The PITT substack @pittparents provides valuable support for parents dealing with the trans assault on their children. But a recent essay pittparents.com/p/a-perfect-st states that the “noble” battle for “gay rights” was a “good fight” rightly won. I disagree...
It was the gay rights movement that embedded individuals’ subjective conceptions about their sexuality and related “identity” – different from their biological sex – into the “civil rights” framework. Prior to the gay rights concession, protected rights related to individuals’ physical beings were based on innate, immutable characteristics (race, ethnicity, and biological sex as male or female). Gay rights led to the passage of “antidiscrimination” laws connected to sexuality (not biological sex) and recognition of “gay marriage”. The trans rights movement built on that, using the same basis of self-identification related to sexuality concepts – in the trans case, recast as “gender”. Thus, the gay rights movement set bad legal precedents that enabled the trans rights movement. Once “gay marriage” was achieved, the established gay rights organizations did not hesitate to put their weight behind the trans rights movement. The two movements are natural allies because both are sexually radical: rejecting natural biological sex and the primal value of maintaining heterosexual behavioral standards. Here is the quote from the PITT column, “A Perfect Storm: How the Stars Aligned to Create the Environment Where Medical Transition Became as Common as Pierced Ears & As Easy to Get” pittparents.com/p/a-perfect-st “One important historical factor [influencing the trans rights movement] is the gay rights movement. Starting in the 1960s, there were a growing number of charities developed to fight the good fight for gay rights. Those charities were triumphant over the years in gaining rights, up until gay marriage became legal in the United Kingdom in March, 2014, and in every state in the United States in June, 2015. At that point, homosexuals had the same rights as heterosexuals, which was exactly the noble goal of the gay rights movement. Unfortunately, rather than downsize and stay relevant as watchdogs, concerning themselves with long-term goals of maintaining their existing rights or specialized issues such as caring for elderly gay men with HIV, many gay charities, such as Stonewall and GLAAD, instead pivoted completely. They ‘re-branded’ themselves to stay relevant, broadening their constituency with the LGBTQII+ acronym, and focusing on “transgender rights” as their main concern. They were infused with money (think Pritzkers and other such wealthy benefactors) for “trans” rights, and they gained much momentum with new demands.”
