Walsh: How, precisely, does a biological
male come to the conclusion that
he is really a woman?
How does this process work?
If he arrives at this conclusion based
on the fact that he feels like a woman,
how does he know what it feels like
to be a woman if he's not one?
Is it not circular logic to say that he
knows what it feels like to be a woman
because he feels like one
and, therefore, is one?
That's circular logic, and
it makes no sense.
What exactly is a female feeling?
Maybe some of the ladies
here can help me out with that.
Even if it made sense to speak of
female feelings and female thoughts,
and even if it were possible for a man
to know that he was experiencing one,
why would that mean that he is a
woman instead of just a feminine man?
We use to have those.
Those used to exist.
The Left tells us that
gender is a social construct.
They reject the idea that women must
necessarily have any particular
feeling or thought or taste
or preference.
If gender is an artificial construct
and our physical features have
no bearing on our identity
as man or woman,
then what the hell is
a woman, anyway?
A woman, in that case, would not be
defined by her feelings, her thoughts,
her ideas, her preferences, her body,
her reproductive organs, her DNA,
or her chromosomes. What
is she defined by? What is she?
Can anyone answer that?
When a man says that he's a woman,
he's now made it so that that phrase
means nothing. It doesn't mean
anything to be a woman.
He might as well say that he's a
whosawhatsit or a thingamadoodle.
It's just a word. It means
nothing anymore.
This is the real harm that this
transgenderism nonsense has caused.
Not only does it foment confusion
in the minds of children,
but it also cheapens womanhood by
turning it into some kind of abstract
concept that we theorize about.
So you women in the audience,
you're not even people.
You're just these abstractions,
according to the LGBT folks.
Or, if not that, then womanhood
is a costume that you
can put on and wear.
This is especially ironic given
the concern for cultural appropriation
that you find these days. If it is
appropriation for a white man to dress
like a black man, is it not
appropriation for a man to dress
like a woman? Why doesn't anyone
ever talk about female appropriation?
That is real appropriation. You've got
drag shows with men dancing around
in women's clothes making a mockery
and a parody of womanhood.
It is like a female minstrel show.
It is female blackface,
and feminists just sit back
and take it most of the time.
Speaking of irony, the Left for so long
has tried to tear down gender constructs,
but transgenderism only enforces the
constructs that they were trying to
tear down. We used to say that a boy
who plays with dolls is girly.
That's what we used to say
back in the bad, old days.
The way to tear down that construct
is to say that it's okay for a boy to be
girly. Or you could say, alternatively,
that it's not girly to play with dolls.
So a boy with dolls used to be girly,
now he's literally a girl, we say.
If a boy who exhibits womanly
characteristics is, therefore, a girl,
then those gender constructs
that the Left was trying to tear down?
They have just made those constructs
into something far more potent and
powerful than any conservative ever
imagined that they could be.
That is why I object
to redefining gender.
