>> The liberal approach works by taking moral and social significance out of identity categories and objecting when any person, institution or law attempts to assign significance to any of them to constrain, denigrate or generalise about any individual. This does not mean that people cannot find any identity meaningful themselves, but that nobody else is justified in telling them that they should and what that meaning should be .

Well said. I wish more people understood this.

Expand full comment

This article makes me so angry for so many reasons. I cannot respond to it all and you are clearly not interested in understanding the other side. You spent the article lambasting the right for "overreacting" as if they were the ones pushing the "culture war." The "overreaction" barely has any power and is a legitimate and reasonable reaction to the batshit crazy progressive/leftist agenda. The left has been unable to rein in the extremists and radicals on its own side and now complains about the other side doing it for them. I cannot help but think people like you just want the left to slow down rather than stop. You vastly underestimate how the left has gone too far.

There is no such thing as "child friendly, non-sexual drag queen acts." You assume that it is normal and good for children to be exposed to this and anyone who opposes it must provide adequate justification. You have it backwards. The real question is why do children need to be exposed to cross-dressing men (most of whom are gay)? What is the point of exposing children to this?

Not to mention drag queens always look like caricatures of hyper-feminine women (lots of make-up, big hair and tight and revealing clothing). It makes a mockery of women and is degrading. It should go the way of blackface and be socially inappropriate. It is absolutely and wildly inappropriate for children.

Trans is not real. It is a made up political identity that has no basis in reality. Men who are feminine are men. They just happen to be feminine. It doesn't make them part of a new civil rights group and they are certainly not women/girls who have the right to access the intimate spaces of women. In my state, all sports, bathrooms and locker rooms are based on "gender identity" rather than sex. This has destroyed single-sex spaces and effectively made every single space unisex. This is a huge and monumental change and barely a word from you. Birthers, bleeders, front holes yet you think it is just the extremist trans activists rather than the whole point of gender ideology/ transgenderism /transsexualism.

The normalization and commercialization of surrogacy. The re-definition of infertility to include gay men and lesbians. The rise in polycules and the demand for the state to recognize multiple partner marriages, three parents being listed as fathers on a birth certificate. Yep, no big deal. Just those hateful bigots complaining again at all the social progress being made, just people who hate freedom.

What you are witnessing is (hopefully) the beginning of a worldwide backlash against the universalism of human rights, which are bureaucratic, un-democratic, imperial and destroying actual diversity. Human rights now just means US civil rights law being imposed upon the rest of the world.

Expand full comment

You hit another piece out of the park, Helen. I really appreciate your reasonable approach to the pendulum of extreme ideologies. My personal feeling is that PEOPLE of all democratic countries have been moving in the right direction on "live and let live" acceptance of our collective human diversity. However, when it became clear that governments (working with NGOs or corporate masters) started to legislate and mandate and censor the crap out of certain ideologies in favor of other ideologies, it forced centrists into a their respective corners. I think the appeal of you article is less of a call for people to "just all get along" but for people to demand their governments stop pitting ideologies against one another and start applying a constitutionality to all instead of bulldozing through an authoritative agenda that has created this great divide.

Expand full comment

This is a really great piece of timely, high-precision, measured and scholarly writing. An original for which there is no imitation.

Expand full comment

Well, I would say I broadly agree in that kneejerk overcompensation is probably bad. But this type of sense is for individuals, not groups; the fringe 3-4% that's loudest are going to be the ones pushing policy, not *only* because they are loudest, but because they are loudest for a reason: those pushing from the extreme left have mobilized NEETs and the cultural elites simultaneously, but those pushing from the radical right are more organized and better funded still than any group of moderates (consider: why did WoLF have to ally with a fundamentalist Christian group, opening themselves to criticism?). Time and money are resources that are in short shrift in moderate groups, simply because we are only now banding for a common cause. These extremist causes have been in the works for decades.

And of course, on top of that, we all know how deep these particular tentacles go. ESG has been absolutely deadly, and the capture of institutions and accreditation means that we won't be budging this beast without a substantial, powerful push. Nuance will be lost--cannot be considered, actually--for the inertia of the monster is immense, and only an equal or greater force will have a hope of dislodging it.

So the simple reality is that the only way LGB is going to be able to salvage anything at this point (if there is still any slim chance of doing so) is to take a leaf from the LGB Alliance and distance from the TQ+ (and condemn that branch) as loudly and as enthusiastically as possible.

I am not saying this as an expression of my personal politics. I am merely referring to the best strategy available to this group, which is to denounce the tag-alongs dragging their "brand" down into the mud, regardless of whatever nuance they may be inclined to feel over those in that group experiencing genuine dysphoria.

I don't believe this will happen in large enough numbers, however, because large swaths of the LGB themselves have embraced the TQ+. This is truly boneheaded from a strategic viewpoint, but there's no talking sense into a 20-something SJW who is convinced he or she is the second coming of MLK Jr..

And we women are also in for a very bad time. I can already see murmurings online about how it was a mistake to give women the vote, and this backlash is going to not only hurt, but be permanent for a generation or two at least--and we have plenty of women pushing for this outcome alongside their men.

And so it goes.

Expand full comment

I wish the reactionary backlash was as strong as you think it is.

Unfortunately, the Ratchet seems to always move in a culturally left direction. At the very most, if the 2010s represented two steps forwards for woke liberalism, we may take one step back, to be repeated every decade.

Gay marriage was imposed against the will of 32 state referendums, as LGBT activists held democracy in contempt from the start. California's Proposition 8, with a 79% turnout, meant nothing to them. Democracy was overturned, yet enough social blackmail and shaming was enough to manufacture consent for the LGBT agenda, even though it was so obvious it had been undemocratically imposed.

Conservatives accepting this outrageous attack on democracy was one of the most cowardly and pathetic things they ever did. It emboldened the LGBT movement to sterilize and mutilate our children, and laugh about how we're powerless to stop them.

What you say is happening is not happening, but it bloody well should be, if we had an ounce of civilizational dignity left within us.

Expand full comment

Learn the difference between the metaphysical and the man-made, then maybe you won’t conflate them so much that you are blowing up balloons in another universe.

Case in point: The universal human rights and principles of not judging people by their race, gender, or sexuality…

Race is metaphysical, gender is man-made and sexuality as in male or female at birth is metaphysical. Treating the metaphysical and the man-made as the same kind of things is simply wrong.

Expand full comment