The Return of Transexual

Billboard Chris recommends that we give up on the word "gender." I agree. At its worst, it is an invitation to engage in old and reprehensible stereotypes (because girls who like to play with trucks are 100% girls). At its best, it is a meaningless word. At one point it was a polite way to avoid saying "sex."

By returning to "transexual," we recognize that there are only two sexes and that a person of one sex is presenting as the other. It is not a pejorative. It is recognizing some basic fact. Everyone out there, including people with sexual dysphoria who present themselves as the opposite sex, deserve kindness, respect and full legal rights as a person. Therefore, using "transexual" is truly not an insult. The benefit of using "transexual" is that we are recognizing basic biology and avoiding massive confusion associated with gender ideology. What confusion, you might ask?  How about this chart published by (believe it or not) Scientific American.

Two years ago I was scolded and told it was impolite, but I now disagree. I'm imagining the conversation when I start using transexual again. It will probably come down to a discussion (probably an argument) about who has the final say over how we use words. I'll see how it goes.

Continue ReadingThe Return of Transexual

Taibbi: NYT is Obtuse and Flat-Footed Over and Over because “It is not a newspaper”

Taibbi, in his latest article: "No, New York Times, You Don't "Deserve Better" Than Donald Trump. Trump should spare us all and retire. But his antagonists' lack of self-awareness keeps giving him oxygen."

If these people were truly that far above the muck, they wouldn’t need to censor reality to prove it. Same with the Times. They penned that editorial pretending they hadn’t been outed years ago for building their whole newsroom around a phony Russia story. Slate published a transcript of a Times “town hall” in which Times editor Dean Baquet talked about his paper being caught “a tiny bit flat-footed” by the conclusion of the Mueller probe, because “our readers who want Donald Trump to go away suddenly thought, ‘Holy shit, Bob Mueller is not going to do it.’”

By “a tiny bit flat-footed” Baquet meant his paper was unprepared for Mueller to come up empty because it had ceased to be a news organization willing to embrace guilt, innocence, or whatever the hell the truth was, and instead became a political operation agitating on behalf of “our readers who want Donald Trump to go away.” It openly rooted for one particular outcome and ignored the other possibility, causing the paper to publish one mistaken or clearly biased story after the other.

These ranged from the infamous “Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence” story to the transparent government PR headline, “F.B.I. Used Informant to Investigate Russia Ties to Campaign, Not to Spy, as Trump Claims” to stories proclaiming the “Nunes memo” about FBI malfeasance to be a mere partisan effort at “defending President Trump from Mr. Mueller’s investigation.” As later revealed in the report of Inspector General Michael Horowitz, the Nunes memo was correct in virtually all its parts. Yet the Times didn’t investigate that story or dozens of others properly, because it was and is now a political organ, not a newspaper.

Continue ReadingTaibbi: NYT is Obtuse and Flat-Footed Over and Over because “It is not a newspaper”

The LSAT has Become an Inconvenient Truth

Wilfred Reilly is a political scientist whose research focuses on empirical testing of political claims. I've followed him for a long time. He follows the facts where they lead. This time, the topic is the extremely sudden demise of the LSAT. This time, Reilly's topic is the extremely sudden demise of the LSAT, which happened just as it became likely that the U.S. Supreme Court will clamp down on affirmative action.

Continue ReadingThe LSAT has Become an Inconvenient Truth