In reaction to an article on "Cristan" Williams' rather sudden, and somewhat bizarre, endorsement of theories that hold that transsexual women have brains that are sexually differentiated at odds with their bodies (this would be something of a reversal of his previous positions, I was taken to task for using "incorrect pronouns" when referring to Mr. Williams. Of course, this is not the first time this accusation has been made.
But, I would contend that no, I do no such thing. While some might disagree on grounds of political correctness, I don't think I am using the wrong pronouns at all. Nor, for that matter, do I think that anyone is automatically entitled to demand the use of pronouns based on their "preference." This, of course, is a major tenet of "transgender activism." And, as which most of transgender activism, I disagree vehemently.
As I have pointed out, the entire transgender paradigm is basically an artificial social and political construct. It has no basis in reality. This, for example, is very much brought out in an article that is cross-posted to The Transadvocate blog. In it, a woman who is "gender queer" identified, who is dating a "trans woman" talks about the politics involved. Yes, even simply dating a "trans woman" becomes a political matter. What a complete load of silliness. But this, is, of course, identity politics at its most extreme.
And that is the problem in much of this...people who identify as women as part of some social/political play-acting demand rights that they have no real claim to, all so they can force their bizarre behavior on society as a whole, which then, based on false claims made by these freaks and perverts, assumes that transsexuals are just like that. And then they wonder, or at least pretend to wonder, why transsexuals want no part of their silliness.
No, I believe that concepts like male and female, man and woman, have real meanings, and are not just labels that can be claimed on a whim. I don't believe there is some inalienable right to be called a woman, or a man, if one is not. If someone makes more of an issue of being trans than an effort to be a woman, then why should I call them a woman?
I don't choose which pronouns I use based on whether or not I agree with someone. If that were true, then I would, for example, refer to one blogger very differently than I do. As much as I vehemently disagree with that person, I don't see them as male. Misguided? Yes. Politically extremist? Without question? Insane? Very likely. But male? No. I believe that person has allowed her political leanings, coupled with an overblown ego that is devastated by the realization that she is not the alpha transsexual she once thought she was to allow her to seek the adulation she receives from basically abandoning what she once espoused to influence her...that, and possibly more than a bit of senility or dementia, but no, not being male.
On the other hand, as I say, when someone is more concerned with hanging on to their past, and reveling in their "gender transgression," why wouldn't I see them as men? Because, quite frankly, that is what they are.