"Gay" is the lifestyle. The sexual act is separate from that. In your example:
"My son IS gay
My son believes he is attracted (only) to other men"
the first includes the sex act, whereas the other does not include the lifestyle. Add the line:
"My son has sex with other men"
and it fits reality better. I'd even argue most men with homosexual urges, which may not be exclusionary, are not "gay" - they don't mince about the place, hips all a'swish while nattering on in Polari, all Quentin Crips-like.
(The benefits of being married to someone with a background in Queer theory and Gender studies gives one a lot of weird "knowledge".)
Moving on:
It is the same with "trans": the person in question is only "trans" as per feminist/queer ideology, during the transitional period. Before, it is a man/woman wishing to change sex and gender; after, it is the new sex and gender (as per ideological theory, not reality - in reality it is a man/woman who has undergone hormonal therapy and surgery to appear as the other sex and gender).
The idea above entered feminism from multiculturalism: the idea that a Pakistani moving to England becomes and Englishman. He/she doesn't: he reamains a Pakistani and his children will also be Pakistani, or mixed heritage (I do detest the old American label "mixed race" - we're not talking about dog breeds, but people). Using heritage makes it clear that [kultur] is a transitional concept: what it is, changes over time, both in the macro and micro formats. The problem for the 20th century - And Beyond! - is that in the West the intelligentsia decide long ago that the change itself was the point, was to be consciously guided [by them, of course] and that all indigenous kultur was WrongBadEvil, which is what has led to Spencerian Doom, which can only be countered by very nasty means. The answer to your question about ideologies detached from reality thus is multiculturalism:
"Where else do we see an entire ideology that is utterly dependent on a single, unsubstantiated, critical point?" The unsubstantiated point being that people can change their culture by an act of bureaucratic and legalistic fiat.
Great analysis of this whole tragedy. One little fact that constantly gets overlooked; the majority of 'Gender Affirming' interventions occur in young girls. We concentrate on the dudes in the women's bathroom and the sports, but a small but significant portion of the young female population is rendering themselves sterile and mutilating their bodies.
The next few years will tell us how many regret their youthful decisions.
"We’re all used to the question “what is a woman?” and the inability of the pro-trans lobby to effectively answer this in any logically consistent way."
Logic? You expect logic from that "lobby"? Though "grifters, charlatans, scientific illiterates, and political opportunists" is probably the more accurate term.
Though rather too many women -- as a sex category as you wisely put it -- are equally clueless on that score. At least that applies to the doctrinaire feminists of one stripe, sexual persuasion, perversion, predilection, or sect who are equally to blame for that clusterfuck. You might be amused, particularly if you have any affinity for gallows humour (sharpens the mind wonderfully), by this article by Noretta Koertge, co-author with Daphne Patai of "Professing Feminism":
"The Feminist Critique [Repudiation] of Logic; Noretta Koertge"
NK: "I wish I could end the story of the feminist critique of logic on this happy note. Unfortunately, however, some feminists have claimed that not just the homework exercises but the very enterprise of characterizing the formal structure of logical inference cannot be separated from sexism, racism, and totalitarianism. And in her new book, Words of Power: A Feminist Reading of the History of Logic, Nye concludes that while men are master of logic, women are more inclined to be masters [pic] of reading (p. 184). If Nye is right, women students would be well-advised to stay away from logic classes. The skills that logic purports to teach are socially deleterious and thank goodness women have little aptitude from them."
Without the imposition of this overarching ideology ..."
Dick-tators to the Left of us, dick-tators to the Right of us. "Into the valley of Death Rode the six hundred." Tennyson's take on an early stage in the Ukraine-Russian war, Crimea being the bone of contention for a hundred years or more though for some rather unfathomable reasons.
Though not entirely sure that it -- Covid at least -- is really a question of an "overarching ideology"; methinks it may be, at least in some cases, simply the unthinking mob -- something of a "revolting" bunch -- starting off from the same untenable premise: "the sky is falling!!11!!"
Reminds me of something from this side of the pond, from Mark Twain, though the provenance is questionable:
"It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so."
So.
This is my view of this Gender Thing:
There are two sexes. Genders. Whatever.
Male and Female.
Male= XY chromosome;
Female= XX chromosome.
Some males are overtly masculine; others are not so much.
Some are really swishy.
Maybe they are gay, maybe just more girly guys.
It's a spectrum.
Likewise, some females are very girly; some are more masculine.
Some of them are gay, too.
Girly gay, guy style gay female.
It is a spectrum.
I think the trans thing is a delusion.
You can't change your sex. Gender.
It is encoded at conception.
I think people should learn to accept themselves as they are.
I also think society should accept people, just as they are.
And not pressure people to behave in any " gender specific" way.
Because, honestly, "sex change" is very extreme.
And, when all is said and done, they haven't changed anything.
They have just put on a costume.
These are my observations, and my opinions.
IMHO.
I'm going to muddle the waters a little, then.
"Gay" is the lifestyle. The sexual act is separate from that. In your example:
"My son IS gay
My son believes he is attracted (only) to other men"
the first includes the sex act, whereas the other does not include the lifestyle. Add the line:
"My son has sex with other men"
and it fits reality better. I'd even argue most men with homosexual urges, which may not be exclusionary, are not "gay" - they don't mince about the place, hips all a'swish while nattering on in Polari, all Quentin Crips-like.
(The benefits of being married to someone with a background in Queer theory and Gender studies gives one a lot of weird "knowledge".)
Moving on:
It is the same with "trans": the person in question is only "trans" as per feminist/queer ideology, during the transitional period. Before, it is a man/woman wishing to change sex and gender; after, it is the new sex and gender (as per ideological theory, not reality - in reality it is a man/woman who has undergone hormonal therapy and surgery to appear as the other sex and gender).
The idea above entered feminism from multiculturalism: the idea that a Pakistani moving to England becomes and Englishman. He/she doesn't: he reamains a Pakistani and his children will also be Pakistani, or mixed heritage (I do detest the old American label "mixed race" - we're not talking about dog breeds, but people). Using heritage makes it clear that [kultur] is a transitional concept: what it is, changes over time, both in the macro and micro formats. The problem for the 20th century - And Beyond! - is that in the West the intelligentsia decide long ago that the change itself was the point, was to be consciously guided [by them, of course] and that all indigenous kultur was WrongBadEvil, which is what has led to Spencerian Doom, which can only be countered by very nasty means. The answer to your question about ideologies detached from reality thus is multiculturalism:
"Where else do we see an entire ideology that is utterly dependent on a single, unsubstantiated, critical point?" The unsubstantiated point being that people can change their culture by an act of bureaucratic and legalistic fiat.
Great analysis of this whole tragedy. One little fact that constantly gets overlooked; the majority of 'Gender Affirming' interventions occur in young girls. We concentrate on the dudes in the women's bathroom and the sports, but a small but significant portion of the young female population is rendering themselves sterile and mutilating their bodies.
The next few years will tell us how many regret their youthful decisions.
"We’re all used to the question “what is a woman?” and the inability of the pro-trans lobby to effectively answer this in any logically consistent way."
Logic? You expect logic from that "lobby"? Though "grifters, charlatans, scientific illiterates, and political opportunists" is probably the more accurate term.
Though rather too many women -- as a sex category as you wisely put it -- are equally clueless on that score. At least that applies to the doctrinaire feminists of one stripe, sexual persuasion, perversion, predilection, or sect who are equally to blame for that clusterfuck. You might be amused, particularly if you have any affinity for gallows humour (sharpens the mind wonderfully), by this article by Noretta Koertge, co-author with Daphne Patai of "Professing Feminism":
"The Feminist Critique [Repudiation] of Logic; Noretta Koertge"
https://philpapers.org/rec/KOETFC
Of particular amusement therefrom:
NK: "I wish I could end the story of the feminist critique of logic on this happy note. Unfortunately, however, some feminists have claimed that not just the homework exercises but the very enterprise of characterizing the formal structure of logical inference cannot be separated from sexism, racism, and totalitarianism. And in her new book, Words of Power: A Feminist Reading of the History of Logic, Nye concludes that while men are master of logic, women are more inclined to be masters [pic] of reading (p. 184). If Nye is right, women students would be well-advised to stay away from logic classes. The skills that logic purports to teach are socially deleterious and thank goodness women have little aptitude from them."
"Thank goodness" ... 🙄
Without the imposition of this overarching ideology ..."
Dick-tators to the Left of us, dick-tators to the Right of us. "Into the valley of Death Rode the six hundred." Tennyson's take on an early stage in the Ukraine-Russian war, Crimea being the bone of contention for a hundred years or more though for some rather unfathomable reasons.
Though not entirely sure that it -- Covid at least -- is really a question of an "overarching ideology"; methinks it may be, at least in some cases, simply the unthinking mob -- something of a "revolting" bunch -- starting off from the same untenable premise: "the sky is falling!!11!!"
Reminds me of something from this side of the pond, from Mark Twain, though the provenance is questionable:
"It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so."
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/11/18/know-trouble/
Rounding out a set of quotes, something again from your neck of the woods:
“Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.”
― Charles MacKay, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds
Re Crimea:
Watch this: https://rumble.com/v6qdln0-history-real-on-ukraine-russia.html?e9s=src_v1_upp
6 min
"Jesus rollerblading Christ" 👍👌🙂
Thanks. Haven't watched all of it, but what I have at least suggests that some of Ukraine's claims are rather "untenable" at best.