I don’t know why they had a special Day of Visibility for “transgenders”. You can’t miss men in dresses pretending to be women. They are visibility itself.
Nevertheless, the Day was had, affording the elite-Expert-ruler class a prime opportunity to vice signal how supportive they were of the latest madness.
Somebody had Biden say on video that “transgender people” are “made in the image of God”.
Now this is a common idiot fallacy, one of many covered in this better selling book. For if it is so that men who wear dresses are made in the image of God, so are psychopaths, sociopaths, murderers, zoophiles, and NPR listeners.
Biden’s writer didn’t mean “made” in the sense that all men possess the rationality given to us by God, but rather in the manufactured sense. That men wanting to be women were manufactured to want to be women by God. That their natures toward rejecting Reality were God given. That being so, their desires cannot be criticized, for who are we to question God’s plan?
Yet, as said, if “made” works as it works for men in dresses, it works for psychopaths and feminists, too. There isn’t any occupation, avocation or activity it doesn’t work for. So the concept is empty.
Another name for this fallacy is the Born This Way Fallacy. If people are born that way, for whatever proclivity you enjoy, you cannot deny the same logic for people who display proclivities you dislike. They were born that way, too. Everybody was born “that” way, for whatever “that” is.
In none of these cases is there a natural dividing line, or test, which says draw this line here but nowhere else. So the argument, in any form it takes, is always a fallacy.
A variant of the fallacy runs on probabilities. They’ll say, Well, there were always a certain number of men who wore dresses throughout history. At rare times they were indulged in this, but usually these behaviors were proscribed; only now, we recognize that thos behavior has always been with us, so we will celebrate the behavior, and take Pride in it.
This is the Always With Us Fallacy, easily seen to be one by a simple substitution.
There were always a certain number of men who murdered other men throughout history. At rare times they were indulged in this, but usually these behaviors were proscribed; only now, we recognize that this behavior has always been with us, so we will celebrate the behavior, and take Pride in it.
Indeed, there were always more murderers than men in dresses, so if we award morality by proportion, murder is even more moral than crossdressing.
The Always With Us Fallacy is powerful. It caused society to conclude that sodomy was a good, and therefore there should be toleration and Pride in open homosexuality. Now you have to worry about your kids watching a Disney movie.
There’s no getting around it. If we decide any behavior is a good, we have to do so by addressing the behavior itself, in essence. Pointing to its frequency or claiming one has “no choice”, or was “born that way”, fail as arguments.
Biden’s writers had him append this to his made-that-way: “parents should affirm their [children’s] gender identity.”
I won’t spend much time on the Appeal to Pity, an ancient fallacy, one that is well beloved, even cherished by the female of the species, except to note its modern name is the Corrosive Tears Fallacy.
If you cause somebody, usually a woman, to cry, you are wrong. Even if you are right. Here the tears are not so much from the men who want to wear dresses (they are men, after all, and not apt to cry), but from women, including the mom’s of young boys who want to signal their vice, and display their sons as daughters for social points.
What’s missed, though, are the feelings of the normal parents (and others) called out by Biden’s speech writer. Those who do not approve of the madness, but who are asked to endorse and embrace it. They outnumber the men in dresses, and their feelings are said to count for nothing. This is the Cruelty Fallacy. It needs no explanation.
Buy my new book and learn to argue against the regime: Everything You Believe Is Wrong.