. It’s not dying for what one believes. It is dying because one cannot accept and solve the conflict between what one believes and what one observes.

          • Trilemma

            Some Christian believe people who are transgender were not born transgender but chose to be transgender. In that case, how difficult was it to chose to be transgender? How difficult can it be to choose to go back to being what they were before choosing to be transgender? Today, students seem to be encouraged to entertain the idea they might be transgender. Some people might wonder if they’re transgender and end up talking themselves into it. I do not consider these people to be actually transgender. For these people, becoming transgender was going against their nature which Tom’s article seems to be saying is futile.

            There are people who are by nature transgender. They did not choose this for themselves. Some people are by nature left handed. They did not choose this for themselves. If the Bible had said left handedness was a sin, Christians would be telling left handed people they need to choose to be right handed. It wouldn’t be easy but left handed people could fight their nature and learn to be right handed with varying degrees of success. It appears to be considerably harder for a person who is transgender to learn to be cisgender than it is for a left handed person to learn to be right handed. As you said, it’s not easy to go against one’s nature. Tom’s article seems to be saying that fighting one’s nature is futile. So why are Christians telling people who are transgender to fight their nature? Perhaps the suicide attempt rate is so high because they are not able to succeed in fighting their nature.

          • Bryan

            In addition to the natural order, because of Adam’s sin, all of mankind has a sin nature. It gives most of mankind a predisposition to blame shift, to lie to protect ourselves, etc. Some have a predisposition to sexual sins such as lust or a need to fornicate. Some have a predisposition to same-sex attraction. Some have a predisposition to gender dysphoria. So as you say there are those who are gender dysphoric and those who talk or think their way into it. For the latter group, talking their way out of it is probably easier than it is for the former group.
            However it’s not quite the same as being left handed. Being left handed is not a sin. Sleeping with someone who is not your spouse, is a sin. Sleeping with a person of the same sex, is a sin. Mutilating your body to match its appearance to a picture you have in your mind is a sin. These have to do with our sin nature not the natural world. Since they are part of our sin nature, they can be overcome, but to do so requires the power found in the resurrection of Jesus from the dead because it is that that defeated sin. Christ’s resurrection is what allows us to overcome our indwelling sin nature.
            So again, it’s not easy to overcome as you said. But it’s also not impossible.

          • Trilemma

            There used to be Christians who believed it was a sin to use one’s left hand and tried to force left handed people to use their right hand. Are you saying it’s not a sin to be a person with a male body but the nature of a woman? Where in the Bible does it say it’s a sin for a person to change the appearance of their body? In the Old Testament, God commanded the mutilation of male bodies. Is breast augmentation a sin? Is a nose job or a face lift a sin? Is it a sin to remove unsightly varicose veins or have liposuction?

          • Trilemma, when you speak of someone “with a male body but the nature of a woman,” you have entered such incredibly complex philosophical territory you would not believe it. But feel free to explain based on what you know: What is it to have “the nature of a woman”? How is it distinct from having the body of a woman?

            Those are my first two questions, to which the mere answer, “They feel like women on the inside” is hardly sufficient. You need to show that this “nature” is an objective reality, that it’s a healthy and normative objective reality where it exists, and that it’s “real” enough to override physical facts.

          • Trilemma

            If you lost both arms and legs, would you still have the nature of a man? If you lost your eyes, your ears, and your tongue, would you still have the nature of a man? If your internal organs were replaced by artificial ones, would you still have the nature of a man? If doctors were able to transplant your brain into a female body, would you still have the nature of a man? I think the answer to these questions is yes and that your nature as a man is integral to your brain. Would it be possible for your brain with the nature of a man to develop in a female body if something went wrong in the development process? I understand there is some science that suggests this is possible.

            I cannot show that this “nature” is an objective reality because there’s no such thing as objective reality for something like this. But the testimonies of people who are transgender tells be that it’s reality for them. Ideally, I think it would be best if people who are transgender could learn to accept their body. Veterans who return from war who are missing limbs have to learn to live with their bodies. People with physical deformities have to learn to live with their bodies. Sometimes cosmetic surgery helps. Sometimes cosmetic surgery helps people who are transgender.

    • Your first sentence is just simply false, Trilemma. The article is based on the premise that people who are transgender have a choice as to what to do about it. Deny that, and you’re denying their humanity even worse than what I suggested in the article.

      • Trilemma

        Perhaps I’m not understanding what you’re trying to say. You said.

        A man decides he’s a woman, and by that declaration he becomes one. His decision rules all. His nature is his to choose.

        But he can’t; especially not according to the philosophy that would allow a man the choice to be a woman.

        If “a man decides he’s a woman” or has “the choice to be a woman,” I take that to mean you’re saying a man can choose to be a woman which means he can choose to be transgender. Right?

        A transgender woman is a person with a male body but the nature of a woman. What are the choices this person has to do about it? Fight their nature and try to live as if they have the nature of a man? Try to accept that their nature and body don’t match? Change the appearance of their body to match their nature?

        • You believe a trans woman has the nature of a woman. That’s highly controversial at best. But suppose even it’s not a choice. Replace “decides” with “declares.” The argument still works.

  • swordfish

    Therefore, while I have nothing but empathy for people who have headaches, who cannot feel comfortable in their own bodies, I have nothing good to say for the movement that tells them their best answer is to defeat their bodies. These activists are urging them — and all of us, really — to fight a fight on the wrong field, trying to overcome Nature where Nature simply cannot lose.

    • Huh. I suppose you think that parallels what I wrote in some way. But no, analogies only work when they really do parallel the thing they’re supposed to connect with.

      • swordfish

        You’ve given no reason why my analogy is inapt, so it stands.

        • I think the burden is on you, actually

          • swordfish

            My substitution of ‘headache’ for ‘gender dysphoric’ in your argument was my argument. You replied that it wasn’t a valid analogy, but you didn’t say why, so the burden of proof is still yours, as far as I can see. Having said that, I don’t mind accepting it: 1. Gender dysphoria = feeling uncomfortable with one’s body. 2. Headache = feeling uncomfortable with one’s body. Why should one ‘rise above’ 1, but not 2?

  • Amanda Hunter

    looks like the author does not know anything about people who are transgender. why in the last few years are there so many people writing about people who are transgender? who are not transgender?

    • Sorry, Amanda. I know considerably more than you realize. And this isn’t about them, anyway. it’s about transgender activism, which is a whole new category of conversation in our culture.

      Why do people who aren’t transgender write about people who are? My answer: That’s a strange question.

  • nanhan

    I really don’t want to be a part of this conversation, but I am. My daughter, who went to a Christian college BTW, is marrying a transgender this summer. This is personal. As a bible respecting person this is difficult. I can only share the conclusions I’ve come to after hours of prayer…to reject her or even correct her is something I have to let God take care of. People struggling w/ this will never come to Christ if they think they are some BIG design mistake. And to say it’s some kind of politically motivated issue is absurdly simplistic. No one chooses to feel like this! The last thing we need to project as believers is that they are some kind of rebellious, mutation, or activist to make some kind of point. How can they even begin a “God Conversation” if they can’t accept their own skin and know that God loves them – just as they are. I’ve told my daughter, I just want you to keep talking to the Lord, “Whatever the two of you decide, I’m okay w/ it.” She has to feel His love her and he has to lead her. And I trust him to do just that. In the meantime…we’re having a wedding this summer.

  • The whole idea is of becoming something that you weren’t even intended to be is ridiculous! I was trapped in that lgbt darkness for 30+ years and was confused about my identity. That is how this darkness (movement) works, they confuse everything!! Not to mention I was molested (what the lgbt call recruited) into the movement which screwed me up even more.

    There is only one “orientation” in GOD’S Eyes, the one HE Created in the beginning, which is the one HE intended, One Male + One Female, which happens to be the plainest definition for heterosexual there is. Anything outside of that is sin, and wrong. #WakeUpSheeple Great article!! Going to use it in my Live Stream this evening on my YouTube Channel

  • Mikhail Ramendik

    What other natural accident of birth does the author hold to be essential for “humanness”? How about eye colour. Or height. Or – skin colour? Or – ethnicity? All of these are natural attributes just like biological sex is. Would denying any of them be denying human-ness?

    Am I denying my human-ness by being naturalized as Irish without a drop of Irish blood? (there’s several kinds of Irish blood actually, well none of them for all I know).

    If I am not, then what is different about a biological male becoming “naturalized” as a woman?

Inspiration
A Case for Fear
Austin Roscoe
More from The Stream
Connect with Us