Post-gender Europe

Europe has gone further than the United States in embracing the new ideologies about sex, gender, and political-correctness.  And it’s going even further:  to unisex bathrooms, laws mandating women on corporate boards, and regulations about how men and women may be portrayed.  For example, it will not be legal for billboards in Germany to show women “smiling for no reason.”

What interests me are the attempts to impose–even to create–gender neutral language.  In languages such as German and Swedish in which every noun has a gender!  (In a German language class, teachers drill it into their students’ heads that the gender of a word has nothing to do with its sex!  So that the word for young woman is neuter. A spoon is masculine, a fork is feminine, a knife is neuter.)  So now the effort is to change the very grammar of these languages.  Sweden has added an “inclusive” personal pronoun to its dictionaries by fiat.  (Though linguists will explain that language doesn’t work that way.)

Details of this brave new world, which may well show up on this side of the pond before too long, after the jump. [Read more...]

The Pope goes all in on environmental issues

Pope Francis published his encyclical Laudato Si  (“praise to you,” from the first words of the document), fully embracing the environmentalist cause.  It warns of global warming, says man is responsible, and calls for sweeping changes to save the earth.  It also, as we will blog tomorrow, makes some sweeping theological changes that constitute a major change in Western Christianity.

You can read the entire document in English here.  After the jump is a news account.  Then I want to pose some questions for our discussion. [Read more...]

ABC’s predictions for June, 2015

We often make predictions here at the Cranach blog, but we also do what often does not happen elsewhere:  we check them.  So it’s fitting to consider the predictions of some ABC programming seven years ago, projecting what June, 2015 would be like.  Gas was supposed to be over $9 a gallon.  Milk cost $13.  And New York City would be underwater.  Among other things.

See one of the videos and read an account of the predictions after the jump. [Read more...]

If transgender, why not transracial?

We are told that personal identity is different from physical being, that some individuals feel like women, even though they have a male body.  But we should treat them according to the way they “self-identify,” rather than according to their physical makeup.  This way of thinking is being applied to sex and gender.

But another physical condition is race.  What if someone feels black, even though he or she is white?  By the same logic, shouldn’t that person be considered black?  This is occasioned by the revelation that Rachel Dolezal, the head of NAACP in Spokane and a long-time black activist is, in fact, Caucasian.  Shouldn’t she be considered black, if that is the way she self-identifies?  Isn’t she, in fact, transracial?  And, if so, shouldn’t we let black people self-identify as white?  Maybe we could all agree to self-identify as a single race–say, Native American–so as to eliminate our racial problems.

This is the argument Carl Trueman and others are making, and it seems pretty unassailable, once one accepts the logic of transgenderism.  Can you think of any other applications?  Read about the case of Rachel Dolezal after the jump. [Read more...]

Evolution vs. liberalism

In the course of a discussion about an article by a feminist attacking transgendered folks like “Caitlyn” Jenner, saying that these men can never know what it is to be a woman, Andrew Klavan makes the point that evolution and feminism are incompatible.  Which made me realize that evolution is incompatible with lots of other ideas of the liberals who believe in it.

UPDATE:  I do not intend to confuse “what is” with “what should be” or to try to deduce from evolution any moral conclusions.  I do see the problem with that, but let me frame this differently.  If behaviors limit reproduction, aren’t those less likely to contribute to natural selection?  Wouldn’t there be natural selection against them?   Wouldn’t ideologies and policies that result in individuals not reproducing be an evolutionary deadend?  I am not asking whether this would be good or bad, and am quite willing to be instructed on the matter.

The original post was not so much about evolution but about liberalism, so perhaps we could ask this:  Isn’t it true that “traditional family values”–that is, beliefs and practices that result in more children being born and cared for–have an evolutionary advantage over “progressive values” such as those supporting feminism and non-reproductive sex?  Not as a moral position but as a “what is” description?

[Read more...]

Transgenderism vs. Feminism

The arguments for transgenderism contradict the arguments for feminism. So claims Joseph Backholm, who concludes that the real issue is “declaring independence from a fixed reality.” [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X