I’ve followed Camille Paglia for many year, always finding her opinions deeply explored, courageous and clearly stated. An excerpt from CPYU:
Although I describe myself as transgender (I was donning flamboyant male costumes from early childhood on), I am highly skeptical about the current transgender wave, which I think has been produced by far more complicated psychological and sociological factors than current gender discourse allows. Furthermore, I condemn the escalating prescription of puberty blockers (whose long-term effects are unknown) for children. I regard this practice as a criminal violation of human rights.
It is certainly ironic how liberals who posture as defenders of science when it comes to global warming (a sentimental myth unsupported by evidence) flee all reference to biology when it comes to gender. Biology has been programmatically excluded from women’s studies and gender studies programs for almost 50 years now. Thus very few current gender studies professors and theorists, here and abroad, are intellectually or scientifically prepared to teach their subjects.
The cold biological truth is that sex changes are impossible. Every single cell of the human body remains coded with one’s birth gender for life. Intersex ambiguities can occur, but they are developmental anomalies that represent a tiny proportion of all human births.
In a democracy, everyone, no matter how nonconformist or eccentric, should be free from harassment and abuse. But at the same time, no one deserves special rights, protections, or privileges on the basis of their eccentricity. The categories “trans-man” and “trans-woman” are highly accurate and deserving of respect. But like Germaine Greer and Sheila Jeffreys, I reject state-sponsored coercion to call someone a “woman” or a “man” simply on the basis of his or her subjective feeling about it. We may well take the path of good will and defer to courtesy on such occasions, but it is our choice alone.
Camille Paglia’s dismissal of global warming as a myth makes one seriously doubt her judgement.
Really? Citation, please! I want to see exactly what Paglia said that you characterize as “dismissal of global warming as a myth.”
Perhaps you are referring to this:
Global warming is “a sentimental myth unsupported by evidence.” “I have been highly suspicious for years,” she tells us, “about the political agenda that has slowly accrued around this issue. From my perspective, virtually all the major claims about global warming and its causes still remain to be proved.”
Maybe Paglia is a skeptic because of 50 years of apocalyptic environmental claims that have not borne out.
But I grant you that her above quote is simplistic sounding. I suspect I disagree with Paglia based on this quote, but it is just a quote. I want to know what she thinks about the facts that concern me about humans wrecking the earth. I believe that humans are, in many ways, wrecking the earth.
That said, have you ever been wrong on an issue? If so, should we ignore EVERYTHING ELSE you have ever said? I think your standard for how to treat people who are wrong on a topic is not a fair way to treat people. Take everyone I admire for the way they generally think. EVERYBODY. I guarantee that I disagree with every one of them on one or more topics, and most of them have said things that I consider downright dumb. I, myself, am in that category. If I time-traveled back 30 years and met my younger self, he would think that I am woefully misguided. I would get on my own nerves and vice versa. We could consider each other to be ignorant in various ways.