Sex is between your legs and gender is between your ears…fine. But why do so many in the trans community get so fucking angry when you question the notion that gender isn’t quite as fluid and indistinct and comme ci comme ca as they assert?

I don’t know anyone who wants to give the trans community a hard time. I certainly never have or wanted to. My basic attitude is whatevs, no problem, live your lives, etc. Everyone feels this way.

But with last November’s arrival of Sutton, my granddaughter, I’ve been feeling triggered by progressive activists in the educational system wanting to force-feed gender ideology to young children. I feel kids should be left alone until…I don’t know exactly, but probably when they approach puberty. And don’t even talk about asking little kids which gender they identify with, or God forbid acting upon their answers with this or that medicinal (Lupron) or surgical measure.

The main impetus behind the hardcore progressive wokester cabal is not just about showing compassion and acceptance for historically marginalized or put-upon communities (African Americans, women, LGBTQ, transgender), but also about bending over backwards to make things right by abruptly and radically reversing biological embeds. One way of achieving this is by threatening sensible centrists and left-moderates with toxic social-media accusations and even career destruction.

Either you’re with us or you’re a racist or a sexist or a homophobe or an anti-trans bigot. Either you’re with us or you’re crabgrass, and you need to be yanked out of the soil. I can’t wait until these fine folks are on the run and searching for tall grass.

It is my solemn, fully considered belief that wokesters are a pernicious ideological movement. It is my solemn, fully considered belief that many on the progressive left have literally gone insane. Thank God the social-political pendulum is starting to swing away from the crazies, and I think many of them realize this. I’ve gradually come to feel over the last three or four years that progressive wokesters deserve serious pushback, and lemme tell ya it feels very good to be part of a growing community that is doing the pushing.

Last night I watched Matt Walsh‘s What Is A Woman?, a 94-minute documentary (available only through a Daily Wire subscription). Mainstream media types have slagged it as anti-trans, but it’s just a simple, rudimentary, building-block exploration of the basics.

All Walsh does, really, is to politely ask trans activists and various professional-class specialists (college profs, psychologists, surgeons) what a woman is, and to apply the measure of basic biological fact against their political theory.

None of them give Walsh a straight answer, and two or three raise their backs and threaten to terminate their interview when Walsh tries to insert the concepts of basic logic and fundamental biological reality. These are people, it is quite clear, who are living in their own bubble, and when Walsh tries to discuss the roots of trans ideology they all go cold and stiff and defensive. Calm and measured at first, they all gradually smell where Walsh is coming from, and seem unable to handle his basic, mild-mannered, sensible-sounding inquiries, almost certainly because to do so would open them up to political difficulties from trans activists. They know who butters their bread.

Has Walsh assembled his documentary in the manner of peak-strength Michael Moore, by presenting a somewhat slanted view of things? You could argue this, yeah, but if I didn’t see the harm when Moore did it how can I complain about it now?

The thing that stuck in my mind is the hostility. Angry, arch-backed responses always expose weak viewpoints and purist radical temperaments.

HE commenter “filmklassik” said the following yesterday: “Plenty of people on here are ‘rebutting’ Walsh’s conclusions with ad hominem attacks (‘He’s an asshole!’, “He’s a bigot!’, ‘He’s a transphobe!’, ‘He’s a bigoted transphobic asshole!’ etc)

“What they aren’t rebutting is his thesis, which is that even so-called ‘experts on gender’ are hard-pressed to define the word ‘woman’ in the context of the current trans debate. Furthermore, when called upon to do so, they react with hostility and evasion. They simply will not answer the question. (But of course, how the hell can they?)

“And what many ‘wokesters don’t want to reckon with is the fact that when your ‘science’ has to be defended with Linda-Blair-in-The Exorcist-like cries of “FuckyouFuckyouFuckyouFuckyou!”…if you can’t defend your premise with sound, objective principles then your premise is by definition flawed. ‘Flawed’ is actually a polite word for what it is.

“But the woke position on trans is not unique. More than a few woke ‘premises’ are articles of faith, not reason. And heretics must be dealt with.”

Repeating: “Women have two X chromosomes and are capable of pregnancy and giving birth from puberty until menopause. Female anatomy is distinguished from male anatomy by the female reproductive system, which includes the ovaries, fallopian tubes, uterus, vagina, and vulva. The adult female pelvis is wider, the hips broader, and the breasts larger than that of adult males. Women have significantly less facial and other body hair, have a higher body fat composition, and are on average shorter and less muscular than men.”

Excerpt from Walsh’s interview with Dr. Michelle Forcier, Associate Professor of Pediatrics and Assistant Dean of Admissions at Brown University’s Alpert Medical School:

Forcier: “Telling [a] family your child, based on that little penis, is absolutely 100 percent male-identified, not matter what occurs in their life…that’s not correct.”

Walsh: “Have you ever met a four-year old who believes in Santa Claus? Would you say that this is someone who maybe has a tenous grasp of realty?”

Forcier: “They have an appropriate four-year old hand on the reality that’s very real for them.”

Walsh: “Agreed. Santa Claus is real for them but Santa Claus is not actually real.”

Forcier: “But Santa Claus does deliver their Christmas presents.”

Walsh: “Well, yeah, but he’s not real though.”

Forcier: “To that child [he is].”

Walsh: “But I see a child who believes in Santa Claus…[let’s] say this is a boy but he says I’m a girl. This is someone who can’t distinguish between fantasy and reality so…you know, how could you take that as a reality?”

Forcier: “I would say that as a pediatrician and as a parent I would say how wonderful my four-year old and their imagination is.”