TERF

I am old enough to remember when the lesbian/gay community fought tooth-and-nail against including bisexuals into their umbrellic microcosm. Yes, the very same people who were screaming - nay, demanding - inclusion suddenly gatekeeping their own subculture with the same rhetoric used against them. And now? the ubiquitous LGBT community (funny how that works) is once again trying to gatekeep by attempting to exclude trans from their precious LGB nomenclature.

I couldn't quite put my finger on it, but yesterday it finally dawned on me that gatekeeping itself is nothing more than an appellatio ad puritatem logical fallacy. Colloquially, No True Scotsman. But further musing had me seriously wonder why gatekeeping was so pervasive in the first place. What is to be personally gained by such a vocal opinion? Even if they consider themselves a part of the LGB community, how are they affected by the inclusion or exclusion of LGBT at an individual level? Does it somehow threaten them? If the answer is, "yes" they've tied their identity to something extrinsic which, for the uninitiated, is generally perceived as absolutely frightening and is an entirely different (and far more serious) conversation not covered here.

Fifteen years ago I had a conversation with a trans individual who was, shall we say, "dismissive" of poly folk. During the ensuing discussion one could almost suggest even close-minded. At the time, that surprised me. I've come to realize that as humans, we ALL have our quirks, our pet peeves, and yes, even our prejudices. Because we are all individuals even within the ideologies in which we choose to label ourselves.

Someone on my timeline recently posted something about (believe it or not) almond milk not really being milk. Which, in and of itself is denotatively accurate, but is that really important? Only in the semantical sense, not the practical. But this wasn't an argument about when and where applying semantics becomes important. Rather a full-on, emotion-filled attack on applying the word, "milk" to plant-based by-products.

Its not that I struggled with how anyone, ever, could get so emotionally vested in something as inconsequential to the trajectory of their life as milk, rather the complete lack of awareness which surrounds the use of common descriptive terms as a functional, practical language aid. Is this really the hill they want to die on? Probably not. It does however illustrate something far more pervasive; a distinct lack of critical thinking skills. Which, in the case of almond milk, is overtly benign. However, if they can't critically think their way out of an emotional reaction to milk substitutes, what happens when they're faced with something even incrementally more important to dissect?

Being trans doesn't even have a specific denotation in which to argue, which brings me to TERFs (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) and their ilk. Even if it did, why oh why (or even how) does it matter to them? What *specific* thing(s) in their life are affected by what other people may or may not choose to do? Equally as important, Courtier's reply fallacy. I don't mean this as an insult, because I fall victim to it far too often myself. In short, they have absolutely no idea what they're talking about, which is why no one who does, pays any attention to them whatsoever. Seriously, when they are elbows-deep in their emotionally-triggered rant and either A) confuse, B) have no knowledge of, or C) outright reject the entire spectrum of medical science (most of which has changed since we were in high school) regarding (in no particular order), chromosomal sex, biological sex, hormonal sex, and all the cellular variations which can further mutate the results ad nauseam - stuff I have difficulty even comprehending - they remain absolutely certain of their correctness, because people who lack any real critical thinking skills often are. Those of us who have it, are always, always, always second-guessing ourselves and trying to improve our knowledge.

Regardless, a complete lack of comprehension of science and logic both doesn't answer the question of why they feel compelled to gatekeep an arbitrarily applied label, and I feel if they could answer that and that alone, we might all be better off.