Some Socialists Double Down on Support for Reactionary Gender Ideology

And in the process, jettison material reality and all pretense of rational thought.

Photo by Michal Matlon on Unsplash

By Bruce Lesnick and Jim Levitt

On May 13, 2023, the Socialist Action website published an article entitled, Republicans Intensify Anti-Transgender Campaign, by Barry Sheppard. The piece is replete with factual errors and logical blunders. We will address those point-by-point. But first a bird’s-eye view.

Where They Go Wrong

Sheppard and Socialist Action (SA) take the position that the concepts male/female, man/woman and boy/girl are no longer rooted in biology. They deny that in humans, sex—like for all mammals and nearly all other plants and animals—is binary and determined at conception. Instead, they adopt the sophistic fantasy that being a man or woman is a state of mind; that a “woman” can be not only someone whose body is of the type optimized to produce large gametes (ova) and bear children, but also a person whose body is of the type optimized to produce small gametes (sperm). All that is required is that the person believes they are a woman. This is as far from materialism and rational thought as one can get. All the errors and logical fallacies in Sheppard’s piece follow from this anti-scientific assumption. This isn’t Marxism. It’s channeling the White Queen from Through the Looking-Glass who proudly proclaims, “Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast." The fact is,

• A “transgender woman” is a biological man who believes or wants others to believe he is a woman.

• A “transgender man” is a biological woman who believes or wants others to believe she is a man.

This simple reality escapes Sheppard and SA. For this reason, they are blind to the harms inherent in pretending that “transwomen” are any kind of woman, or that “transmen” are any kind of man:

• Their view eviscerates women's rights and gay/lesbian rights, all of which are integral to building working class solidarity. If you can’t define the word woman, you can’t fight for women’s rights. Women lose the right to sex-segregated spaces, sports and affirmative action programs. Gays and lesbians are slandered as bigots if they base their choice of same-sex partners on biology.

• Their view promotes sexist stereotypes, implying that non-stereotypical men and women are really the opposite sex.

• It threatens children's health and safety, steering vulnerable youth to medicalization and a life-long dependence on Big Pharma.

• It undermines science, critical thinking and freedom from religion, insisting that people must promote the subjective beliefs of gender ideologues above material reality. This, in turn, undermines people's ability to think critically about politics and current events more broadly.

The Difference Between T and LGB

A serious fallacy in Sheppard’s article is the notion that trans rights are a natural extension of gay and lesbian rights. Despite the letter T having been grafted onto the end of LGB, trans is not at all analogous to homosexuality. Sexual orientation is internal, with no external reference to measure it against. Only the individual can say what their sexual orientation is.

Trans is completely different. In this case, there is material reality to contend with. A biological man telling you they are really a woman is like a 5-foot 2-inch person telling you they’re really 6-foot-6, or a 50-year-old person telling you they’re really 18. Material reality trumps any individual attempt to deny it. Anyone who believes something about themself that flies in the face of material reality is living an illusion.

Another difference between homosexuality and trans is that, in the former case, we’re asked to simply let people live in peace. In the latter case, it is demanded that we not only accept but also validate, celebrate and reinforce some people’s delusions and modify law and public policy accordingly. These are not at all the same thing.

What’s more, multiple studies and mountains of data demonstrate that young children who think (or who are encouraged to think) they are trans often have multiple comorbidities including depression and autism. When these children are treated with love and counseling rather than puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, surgery and “affirmation” that they were born in the wrong body, the great majority outgrow their gender dysphoria, and most grow up to be healthy gays and lesbians. So, in a very real sense, gender ideology has the effect of “transing away the gay” for young children.

For more on the difference between homosexuality and transgender and how the latter reinforces homophobia, see these two indispensable pieces: The Queers Versus The Homosexuals and Homophobia in drag.

---

Republicans and Democrats

With all of this in mind, we can proceed to examine Sheppard’s article in detail. The very first sentence is either sloppy or strangely problematic. Sheppard writes,

The Republican Party, which became a far-right white nationalist, anti-abortion, anti-LGBTQ party under the Trump administration, has now decided to launch a coordinated campaign against transgender people. (Emphasis added.)

If the Republican Party “became” far-right, white nationalist, anti-abortion and anti-LGBTQ only under the Trump administration, what, pray tell, was it before? Measurably less reactionary, racist, misogynist and homophobic? And what of the Democratic Party, that other half of the American capitalist duopoly? Rhetoric aside, is the Democratic Party not just as reactionary, racist, misogynist and homophobic as the Republican?

Embracing Woke Talking Points

And what is the “coordinated campaign against transgender people” to which Sheppard is referring?

He uncritically quotes Montana representative Zooey Zepher’s claim that, “If you are forcing a child to go through puberty when they are trans, that is tantamount to torture.” He cites the passage of laws that ban the administration of puberty blockers, wrong-sex hormones and cosmetic gender surgery to minors.

These medical interventions permanently alter children’s bodies and carry significant risk of harm. Studies have failed to show widespread improvement from these treatments and children are incapable of assessing the long-term risk/benefit. For all these reasons, Finland, Norway, Sweden, France and the UK now discourage medicalization of gender dysphoric children. Are all these countries transphobic? Are they all in thrall to the Republican Party?

Sheppard continues,

For several years, Republicans have been pushing ‘bathroom bills’ that exclude trans people from multi-user bathrooms, locker rooms and other spaces for both sexes, that align with their gender identity.

In other words, some Republican-sponsored bills oppose boys/men being allowed to use girls’/women’s bathrooms, locker rooms, changing rooms, etc. To object to this standard, which was fought for by women and has been in force for over a hundred years, one must believe that either all bathrooms and changing rooms should be multi-sex, or that what were once sex-segregated spaces must now become preference-segregated, where what counts is not biology or material reality but only what a person feels. In other words, the gender ideology view holds that any biological male who wishes he was or believes himself to be female should have access to female spaces, and vice versa. So, some Republicans are pushing for laws to preserve sex-segregated spaces, while Barry Sheppard and the enlightened cadre of Socialist Action want to abolish these. Got it.

A straw man argument often raised by gender ideologues is to assert that opponents of their ideology are claiming that all “transwomen” are violent and predacious. Nice try, but no. It’s much simpler than that. All “transwomen” are men, and most violence is committed by men. Misrepresenting these facts is just another way gender ideology undermines women’s rights and safety.

Sheppard writes,

In recent years states have introduced bills that make it harder for trans people to use their gender identification on state documents like drivers [sic] licenses or to change them on birth certificates, or to use a person’s preferred pronouns.

Wow. Many public documents have a place to denote one’s sex, something that is binary and fixed at conception. But SA objects! In place of one’s biological sex, they say, people ought to be able to list their imagined sex. But why stop there? Why not replace the person’s actual height, weight and race with their imagined values for those?

Sheppard laments,

Florida has passed what has been called “Don’t Say Gay” law, making it illegal for teachers to discuss or use any materials that refer to sexual orientation or gender identity for grades up to third grade.

Sex education doesn’t begin until 5^th or 6^th grade, so what exactly is the problem here? Do Sheppard and SA think that the revolutionary position is for sex education to be moved down to 2^nd or 3^rd grade?

(Since Sheppard’s article was written, Florida extended their ban on gender ideology materials through high school. Here, one must distinguish between materials children are able to peruse on their own—books carried in the school library, for example—and what is formally included in the school curriculum. There is no more science behind gender ideology than there is behind creationism or intelligent design; none of these should be part of elementary or high school curricula.)

Sheppard writes,

Teachers must notify parents if they think a child is transgender…

Do Sheppard and SA think parents should be kept in the dark? That schools should be able to pretend a child is the opposite sex and use different names and pronouns for the child at school without the parents’ knowledge or consent?

Sheppard then bemoans,

Another law some states have adopted bans “drag shows” in any place where young people “might” see them.

Do Sheppard and SA think highly sexist, sexualized drag shows should be presented to children? Should this also apply to movies, regardless of rating? Should all pornography be made easily available to children? Is this the revolutionary outlook that will inspire and unite the working class?

Doing Violence to the Facts

Sheppard writes,

Trans Americans are four times more likely to be victims of violent crime than their cisgender peers, a 2021 study reports.

He doesn’t cite or link to any specific study, but his claim is belied by statistics compiled by the trans advocacy group Human Rights Campaign. As Kentucky State University Professor Wilfred Riley argues,

According to an exhaustive database kept by the HRC, there were 29 recorded murders of trans individuals in the most violent recent year on record (2017), a fraction of the 17,294 murders committed that year. In fact, the transgender murder rate is far lower than the murder rates for African Americans, poor Americans of all races, and “men” in general. Further, most murders of trans persons are same-race domestic or personal disputes, not hate crimes.

…

The Human Rights Campaign maintains a year-by-year database containing every known case of a transgender individual being killed by violent means, and gives this number as 29 in 2017, 26 in 2018, and 22 in 2019. Not only do these figures not reflect a year-by-year increase in attacks on trans persons—they are remarkably consistent, and may be trending slightly downwards—they also indicate that the trans murder rate is significantly lower than the murder rate for Americans overall.

Data from the United Kingdom indicates that,

The trans homicide rate appears to be one tenth of the general homicide rate if we assume 1% of the population is trans, or half the rate if 0.2% of the population is trans.

Meanwhile, close to 200 women were murdered in the UK in 2017 alone compared to an average of less than 1 trans person murdered per year between 2008 - 2017.

Sheppard continues,

Last year a study by a suicide prevention group focused on LGBTQ youth, found that 86 percent of trans or nonbinary youth reported negative effects on their mental health stemming from this legislative attack, and nearly half had seriously considered suicide that year.

The statement above is confounded on several levels. It lumps lesbians, gays, nonbinary and transgender together without any indication of the contribution of each to the overall numbers. And how is “nonbinary” defined? If it includes men/women who reject male/female stereotypes, that covers a lot of people who are neither gay, lesbian nor transgender.

More importantly, the actual data doesn’t support Sheppard’s assertion. The three most cited studies—the RaRE Research Report, the Stonewall commissioned Centre for Family Research survey at the University of Cambridge, and the study by Toomey et al in the US of 121,000 youth ranging in ages from 11 to 19—have been thoroughly debunked:

Although there is no doubt that children and young people suffering gender dysphoria are an extremely vulnerable group deserving of our support and care, the oft-quoted suicide statistics are from surveys which are not robust and there is no evidence that transition is a ‘cure.’

The RaRE study, for example, included just 27, self-selecting, non-randomized participants—hardly sufficient for any statistically significant conclusions. It also failed to control for sexual orientation, a serious confounder.

And we should note that, according to psychologists and the CDC, comments like Sheppard’s can actually promote suicide.

Decades of research suggest that suicide is a socially contagious behavior, especially in youth. In 1994, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published a document titled “Suicide Contagion and the Reporting of Suicide: Recommendations from a National Workshop.” In a section titled “Aspects of News Coverage That Can Promote Suicide Contagion,” the CDC cautioned against “[p]resenting simplistic explanations for suicide.” Suicide, it explained, “is never the result of a single factor or event, but rather results from a complex interaction of many factors and usually involves a history of psychosocial problems.”

Defend Free Speech

Finally, one does not have to agree with Zooey Zepher’s remarks or ideology to oppose his having been temporarily banned from the Montana House of Representatives. All contentious issues need to be openly discussed and debated, not reflexively suppressed. In fact, in a classic demonstration of the Streisand Effect, attempting to silence Zepher greatly increased his exposure. The fact is, opponents of gender ideology are the most likely to be deplatformed, silenced, censored and fired for their views. Even though it is more the exception that proves the rule, Zepher’s unjust banning muddles the landscape and makes it easier to silence critics of all types on all issues.

*  * *

It should go without saying that transgender people, like all others, deserve full civil and human rights. But full rights does not mean super rights. Rarely have the special accommodations demanded by one group been so injurious to others including women, gays, lesbians, children and all who value rational thought.

For more on this issue see:

With Gender Ideology, The Left Is Shooting Itself in The Foot

Hitchhiker's Guide to the Transgender Galaxy

It’s the funding, stupid

---

A Parable

Three men—a lazy socialist, a sophist and a Republican—walk into a bar. It’s ladies’ night.

The sophist says to the bartender, “I identify as a woman so all my drinks should be free.”

The Republican says, “That’s ridiculous! We’re all biological men. Material reality matters. And by the way, the sun sets in the west.”

The lazy socialist, whose reasoning is rusty for not having led a working-class movement in the longest time, thinks to himself: The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Therefore, I can never go along with the Republican. Besides, who doesn’t like free drinks? He turns to the bartender and says, “Dialectics tells us that everything changes into its opposite. Therefore, anyone who challenges Mr. Sophist’s gender identity is a bigot! Drinks all around! The Republican transphobe can pay. (And based on Mr. Republican having declared it to be true, we know the sun does not set in the west!)”