I regularly subject myself to the writings of various right-wing thinktanks, because they’re extremely influential to the right in America, and because they generally spout whatever the guys pulling the strings (the ones with the money) want, in terms of national direction. It gives me ulcers on a good day.

Today was a bad day.

From our friend Mr. Stephen J. Heaney at the right-wing Witherspoon Institute comes a real gem, in response to Kye Allums decision to come out as a transgender man playing on a women’s basketball team. According to a blog post entitled “Just the Facts, Ma’am,” which was published on November 29th by Mr. Heaney:

Being a human male is a biological category. It means having a particular chromosomal structure: XY. This normally gives rise to certain physical characteristics such as particular hormonal balances and bodily structures such as a penis and testes. In childhood stages, we call this a boy; in adult stages, we call this a man. A human female, on the other hand, has an XX chromosomal structure, leading to a particular hormonal balance and bodily characteristics, such as ovaries, a uterus, and mammary glands. The child is a girl; the adult is a woman. The way to be sure which sex a particular human being is, male or female, is not by asking the opinion of the person in question, nor—as the NCAA has reportedly recommended—by “following the gender classification on a student’s identification documents, like a driver’s license.” It is to do a physical examination. Whether one is a human male or a human female is a matter of fact, and that is no less the case because the genetic factors that determine sex are not always well or fully understood. It is such a matter of fact that undergoing hormone treatment and surgery to create a more masculine appearance is not going to make a woman into a man. It will merely result in a mutilated woman—a situation that may please the person who undergoes such “therapy” but does nothing to change the foundational facts.

Let’s break this down.

Being a human male is a biological category. It means having a particular chromosomal structure: XY.

This is demonstrably false. There are chromosomal structures other than XY which result in maleness. Unless Mr. Heaney is willing to admit that there are quite a few different sexes. Somehow, I doubt that.

This normally gives rise to certain physical characteristics such as particular hormonal balances and bodily structures such as a penis and testes.

Again, this is simply, biologically wrong. This, in concert with dozens of other factors, usually (not normally) gives rise to a certain set of physical characteristics which vary greatly from person to person, but which share some commonalities that sometimes, in some situations, are worth considering (i.e., it makes sense to notice that most women have uteri and that any discrimination against people with uteri will disproportionately harm women. It does not make sense to take a blood test to check someone’s chromosomes before allowing them to drive a car).

In childhood stages, we call this a boy; in adult stages, we call this a man.

No, Mr. Heaney, you call this a boy. You call this a man. I respect other people. I believe they have a right to determine how they will be defined as human beings.

A human female, on the other hand, has an XX chromosomal structure, leading to a particular hormonal balance and bodily characteristics, such as ovaries, a uterus, and mammary glands. The child is a girl; the adult is a woman.

Ah yes, the particular hormonal balance of the woman. It is precisely the same in ALL WOMEN. Because variation would be confusing, and lead to epistemological questions. Epistemological questions are wrong.

The way to be sure which sex a particular human being is, male or female, is not by asking the opinion of the person in question, nor—as the NCAA has reportedly recommended—by “following the gender classification on a student’s identification documents, like a driver’s license.” It is to do a physical examination.

In that case, I will be referring to Mr. Heaney as “she” in the future. After all, I have not done a physical examination on her. Her own self-presentation and identification is therefore irrelevant to me, and my woman’s intuition (which I got with my chromosomes) tells me that she’s a woman, like me.

Whether one is a human male or a human female is a matter of fact, and that is no less the case because the genetic factors that determine sex are not always well or fully understood.

So it’s a matter of fact, but it’s not a matter of fact that we can easily discern? I thought it was chromosomes, simple as that. Which one is is, Ms. Heaney? WHICH ONE IS IT? I am in utter dismay! How can I go through the rest of my day without knowing the absolute Truth About Gender (TM)?

It is such a matter of fact that undergoing hormone treatment and surgery to create a more masculine appearance is not going to make a woman into a man. It will merely result in a mutilated woman—a situation that may please the person who undergoes such “therapy” but does nothing to change the foundational facts.

That is so interesting. I have never heard anyone say anything like that before.

The university exists to seek the truth. Its faculty attempts to extend our knowledge of reality through theories based on observable facts. Yet in this instance at least, the university in question has acquiesced to the obviously false claim that one of its student athletes is a man, agreeing to call her a man, and to refer to her with male pronouns.

Ms. Heaney knows a lot about truth. She knows the real truth! This is exciting for me, because I always thought that reality is kinda complicated and difficult to get a handle on. Like, it’s always been flat-out amazing to me how much I don’t know. How much nobody knows. I always thought this was pretty miraculous. One of those incredible things about being alive. But also, it is confusing.

Because sometimes, I don’t think I know the real truth. I think, maybe I’m wrong. Or maybe my perspective is different from someone else’s, without being more or less valid. I think, maybe I don’t know the best thing to do. Maybe things aren’t as solid as I thought! Maybe I could relax a little bit, and be more flexible. Maybe my way of folding the socks is not the correct way of folding socks! And that gets very confusing. Because there are so many choices to make. How do I know when to be flexible? What if by being more flexible, I end up letting the Nazis march on Poland? That is not a good time to be flexible!

How will I know what to do?

Luckily, there is Ms. Heaney. She knows the Truth, and she can tell it to me, so I won’t be afraid and confused anymore. She can tell me what gender everyone REALLY is. More importantly, she can tell me exactly how people should behave, because once they have been placed into one of her two factual and unchanging categories, we can determine (through logic and reason and truthy facts) who is better. And we can stop all this nonsense about women being the intellectual or moral equals of men. Because they are not. It is the Truth.

As Greg Forster said in an article for Public Discourse, “When you boil it down, the only battle that ultimately counts is between those who think you can decide the meaning of your own life, and those who think that the meaning of your life is not something you get to make up for yourself.” Most people know in their bones that we cannot simply make it up to match our desires. They have been going along with this game for a long time, and are beginning to say to themselves: This isn’t just disturbing; it’s wrong. And it’s got to stop.

It’s wrong and it has to be stopped, because we don’t know the meaning of our lives. Ms. Heaney does. She knows the Truth.

So Jezebel published a piece that essentially promotes sexual assault.

It’s an article that is terrible for a lot of reasons.  The big one is that the author wants to be “freed” from the concept of consent.  Which is really enough.  But the article is also terrible because it just doesn’t make sense.  Not even a little bit of sense.

Here are the observations from Paris our author offers us—the “evidence” for his theory, if you will:

1:

At clubs, bars, bistros, in the street or on the Metro, Parisian men lobby very aggressively for sex… it is fairly common to watch men literally grab and touch the girls who weave through the crowd. Men often draw a finger down an unknown girl’s cheek or under her chin like a doting Uncle; they can be seen pinching girls’ noses, throwing arms around shoulders and even stealing kisses.

Okay, so street harassment happens in Paris. A staggering revelation.

2:

Parisian women deny or accept these advances with a decisiveness many American women lack. Naturally, some girls in Paris walk away and reject these strong come-ons. But one can observe many of them reacting with knowing laughter; these women understand the game. They often seem legitimately flattered by the attention and stick around for an introductory conversation. The men buy the women drinks. Sometimes they trade phone numbers or make out in a corner somewhere. And sometimes, of course, the whole exchange ends in sex.

And, sounds like women in Paris respond to street harassment pretty much exactly the same way women in American cities respond to street harassment. Women have different attitudes about and responses to men who feel they are entitled to female attention on the street. Some women in some situations feel extremely violated and feel safe enough to respond negatively. Some women in some situations feel violated, but are too afraid/unsure of their boundaries/tired that day/convinced it won’t make a difference to make a scene. Some women feel flattered for a huge variety of reasons related to how they are approached, who is doing the approaching, and how much they feel their value rests on being attractive to men.

It’s all very confusing… If you never, ever had to think critically about street harassment, why it happens, and what it means. In other words, if you live in the bubble of unreality that privilege produces.

3:

A specific example from my time in France helps illustrate my point. I once fell madly in love with a woman named Madeleine… We were never intimate because the moment never seemed right to try to kiss her… I complained about Madeleine to a female French friend who said to me, “Have you tried getting her drunk?”

If there’s one thing I know about women, it’s that unlike men, who are precious snowflakes of individuality, we operate as a single mind, much like the Borg or Swedish pop sensation ABBA. So if a French lady suggested getting a woman drunk in order to have sex with her, I guess I think it’s a great idea too. And if 45% of South African women say that there’s no such thing as marital rape, that’s good enough for me!

4:

This idea of plying a woman with alcohol (something that is applauded by American men in private) often enrages American women because they view it as an assault on their right to consent.

Well, American women (and the American legal system) can be uptight that way. The author is more relaxed about such things. For example, he wouldn’t mind if someone tattooed Barney the Dinosaur on his forehead when he was too drunk to say no or resist. Because he’s the kind of guy who thinks it’s cool to do whatever you feel like to someone’s body, as long as they don’t say no. He’s not one of those prudes who has a bunch of rules about what people can and cannot do to his body when he’s passed out. No sir.

Sigh.

Anyway, here is the theory that emerges from the above pieces of evidence (which were, to review: street harassment happens in Paris, women respond to it in a lot of different ways, Madeleine wasn’t interested in the author, a French lady suggested getting Madeleine drunk, and some American women don’t think it’s cool to have sex with them if they’re incapacitated by alcohol).

1:

[French] women maneuver around male aggression to gain the upper hand.

Yeah, I think I remember reading something about that.

and 2:

Here in America, our use of the word “consent” complicates the way we view the relation between sex and pleasure. “Consent” is a weighty term otherwise reserved for elevated, formal, even sanitized contexts. Using the term in regards to sex inherently ties a sexual choice to ethical and legal ones (and our unshakable Puritanism once again rears its modest head). But we shouldn’t forget how eminently capable we are of having conflicting or layered desires and of making contradictory decisions over time. Sometimes we act spontaneously and even surprise ourselves. Is there a greater expression of our autonomy than acting spontaneously? Thinking about sex as decision — and not an action requiring consent — may in this way be empowering. A decision is an action that can be neutral and value-independent in a way that offering consent simply cannot.

And here’s where the not making sense really starts to gain steam. I’m going to have to go ahead and go high school English teacher on this.

Whose use of the term consent complicates the way we view the relation between sex and pleasure? America’s use? Americans have very strong conflicting opinions about the meaning of the term “consent.” So, which Americans? And is “complicating” the way we view the relation between sex and pleasure bad or good? Why is this so? The writer is unclear on these points. How does using the word “consent” tie a sexual choice to ethical and legal choices? And is tying one’s sexual choices to ethics or legality useful or not? Again, the writer is unclear.

This sort of murkiness is common in the writing of privileged people. It comes from the belief that everyone shares your perspective, which is the kind of misunderstanding that you can easily develop if society as you know it treats your body and identity as the “norm” from which others deviate. It’s a misperception that does not lead to strong arguments or a solid understanding of the workings of the world. It leads to statements like this:

Thinking about sex as decision — and not an action requiring consent — may in this way be empowering. A decision is an action that can be neutral and value-independent in a way that offering consent simply cannot.

I have read this a few times now. I invite you to do the same. Read it again:

Thinking about sex as decision — and not an action requiring consent — may in this way be empowering. A decision is an action that can be neutral and value-independent in a way that offering consent simply cannot.

Does it make sense?

No. No, it doesn’t.

Despite the lack of clarity, I think I can grasp the author’s argument. There’s some stuff thrown in about American women being Puritans and how sometimes women say no but mean yes and sometimes if you nag them long enough they change their mind. And it seems that the author doesn’t actually know the meaning of the word “consent,” which, to most anti-sexual violence activists implies enthusiasm and enjoyment rather than capitulation. But basically, the author’s conclusion is that he is entitled to more sex. And indeed, he closes with this:

I’m hoping we can start having more guilt-free sex by any means necessary.

That’s the royal “we,” of course.

H/T A few different peeps.

A recent study by the University of Michigan found that American college students don’t have as much empathy as they did 30 years ago (to see where you fit on the empathy scale, take the UMich test here).

The findings are important for a lot of reasons, but they have particular relevance to the incidence of sexual violence on campuses.  The profile for a campus rapist is generally a young, narcissistic man lacking in empathy, especially empathy for women.  And, it’s empathy that makes bystanders feel enough concern to step in to stop a violent situation.  If college students lack empathy, they are more likely to be violent themselves, and less likely to try to stop the violent situations they witness.

Programs that increase empathy have been shown to reduce all types of aggression, and cruelty toward any vulnerable population, including animals, tends to predict cruelty toward other groups.

More importantly, studies have shown that it is possible to increase our capacity for empathy.  People who lack empathy can change, and become more empathic.  Their brains are less active in certain regions, but brains are an amazing thing.  They are plastic, and they can change with effort.

It’s likely that effective campus anti-violence programs would include efforts to increase empathy in students.  Overall compassion, and specifically empathy in bystanders and empathy for women, would greatly decrease violence on campus.  Realistically, this is probably the only way to have a meaningful, long-term impact on the incidence of violence.

It’s worth noting that meaningfully increasing one’s capacity for compassion is unlikely to happen in the course of a one-hour presentation at orientation.  In fact, typical “violence prevention” programs that tell young women to be extra careful, in effect blaming victims for their own assaults, might decrease empathy for survivors of sexual violence.  The most effective programs will focus on increasing compassionate feeling and behavior in offenders and bystanders.  They will be long-term, intensive, and community-wide, not a halfhearted afterthought that gets as much attention as the introductory picnic.

Dear SAFER supporter,

You’re Invited!

What: SAFER Outreach Work Party!
When: Monday, November 29th from 6-9pm
Where: Our Office!
32 Broadway, Suite 1801
New York, NY 10004

Students Active for Ending Rape (SAFER) is in the midst of a big push for the Campus Accountability Project and we NEED YOU to help us get the word out!

We’re looking for volunteers to join us for a one night work party!  Meet the faces behind SAFER and help us gather contact information of schools missing from our national anti-violence initiative, the Campus Accountability Project.

Food!  Music! Excellent Company!

Please bring a laptop with wi-fi capacity and an ID to get into the building.  If you don’t have access to a computer and would like to join us, please send us a message and we will arrange something!

About the Campus Accountability Project
The Campus Accountability Project invites college students to become advocates by researching their schools’ sexual assault policies and find out what their schools are doing to prevent and respond to sexual assault. Students are encouraged to research their school’s policies and programs and submit their findings on our National V-Day/SAFER Campus Accountability Project Database. Our policy review form guides students through specific questions about what their school does and does not offer according to the current policy on the books. Students can begin the process and then save their work and return if needed. A complete policy analysis takes around two hours. Only students can submit to CAP. All CAP submissions are fact-checked by SAFER staff and then published on a public, search-able database which serves as a research tool for activists seeking to make change on their campus.

You can read more about the volunteer position here: http://www.idealist.org/if/idealist/en/SiteIndex/AssetViewer/default?asset=VolunteerOpportunity&asset-id=207933-18

Not based in New York?  No worries!  E-mail us and you can help out from anywhere!

PLEASE RSVP to so we can add you to the security list!

THANK YOU!