Simple Solutions Are Complicated by Extremism

Updated: Jul 14, 2021

Initially this article had a very different title. I was going to suggest that there is a simple solution to the gender pronoun debate, eliminate gender and rely on biological sex. This seems like the common sense approach to the issues we face. With at least 52 known genders so far and an unlimited potential for additions, it's unreasonable to expect Americans to memorize and recite for each individual their gender when addressing them. We already must remember, to the best of our abilities, a person's name. Now we would be required to remember potentially hundreds of genders, names, match them properly or else be subjected to ridicule and cancel culture.

For those unknown to us we have traditionally referred to them by him/her or he/she in addition to their name. We could instead rely on a person's name alone. If a descriptor is required when addressing a person because we don't know the name of the person, we could refer to them as male/female. For example we might say "John ran down the road" or if you were trying to describe the person to another person you might say "The male ran down the road" as opposed to "he ran down the road".

I personally have no problem adhering to any neutral set of ideas. Gender, that is applying an additional label to something needlessly, seems to be a ripe environment for abuse. Any sane person can agree that there are two sexes. Even in intersex people the person either displays as male or female or some combination of the two. There are still only two sexes, it's just that neither of the characteristics of the two sexes perfectly applies, it's a combination of both.

Truly intersex people account for .018% of the population. For context, a person's chances of being killed in an auto accident are roughly the same as a person's chances of being born intersex. Additionally, being born intersex is measurable. We know when this occurs as opposed to it being a subjective feeling as is the case in transgender people. So we should probably make exception for those intersex people and allow them to label themselves later in life as whatever sex seems to fit them at that time. Realistically, we are talking about an extremely rare occurrence.

As you may have noticed, though, the title of this article is not "Gender Pronouns: A Simple Solution" anymore. Instead, a recent video made me question whether giving ground on the gender debate is worthwhile. For all of history, gender has been linked to biological sex, that is until recently. I haven't completely abandoned the idea that we should entirely eliminate gender and rely solely on sex as the basis for such things as restroom and locker room access, sports competitions, etc. However, a recent video made me question whether we should be fighting fire with fire rather than coming to some equitable solution. Should a male be able to be considered a "mother" if this is what male mothers do?

The kind of extremism displayed in the video is infuriating. It pushes people like myself, a generally liberty-minded person with a strong belief in personal liberty, to our boundaries. More on why in a moment but first watch the thirty second video below. For background, the video displays a couple who are a trans man and woman. Each transitioned, or is transitioning, to the opposite gender. The biological female produced a baby for the couple but they are assuming the opposite gender roles in rearing the child. Check it out:

I have no problem with people living their lives the way they want. I certainly wouldn't want anyone getting in the middle of my wife and I and telling us what we can and cannot do in the privacy of our home. However, I would fully expect someone to step in and protect our children from things that might harm them. This includes physical harm or mental harm. When you get into the mental harm arena, the grounds can get shaky. For example, I think most would agree allowing children to suck on the body parts of adults is questionable. There are exceptions to this of course. When a child is sucking on the nipple of a biological female for the purpose of sustenance, this is commonly accepted. Of course it is, it is the natural progression of growth for a child. When, however, a child is sucking on the body parts of an adult for the sexual gratification of an adult, we call that child abuse.

Some might argue here that religion or other traditionally accepted ideologies are mental abuse. I've definitely heard that argument before. The problem is that religion is accepted in society and protected under our constitution. Even if it weren't, it then comes down to a question of social acceptance. Is the video above what we want to be socially acceptable in society? Do we want infants and toddlers subjected to acts that benefit them in no way for the pleasure of adults, especially when that act includes using their mouths to suck on a body part of an adult?

This is hardly the same kind of mental abuse that extremists speak of when they suggest religion is a form of abuse. It's clearly in a league of its own. Not to mention that, while there are surely mental aspects of abuse the child in this video is enduring and will continue to endure throughout its life, this is potentially physical abuse. The best that can be inferred is mental abuse here, whether rising to illegality or not. Parents don't send kids to church for their personal benefit. Whether you are religious or not, there's a clear distinction in doing something because you believe its in the best interest of the child and doing something to derive pleasure from a child.

Here, we can't say what the intent of the adult is behind the baby sucking on the adult males body part, precisely. One thing is absolutely certain, it is not for the sustenance of the child. In fact, I can't find a single piece of evidence that a baby sucking on an adult male's body parts is in the best interest of the child at all. It can only be that the adult male being sucked on, and/or the other partner in the relationship, is deriving some sort of personal satisfaction from the act of the baby. Whether that's sexual or some kind of mental health relief so that the male feels more like a female is not clear to me.

Even if it's not sexual in nature I'm of the opinion that children, especially infants, are not comfort pets. They do not exist to make your mental health better or to bring you confirmation of your own identity. They exist to carry on the human species. They exist to one day have a life of their own and seek happiness for themselves. Quite the contrary, parents exist to guide their children through life. They exist to help form the identity of their offspring, not the other way around. Children are not your therapist or a case study on the best way to transition to another gender. Like I said, it's infuriating and if it's not child abuse in that video, its dangerously close.

So, I wanted to write a productive article which would attempt to create one possible solution to the gender pronoun debate. Instead, I find myself more disgusted than ever at what society has become. I'm unable to even give the benefit of the doubt or defer to personal liberty as I am most often inclined. No, you don't get to have personal liberty when that liberty infringes on the rights of another. The common and simple argument in these kinds of debates used to be "If we allow that then what's next?" followed by an "off-the-wall" claim that seemed very unrealistic.

Ten years ago you might have heard "If we allow people to transition to another gender and accept that as a society, what's next? You'll have men trying to breastfeed infants". Then someone might say "You're crazy. Keep your conspiracy theories to yourself and let people live their lives". It's the slippery slope argument and while it is not completely rational, here we are. Things like this are happening and being turned into docuseries to draw attention to and normalize infants sucking on the body parts of adult males. It's close to abuse, if not. The producers of such series are complicit in the borderline abuse.

Is that it, though? What is next? You can probably see where this is leading. We are normalizing infants, and presumably up to toddlers as they also breastfeed, sucking on the body parts of adult males. Through a docuseries and one side of a political spectrum who will undoubtedly support this, we are normalizing it. Are nipples the only male body part that infants and toddlers are allowed to suck on? It's as disgusting a thought as there could possibly be to me, but it's a necessary question today, unfortunately. It serves no purpose except that of the parent. If it does, I'm open to reading the studies on it. The motives, then, are extremely suspect. Even in a best case scenario, the child is being used for the pleasure of the parent which is wrong. In the worst case scenario, the child is being molested, which is (or is supposedly) illegal.

Rather than writing a productive and solution-oriented article, rather than trying to come up with some idea that might help us all to live together with the liberty to make decisions that only affect us, I am here. I am sidetracked by extreme gender ideology trying to take root in our society and normalize, at best, the neglect of our most vulnerable. That's how extremism complicates solutions.

So...What's next?

A.G. Miller is a father, husband and community member who resides in Tulsa, OK. He is an Army combat veteran, former police officer, and business owner who graduated summa cum laude with B.S. in business management and currently attends University of Tulsa College of Law where he will graduate with a J.D. in 2022.

"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." -Thomas Jefferson
36 views0 comments