Phillips shares her take on gender-neutral child-rearing
. Guess what, she's not in favour!
For someone’s gender — along with their sexuality — is a key element of that individual’s identity. If they are confused about their gender, they are likely to grow up confused about their identity.
Confused … to the point where they might learn to think about it. Objectively. How terrifying.
Indeed, it is hard to think of a more fundamental way of mucking up a child and imperilling his healthy development.His
? Ah, a slip. We're worried about emasculating little Olly. Heaven forbid that a boy should be denied training in the essential Phillipsian virtues of competition, aggression, stiff upper lippery.
People suffering from innate gender confusion, when they feel they are trapped in the body of the opposite gender to the one to which they belong, are tragic cases.
Ah, the old cliché of the tragic tranny. Perhaps if we were invited to think about gender from an early age, it would be easier to bear the … prejudice.
The rest of the article is completely incoherent — amusingly, the subhead used to break up the text is "Lunacy" — as Phillips tries to take on her favourite baddies all at once — the left, feminists, gay rights activists and academia — armed with a couple of vague nods to evolutionary psychology and utterly unsupported one-line arguments like these:
Human identity is formed by the union of male and female.
That's some impressive determinism.
Sexual and gender differences lie at the very heart of what it is to be a human being.
"Sexual and gender"? Either she believes they're one and the same, 'biology', in which case this is tautology; or she accepts the distinction, which must lead her to realise that "sexual differences" and "gender differences" are, um, different.
And surely "sexual and gender differences" lie at the heart of what it is to be a man
or a woman
, rather than a human being. Which is what Sasha Laxton's parents want Sasha to think about.
The dual goal is to marginalise men and to upend society’s fundamental moral codes.
I've no idea why thinking about gender would marginalise men. It does, though, reveal whose interests Phillips might have in mind.
Having first been told they can behave sexually in whatever way they want, people are now being told they can be sexually whatever they want. And anyone who objects to this will be told they are a bigot.
Here's proof of Phillips' earlier point that confusion can be a dangerous thing. Alas, it's Phillips who's in a muddle. For people to be "sexually whatever they want" requires surgery. Sasha Laxton is sexually a boy or a girl; s/he is simply being encouraged to make up hir own mind about what that means.
Oh, and Phillips is indeed a bigot.