This post is about a Guardian story about children in school discussing gender with their teacher. An audio of a particular classroom discussion was aired on Tik-Tok. The background is how liberal-progressives have seized on the “trans-rights” cultural action, to the extent that it is now taken as axiomatic that anyone who doubts this ideology – that gender is something an individual can simply choose, rather than something which just happens because of the laws of nature – is a bigot (or in the audio itself, “despicable”). In my view the underlying point of all this transgender promotion (as opposed to old-fashioned tolerance and care) seems to be to destroy everything to do with the “old world”. Not simply “patriarchal authority” but reason, basic perception and basic moral values based on reason are all to be swept away as well. The ideology is absolutely atheistic, materialist and virtually nihilistic. Nonetheless, the people who are pushing this agenda along seem to genuinely believe that they are speaking up for human rights or a more “compassionate” society.
This example is just one of countless. It is based on a media story which was centred on a Tik-Tok audio clip in which a classroom discussion was recorded. In the discussion children are talking about “identifying as a cat”. One girl, apparently, said something like “I don’t believe a girl can identify as a cat or as a boy for that matter”. The teacher called her views “really despicable”. We are in quite a strange place when a schoolchild suggesting that you cannot simply change your gender at will (until very recently a rather uncontroversial scientific fact) can be told her views are “despicable” by a teacher.
As far as the article goes it seems to be important to the author to insist that no one identified as a cat:
I apologise in advance, because this column is about something that didn’t happen
how fiction becomes fact
If you have come across this story, you would be entirely forgiven for thinking it was real
At no point did anyone identify as a cat.
Cat child didn’t happen
nonexistent cat child.
The main idea of the article appears to be that “cat child didn’t happen” and this is an example of how the media (The Daily Mail – the go-to bête noir of progressive-liberals – is cited) and right-wing politicians seize on such stories, “traduce” them and “mangle” the actual people – “immigrants, racial and sexual minorities, disabled benefit claimants” involved in the stories. The author appears to be claiming the mantle of “compassion” for herself.
In fact, based on a quote of the conversation, included in the article itself “cat-child” may well have happened:
It was a heated debate, during which one of the girls cited a conversation with another girl about identifying as something other than a girl, such as a cat. “I said, how can you identify as a cat when you are a girl.”
When I first read this I read “you” as the second person pronoun. On second thoughts it could mean “one”. If the latter, then the girl was making a theoretical point and there is no actual cat child. It is difficult to be entirely sure. The audio can be listened to here. (Some issues about privacy of course; perhaps one can cite public interest). Readers will have to decide for themselves. But, based on the charge that “you have just really upset someone” and “you are questioning their identity” (remarks by the teacher) it does look like the girl who is speaking really does know someone who identifies as a cat – and it is not simply a rhetorical point. (At least the teacher appears to believe that cat-child is real).
If the latter interpretation is correct then cat-child really did happen. If so, this, of course, undermines the whole basis for the article. What the author is trying to do is say: “why is there this furore about a child identifying as cat, it didn’t happen”. Therefore there should be no furore. It is the furore she wants to silence. This is a standard attempt to normalise the abnormal – to say “transgender ideology” is completely special, nothing to get worked up about, let’s all move on and accept it”. It is insidious and an entirely standard part of the propagandizing. These people, and this is a hallmark of the movement, never want to discuss their strange and novel ideas. They want to shut down the debate and simply have their ideas accepted as part of the social fabric. To think otherwise is “despicable”.
Unless the author of the article has some inside information then she is in no better position than us to know whether the speaking girl really does know someone who identifies as a cat or was just making a rhetorical point and so one wonders how she can be so sure that cat-child “did not happen”. She may be basing it on a statement from the school that there are no cat-children in our school; but, of course, the speaker could have a friend in another school.
Quite likely the truth lies somewhere in the middle. The speaking girl was having a conversation with someone and they said “I could identify as a cat if I wanted” and she was referring to that conversation.
Even if the cat-child was a rhetorical device, the main point remains; a teacher is turning a discussion about sex and gender not into a debate but into a matter of school punishment and expulsion if you hold the wrong view. The students in the clip are to be applauded. They hold their ground and speak respectfully against the teacher who is trying to wield power.
What I find really quite surprising in this audio is the teacher: “Where did you get this idea from that there are only two genders?” Gosh – where indeed? Not from the last 400 years of biology teaching perhaps?
There is also (from the teacher) “There is actually three biological sexes”!!! At this point her voice goes strangely high – usually taken as a sign that someone is lying. Not to mention the grammar of “is” and the plural. She gives the example of an incredibly rare medical condition when people have XYY chromosomes as an example of the “third sex” and tries to trap the children because they may not have known this. This is, of course, not a “third sex” but a medical condition wherein the two sexes, which are determined by chromosomes in a pretty binary way (XX or XY), have got tangled up.
What is particularly sinister is that the teacher who is trying to insist on the fact of “three sexes and infinite genders” threatens to report the students and threatens one “you need to go to a different school”.
The Guardian propaganda continues;
She is scolded by the teacher, whose tone and language definitely to my ears from the short recording sounded troubling, and the wrong approach to such discussions
In fact, the teacher apparently said that the views of the child who asserted that gender is tied to biology were “really despicable” and she threatens them with punishment and possible expulsion. You can call that “scolding” if you like – but I am not sure that is in fact just “scolding”.
Anyway – it looks like the media furore over cat-child definitely rubbed author, Nesrine Malik, up the wrong way.