Transgender Flight from Reality

Stockholm Pride (Photo credit: Frankie Fouganthin)

Stockholm Pride (Photo credit: Frankie Fouganthin)

Sexual realities of individuals have moved from the realm of fact to the realm of opinion

The late Daniel Patrick Moynihan — ambassador, senator and presidential advisor — once observed that “you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.”

To a sober, rational individual, this seems sensible.

Implicit is an assumption — which also seems fair and reasonable — that there is something called reality, consisting of facts that exist independent of opinions, wishes or attitudes.

Detachment from reality is generally viewed as a psychological problem, and in the extreme case, mental illness.

Yet in our own country, in our public discourse, in our public policy and in our courts, there is diminishing recognition or appreciation that there is a difference between a fact and an opinion.

The U.S. Supreme Court has just agreed to hear the case Gloucester County School Board v. G.G.

Woodrow Wilcox


G.G. was born a young girl and now “identifies” as a boy and as result wants to use the boys’ restroom, rather than the girls’ restroom, at Gloucester High.

When the school received complaints from the parents of boys who use the restroom, it issued guidelines saying that, for the purpose of restroom use, your biology defines your sex, not your opinion (what now is called “gender identity”). The school provided GG separate, single-stall facilities to use.



But because this is really about politics, and not about going to the bathroom, G.G. sued the school. On G.G.’s side was the U.S. Department of Education, which issued a letter indicating that forbidding use of a bathroom to an individual who claims a certain sexual identify, regardless of what the biological facts may be, is discrimination and violation of federal law.

The position of the Gloucester County School Board was upheld in district court, but was overturned on appeal, giving G.G. the green light to use the boys’ room.

The Gloucester County School Board appealed to the Supreme Court, which now has agreed to hear the case.

This can be seen as a natural progression from the Obergefell v. Hodges case, which the Supreme Court heard last year, in which the high court redefined marriage to include individuals of the same sex.

Just as the sexual realities of individuals have moved from the realm of fact to the realm of opinion, so has the reality of what was once thought of as holy matrimony — the unique union of man and woman in marriage.

But as we drift as a society, becoming more and more detached from the discipline of reality and truth, and as what we consider truth is increasingly about opinions backed by political power, things become more and more dangerous.

Even those who help make this happen become victims of their own politics.

Peter Thiel, the homosexual billionaire, who has locked onto Donald Trump’s candidacy, spoke at the Republican convention. He said then, “When I was a kid, the great debate was about how to defeat the Soviet Union. … Now we are told that the great debate is about who gets to use which bathroom. This is distraction from our real problems. Who cares?”

But being in touch with reality — knowing the difference between facts and opinion — is anything but a distraction. There is really nothing more important to us as a free society.

Thiel spoke the other day at the Press Club in Washington and complained, “The Advocate, the magazine which once praised me as a gay innovator even published an article saying that as of now I am, and I quote, ‘not a gay man,’ because I don’t agree with their politics.” Once politics makes facts and defines reality no one is safe.

The American Declaration of Independence contains the words “We hold these truths to be self-evident…” But what place is there for self-evident truths in a nation where going to the bathroom has become a political act?

This article is printed with the permission of the author(s). Opinions expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the article’s author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of American Clarion or Dakota Voice LLC.

Comment Rules: Please confine comments to salient ones that add to the topic; Profanity is not allowed and will be deleted; Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will be deleted.

Star Parker is president of the Coalition on Urban Renewal & Education and author of the new book White Ghetto: How Middle Class America Reflects Inner City Decay. Prior to her involvement in social activism, Star Parker was a single welfare mother in Los Angeles, California. After receiving Christ, Star returned to college, received a BS degree in marketing and launched an urban Christian magazine.
Star Parker
View all articles by Star Parker
  • Lori Stewart

    Much like the science deniers of global warming, like those who ignore literally centuries of data about sexual identity, to include orientation and gender, are the populist movement. Not the elites, not the educated, not the intellectuals, but those who only become visible due to the anonymity of the internet.

    • It’s remarkable how some people can so adamantly deny science, isn’t it?

      The amount of science is staggering which shows us the global climate has been for thousands of years changing in greater extremes than today, yet those with a political agenda claim, contrary to science, that western industrial advancement is somehow changing the global climate.

      The amount of science is even more voluminous which reveals that if you were born with a penis you’re a man, and if you were born with a vagina you’re a woman. Yet some people with a political agenda feel entitled to ignore the physical science that is quite obvious between their own legs and elsewhere in their bodies-including their very genetic makeup.

      How ironic that at this time, our scientific pinnacle, our popular culture has become its most anti-science.

    • DCM7

      Once something gets fixed in the public’s mind as “science,” even if it’s clearly false, it becomes almost impossible to dethrone. This is why there is so much abuse of that powerful word “science.” Much of what people think they “know” “scientifically” about sexuality these days serves as (well-documented) examples of that abuse, not examples of real science — particularly where “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” are concerned.

      Think homosexuality is scientifically known to be “normal” on any level, or for any person? Then you’ve been scammed. You’ve missed a big part of the story — one that others have *not* missed.

  • Brianna Michelle Clark

    I’ll be glad to help all of you out then. You are quoting science as the proving truth that transgender people must be denying reality and are mentally ill. Well, science is finally catching up to us. There have been studies done that indicate that a male to female transgender person’s brain actually functions biologically more like a genetic female brain than a male brain. And oddly enough, the opposite goes for female to male transgender, whose brain functions more like other men. These are just 2 articles I could fine from a quick search:

    So, now that science is showing that we may actually be biologically different from normal genetic men and women. But I have a feeling that even if science proved that this were the case, most of you would still find a reason for us to be mentally ill instead.

    • Science also indicates that sometimes our behavior brings about a change in our brain structure. Not a big surprise, given that our behavior often has physical effects (i.e. physical exertion builds muscle where a sedentary lifestyle brings about muscle atrophy and weight gain).

      The science is really simple. Our genetics reveal whether we are males or females; it’s a scientific fact, not a choice. Even more obvious, if you were born with a penis, you’re a male and if you were born with a vagina, you’re a female.

      I understand that there is a small number of people out there who have experienced unfortunate things in their lives that have left them confused about their sexuality. However, the science is clear. We should be helping such people adjust to reality and conform to reality, rather than encouraging them in their delusion. We do them a great disservice and great harm in pointing them away from reality, rather than toward it.

      • Brianna Michelle Clark

        There’s always a reason you can’t accept something. I have a strong feeling you also believe that Trump will make the best president this country has ever seen, and he never touched a woman against her will.

        • DCM7

          In other words, you can’t counter his points so you have to try to distract from them. Well, that’s to be expected in discussions like this.

        • Wrong again. I won’t be voting for Donald Trump.

          • Brianna Michelle Clark

            It was meant more in general, as I’m sure you wouldn’t disagree that most people who feel the way you do about transgender people, feel the same about gays and lesbians, and so therefore, trump is the only logical choice.

            • Actually Donald Trump has made it clear that he supports the homosexual and transgender agenda. You just can’t seem to get on the same side as the facts, can you?

              • Brianna Michelle Clark

                Sure I can. Because I know a vote for trump as president is a vote for pence as vice president. And pence has made it very clear he does not support LGBT, and plans on making sure any pro-LGBT laws are removed.

              • Hmm. You only brought up Pence after I pointed out your growing record of being on the wrong side of the facts. You should probably quit before you embarrass yourself further,

              • Brianna Michelle Clark

                No, pence was the reason I brought up trump to begin with

              • Oh, okay, that’s why you didn’t mention Pence until your third comment about Trump. It was because you were concerned about Pence, the guy who will fill the office that America’s first vice president described as “the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived.”

                Typical. Liberal. Obfuscation.

            • Mark0H

              Do you have even a clue how peculiar men look when they try to pass as women? No matter how plain or homely a man may have been, once he has “transitioned” to female, he looks absolutely bizarre, not even remotely like a true woman. Why would someone do something so horrible to himself? It can only be psychosis.

    • DCM7

      “I have a feeling that even if science proved that this were the case”
      In our day, the persuasive power of “science” is heavily abused. If something has to be sold as “scientifically proven” in order to keep it from being questioned, that thing needs to be questioned — hard and carefully. There’s also the fact that scientists are often tasked, and paid, to get the “right” results; “science” is literally blocked from supporting things that are “politically incorrect.” If you don’t see this, you don’t want to and aren’t really paying attention.

      “most of you would still find a reason for us to be mentally ill instead”
      I have no desire or need to think of anyone as being anything besides what they actually are. I only seek to know and acknowledge what’s true — not what I necessarily wish to be true, and not what others want me to believe is true. There is a definite, unquestionable design for sexuality, and science is never going to “disprove” it, no matter how much people want to force it to.

      Real life shows that “transgenderism” is neither normal nor healthy, and that many so-called “transgenders” have gone on to live as their correct, biological gender, to their great benefit. You can try to make that reality go away by way of denial and appeals to “science,” but you can’t.

      • Brianna Michelle Clark

        And why is there an unquestionable design to men and women being male and female? Because the bible said so. That’s all there is to it. You can’t use nature, because there are plenty of examples in nature that would support transgender biology. But let’s not use science to detract from the “facts”

        • DCM7

          If anything attests to the design of men and women being male and female, it’s nature. (This, of course, does reflect what the Bible says — as reality has a very strong tendency to do.)

          There are “plenty of examples in nature that would support transgender biology”? I don’t know what kinds of examples you have in mind, but based on past experience I suspect they would each fall into one of a couple of categories:
          (1) Examples of things in nature that are in some way messed up from their original design (which, of course, perfectly fits the Biblical concept of a “fallen world”).
          (2) Examples in nature that might be used to “prove” things that they really don’t prove. (This might include, but not be limited to, things involving animals that are not applicable to humans.)

          Dismissing things as being “only” from the Bible makes for a very poor argument. It merely demonstrates the arguer’s ignorance of Biblical matters (such as mischaracterizing the Bible as something “discredited”).

          (BTW, I find it interesting that people dispute the idea of gender being “binary,” yet any supposed gender “variations” beyond male and female are merely permutations of those two.)

        • beethovens10th

          There is no scientific, medical or physiological requirement to obtain the “transgender” diagnosis - that indisputable fact far separates your tedious contentions from scientific fact.

      • beethovens10th

        “Science” is the left’s new UNconstitutionally state-imposed religion.

        • DCM7

          And it’s always false science, to boot.

    • beethovens10th

      Science doesn’t “catch up.” I don’t know where you people come up with these inane slogans. Or are you saying that “science” is just used as a political tool and has just become more useful?

    • beethovens10th

      Those articles are highly inconclusive (“Imaging studies and other research suggest…”) and are more on the order of bait for controversy than actual study results. It’s easy for people with a political agenda (and the “transgender” issue is purely political) to grasp at any even remote “evidence” to prove their position to promote it to a position of “settled science.”

      • DCM7

        The key phrase has been posted here by Mr. Brianna himself: “There’s always a reason you can’t accept something.” As they say, “where you stand depends on where you sit.” He’s in a position where he has a vested interest in believing certain things that politically correct “science” says, because the alternative is too much. In contrast, those of us who reject this “science” don’t have any interest in “keeping people down” or whatever else we’d be accused of; we merely seek to understand.

        When it comes right down to it, he’s in the same position as the rest of us. We all desperately need something we can’t provide for ourselves, and in order to find it we have to go down a road that may appear to be the last place we’d want to go.

  • beethovens10th

    It’s funny how dudes like “Brianna Michelle” posting here as fake “females” always go overboard with the new persona, adopting especially feminine names and clothing to try to compensate for the truth. He becomes a sad caricature as a result, a spectacle at which people in public secretly snicker. No one is fooled by the vast majority of these cross dressers.