Mark Steyn, whom I have mentioned several times before, has a brilliant observation in this article from Maclean’s. Granted, the article is a bit unseemly at times; so, you may not want to read it. However, he makes the point that we live in a milieu of sexual freedoms which have made us as “free” sexually as any culture has ever been.
This “freedom” has caused great confusion. So, Toronto’s Gay Pride Parade was billed this year as an event for LGBTTIQQ2S communities. Don’t worry if you miss some of the letter references. The point is that it is impossible to consider people by the genders they choose for themselves. Male and female are anatomical, observable features. In that sense, they are objective. Gender is used to make the concept of sexuality subjective. As such, it is a term best described as pyschological Play-Do. The confusion is illustrated by the complaints from the gender confused; they assert that border security personnel make traveling difficult for them. As Steyn points out,
“When a Bigendering person shows up at the frontier, don’t be surprised if the border guard comes over all 2-Questioning. ‘Travel,’ explains the Star’s Julia Steinecke, is ‘complicated for those who live in the grey area between genders.’ Indeed. Flying is no place for “those who live in the grey area.” Everything’s black and white: Business or coach? Chicken or beef?”
“If you don’t ﬁt into a gender box,” says “award-winning Canadian writer” Ivan E Coyote, “all of a sudden, you’re a target.” Mr./Ms. Coyote prefers to be addressed as he/she and self-identifies as a “very masculine reading estrogen-based organism.” And the hicks at U.S. Customs and Border Protection don’t have a check box for that. Mr./Ms. Coyote was recently detained at Ottawa Airport along with a friend who’d flown in from America, “a tall, feminine woman with a heavy moustache.”
Of course, the proposition is untenable. The larger population cannot conform to every individual’s self-proclaimed identity. We are–sexually speaking–upside down. We are trying to force the many to conform to the one rather than acknowledge that each individual must conform–at least to some basic extent–to the norm of the many. When it comes to sexual conformity, we don’t ask for much, but it seems that we should at least expect everyone to conform to the norm of male or female.
What is intriguing about the article is that it points out that while we have embraced the full explosion of sexual non-conformity, we have been surrendering some of our real rights of individual liberties–like free speech, free exercise of religion, and the right to private property. It is as though we will give up our real liberties if you will allow us to keep our sexual fantasies.
Fantasy always crashes on the shores of reality. When the breakers crash, we will awaken from our confusion and land on a deserted beach parched of freedom.
What do you think?