Winning The Trans Debate: Balancing Victory with Integrity

[Social Media]

 

The so-called “trans wars” seem to be reaching a pivotal conclusion. In 2024, significant developments, including the Cass Review, Wes Streeting’s decision to ban prescribing puberty blockers to children, and a series of legal rulings affirming the right to uphold belief in biological sex, signaled a return to what many describe as common sense. These outcomes suggest a turning tide, one that gender-critical feminists view as vindication of their long-held positions.  

 

Public opinion has shifted dramatically. Only 30 percent of British adults now support the ability to change the sex registered on one’s birth certificate, down from 53 percent in 2019. This reversal underscores the growing skepticism surrounding trans-rights activism, which, for all its noise, has struggled to gain traction. As Right-wing populism rises in opposition to progressive pieties, people increasingly resist what they perceive as moral impositions—especially on fundamental matters like biology.  

 

For gender-critical feminists, who have faced significant opposition and personal consequences, the challenge now is to avoid the pitfalls of triumphalism or adopting the rhetoric of victimhood. Natalie Bird’s legal battle with the Liberal Democrats is a case in point. Barred from standing as an MP after wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with “Woman: Adult Human Female,” Bird sued her party for discrimination. Though the Lib Dems admitted fault, she pursued further compensation for “injured feelings,” a move that mirrors the tactics often criticized in her ideological opponents.  

 

While Bird’s actions are understandable, they risk blurring the distinctions that have set gender-critical feminists apart from their adversaries. The rhetoric of victimhood has been a hallmark of trans-rights campaigns, which have often relied on emotional appeals to counter opposition. To the victors, however, comes a different reward: the clarity and dignity of being right. Feminists have long maintained their composure under fire, and preserving this integrity is crucial even as they navigate the complexities of success.  

 

In a seemingly unrelated but equally fascinating arena, portraiture provides a glimpse into the timeless allure of vanity. Consider “The Visionary,” a 1989 painting commissioned by Donald Trump for Mar-a-Lago. Created by Ralph Wolfe Cowan, the portrait bathes its subject in celestial light, presenting an idealized version of reality. Cowan’s boast—“Nobody ever dislikes my portraits”—captures an enduring human desire for flattery.  

 

Historically, British portraiture thrived on this very principle. With the collapse of religious art markets post-Reformation, artists turned to wealthy patrons, crafting flattering depictions that emphasized grandeur over reality. Yet today, this tradition has fallen out of favor in high art, where raw, unvarnished depictions dominate.  

 

The modern disdain for self-flattering art is perhaps best exemplified by personal anecdotes. One recalls a brief romance with a man who had commissioned a Trump-like portrait of himself. Displayed prominently at the foot of his bed, the image served as a daily reminder of his aspirational self-image, ultimately dooming the relationship. Such stories illustrate how excessive self-regard, whether in activism or art, often leads to unintended consequences.  

 

Both the trans debate and the art of portraiture underscore timeless human tensions—between identity and reality, conviction and vanity. In victory or self-expression, the balance between authenticity and excess remains as vital as ever.  

 

Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2024-12-20

 

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, Social Media said:

Only 30 percent of British adults now support the ability to change the sex registered on one’s birth certificate,

Sooo, 30% of British adults are barking ( IMO ). Frankly I doubt it's that many in reality.

[jippytum]

One good thing about trans athletes in  sport  is they have made people realise what an unfair nonsense this is. 

I really doubt 30% of the population agree that birth certificates should be altered to accomodate sex orientation in children. 

[JonnyF]

The truth always wins in the end. Biological sex is reality. There is no "my truth" or "your truth", only THE truth. 

 

A tiny but vocal "progressive" minority should never dictate to the majority.  

 

It's just a shame it was allowed to get so far before people pushed back. Better late than never. 

[Hanaguma]

On another note, the LGB are starting to distance themselves from the "T" in the alphabet soup of victimhood.  There is genuine fear that young boys who may be just gay are being told that they are actually girls trapped in a boy's body, and encouraged to 'transition'. 

[KhunLA]

55 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

On another note, the LGB are starting to distance themselves from the "T" in the alphabet soup of victimhood.  There is genuine fear that young boys who may be just gay are being told that they are actually girls trapped in a boy's body, and encouraged to 'transition'. 

Smart folks, as I don't know any LGB folks that agree with the rest of the alphabet soup.  More simply embarrassed by them.  Nobody is transitioning to anything, except mental illness.

 

You got 2 versions, M & F, and you don't get to pick.  How you enjoy either is UP2U, but try not to tell people you're something else, as all you'll be then, is quite foolish.

[ignore it]

There  a debate?

 

 

[riclag]

17 minutes ago, ignore it said:

There  a debate?

 

 

Brilliantly transcribed !

 

My first introduction to the trans world was at a Kink’s concert,

Boys will be boys and girls will be girls

its a mixed up bobbled up shook up world except for lola ,

 

[riclag]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooo, 30% of British adults are barking ( IMO ). Frankly I doubt it's that many in reality.

Scary! Have my brethren actually reached 

the Outer limits of nonsensical quagmires! 

[johnnybangkok]

BodyDysmorphicdisorder (BDD), or body dysmorphia, is a well documented mental health condition that's been around for many, many years. The question of course is since a sex change is a permanent condition with no going back, at what age should it be allowed? In the vast majority of countries you can only get a full sex change when you are 18 and above (a sensible age when most are considered adults) but the controversy comes with puberty blockers in teenagers as young as 10 which I think most sensible people think is far too young. Places like the UK have now banned puberty blockers for under 18's but the point though is this should be medical considerations NOT a political one as extreme cases of BDD can lead to suicide.

 

It's just not as straight forward as everyone makes out and the demonising from mostly the right isn't helping. I personally think the age should be 18 BUT with exceptions in a small amount of cases. This won't work of course because any ambiguity will just feed the haters so keep it at 18 and just keep your fingers crossed it doesn't lead to an uptick in teen deaths.