[1124] Anomaly

I'm "weird." I know I'm weird. It's been apparent my entire life. I do and say the things you won't. The fact that I'm writing is weird. The fact that I've been writing for nearly 20 years is weird. I live in a weird house. I approach normal things like TV in a weird way. I'm in a weird field and trying weird ways to attempt to do business. There's something(s) about what I was born with that differentiate me. It's more than something like brown eyes or curly hair, but it's also no more than "boring" attributes like that put to work over time.

I'm still in the woods of Peter Boghossian and his interviews with people who have been bitten by reactionary forces. He can get exhausting in how much he lets on, but I think his core perspective and points are sound. He wants evidence and reason. He wants conversation. He wants to figure out how we protect institutions from the human propensity to devolve into tribal incoherence. He's weird.

I'm increasingly aware of how weird it is to want to "do better." A growth, evidence, and accountable mindset are the exception, not the rule. I happened to have watched the first episode of The Imagineering Story. Walt Disney was a weird generator from which the whole of what we know as amusement parks has followed. It took dozens of imagineers and thousands of people to put it all together, but he pushed everyone over the cliffs. It makes me think about the first time I heard that it's something like 5% of overly-motivated and radicalized revolutionaries that overthrow something or kick off new eras. The vast majority of the population is living in the wake of a relatively small handful.

To be sure, I have serious doubts about the "great man of history" narratives. I do not think they take away from my own sense of weirdness nor the impact of small deliberate pushes where something hasn't been pushed before. I don't think the future is inevitable, and the choices and focus some maintain in their realms have an enormous spill-over effect. We see this in medicine, the leadership of certain countries and companies, and in the wake of the death of the stabilizing force in our own families.

What constitutes the difference? Why am I weird? Why, and this is from Boghossian, do pretty much all people fall for the latest trends, political waves, language hijacking, and others just seem constantly skeptical and impervious? Why am I willing to see the reason in J.K. Rowling, yet the people who know her will spend years voicing pain and concern? Why do I care about gun violence statistics, but most will belabor the worst anecdotes devoid of 95% of the context? Why can I understand why Kyle Rittenhouse was deemed not guilty, even if I think he has the most cunty punchable Ben Shapiro-esc face that I've seen in a while, and question the motives of anyone carrying around guns?

I want, genuinely, to not believe incorrect or dumb things. That's the weird difference. I want that more than fitting in. We're a tribal species who does not inherently see the dangers of the tribal wisdom that maintains a certain internal coherence. Whether or not that internal coherence comports with reality, evidence, or consistent accountability does not even enter the conversation sometimes until it's litigated or there's concentrated sustained outrage.

For the longest time, I did not understand why trans issues were even part of the political conversation. As I've listened to more and more of these interviews, it's becoming clearer the lanes of disingenuous outrage and language being used to hijack our understanding. I was perfectly unaware of how deep the corruption went or how it manifested. As a liberal, leftist, generally "live and let live" person who vehemently hates religion, barely tolerates guns, and wishes we had drive-through abortions, I'm going to instinctively say "Yeah, trans, whatever, let them do what they want."

Oops. Except, the science wasn't there. The journals purporting to have the science were publishing literal garbage invented by Boghossian himself to prove a point. The "it's not dangerous to block puberty" and "children know what they are" narratives are just lies. The stats on people who de-transition, who turn out just to be gay or have autism, or who have some often well-documented mental health struggles overwhelm the actual data and story of what it means to be pursuing "trans rights."

You say something like that, you get labeled. Not by the data or the scientists or the people with direct experience who might testify. You're a "terf" or "transphobe" or "hateful" or whatever damming epithet is trending that month. You're silenced, and depending on what place you occupy in society, punished. We've been doing this dance long enough that those punishments are getting reversed after lawsuits, and the adults in the room have woken up to the liability of riding trends instead of science.

The battle wasn't about whether or not we should accept trans people. The battle is about language and facts of biology. I don't think anyone sincerely gives a shit how you wish to dress, modify your body, or present in the world. I think everyone who is reasonable cares about male bodies beating the fuck out of a woman's in a physical competition. I think we need to protect the facts of sexual dimorphism, know the numbers behind exceptionally rare intersex conditions and what that constitutes, and be of the general constitution of taking claims seriously, investigating them with evidence, and opening debate in service to policy.

Is it actually a good thing to build into a curriculum for kindergarteners to entertain the idea that they're trans? It seems not. It doesn't "feel" wrong or right to me, the evidence suggests children are dumb and confused. That's what it is to be a child before we even introduce longitudinal studies, which exist, and we could talk about, if we actually gave a fuck about raising healthy children. Is it actually a good thing to erase the differences between the sexes? The evidence suggests there's a catastrophic impact socially, psychologically, and disproportionately bad compared to any given individual who wishes to insist they are different than how they were born.

Doubt shouldn't be a death sentence. Questions are not harm. Doubt and questions are not hatred, erasure, denial, or evidence of some immutable destructive power complex.

I was absolutely fascinated the day I got railroaded by 15 people on facebook under a former friend's post. She talked about binding her chest and I think was entertaining non-binary? I was already sympathetic and on the crowd's side, but all that was on offer was incoherent hatred. The attempt at a conversation wasn't about her as it was some spin-off related to hormone blockers or something. I was a transphobe, ignorant, impatient, unwilling; anything but a sentiment that was trying, engaging, or sharing the evidence of what was forming my view. I literally hooked up with the friend in question, but somehow I'm "afraid," but my dick wasn't? I "hate" her for being uncomfortable with her femininity or sexuality? I'm antagonistic or evil by referring to her as "her" when I have no clue what she may or may not wish to be called today having not interacted for pushing a decade?

I fought pretty much everyone I could find about religion versus science for 4 years of my life. I read every book. I watched hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of debates, lectures, and panels. I was as detailed and evidence-based as you could get about the 30-odd things tangential to "the debate" the New Atheists kicked off. That shit was my world. I persuaded no one. Evidence mattered to me, not to the faithful. "Evidence" was merely a fungible concept to them, not the preponderance of probable reality. They were not foundationally situated to hear me, nor was I aware of the nature of the game I was really trying to play.

The same rules apply in counseling. I persuade no one. I'm speaking a different language. I'm trying to get them to turn the insights of evidence into their own working practice. You don't know the same things I do because you're not practicing the same things I am. I say sometimes there's a difference between knowing something "intellectually" and knowing it "in your bones." It's the difference between physically working to create something, and telling yourself "Oh yeah, I could do that." You almost certainly can't, not as you are now, but the hours, weeks, or years it takes to get there, what you could do starts to manifest in reality. What "I can really play" manifests frustratingly as a direct proportion to how often I'm practicing my guitar.

You can get to a place where you're not as emotionally reactive and self-justifying. You can read that and profess to be a certain way, but I guarantee there's a large majority of people who read the names Kyle Rittenhouse or J.K. Rowling and have been running their prepared-for-them speech the entire time they've not-read everything else here. The reaction is dictating, not reason, not curiosity. You know how I know? Because I still feel a certain kind of way talking about Rittenhouse. I've never held animosity towards Rowling, as I found it self-evident that women need their own space free from dicks.

I've got some broad rules. The name-callers are wrong. I say this as an incredibly inventive shit-talker. If your "side" is stuck on labeling someone, and cannot be moved to offer data, reason, patience, or listen to a divergent point of view, you're just wrong. I'm someone who calls his state senator a Nazi every few days. My state senator wrote a letter saying he wouldn't certify the election. If tomorrow he sponsors a bill that raises the minimum wage to $30 an hour, I'll tell you my nazi senator has a great grasp of faux predatory inflation and the needs of his broke-ass constituents. I'd call him a Nazi to his face, and give him credit where it's due.

The silencers are wrong. There is no "platform." You have a voice. "Crazy" people have a voice. You're crazy about something. If you're uninterested in learning how to identify and incorporate what makes you or them crazy, you're wrong. If you can't talk and articulate, or more likely just refuse to be bothered, you are wrong. You hurt the project of long-term societal sustainability and undermine whatever underlying liberal ideals that keep you comfortable.

Boghossian does a series where he breaks down NPR segments. It's been widely acclaimed by people, also weird, but like me, who genuinely want to learn and do better. If you don't have it in you to be perpetually swayed by what's popular or normal, when you hear endless reams of propaganda or unscientific superficial takes, it frustrates and bores you. I think we're so unsophisticated and dishonest, we think the Candace Owens' and Ann Coulters' of the world are fundamentally different in their instantiated absurd propensities to dodge and obscure a subject while professing their independent or critical thinking capacity. Crazy fucks make shit up and don't hear words for what they actually mean. Why would you ever want to emulate them?

Your god forbid you ever read a blog of mine echoing fear for fear's sake. Pretending there aren't people doing the work compiling the data on whatever the subject might be. I entertain the idea indefinitely that I'm wrong. I want to be less wrong. Why don't you? I want to be articulate. I want to have a real shot at accomplishing the things I profess to care about. I want us all to feel more understood, capable, and alive in what connects us. That cannot happen if you "disagree with biology" or "those aren't MY numbers," or you "don't feel that comports with your experience." Ok. Well. Your experience, like my experience, is infinitely small, corrupt, and comprised of seemingly contradictory forces. I'm willing to ask if my feelings make sense. Why aren't you?

I used to believe in the Southern Poverty Law Center statistics. I would previously have said of course you can trust The American Academy of Pediatrics. I would say listen to NPR or VICE. It's not "merely inconvenient" about who does crimes, in what neighborhoods, and why people die. You're allowed to worry about wildly divergent cultures poorly integrating into yours. You're allowed to believe you're the superhero of your own life with your weapons and grudge against authority and state influence. You're obligated to suspend every reactionary posture in service to another question. You're obligated to maintain a certain level of integrity in the face of any claim. Go on, simply disagree with that and scream at me. Let's keep getting exactly what we deserve.