I Hate Gender Ideology but I Don’t Hate Trans People
I don’t believe we can win this fight by demonizing an entire group of people. Nor do I want to win it that way.
Reality’s Last Stand is a reader-supported publication. Please consider becoming a paying subscriber or making a one-time or recurring donation to show your support.
I have been speaking out against gender ideology for about five years. During that time, I’ve tweeted extensively (or posted on X, as it’s now called), appeared on numerous podcasts, written countless articles, attended several protests, and even consulted on legislation. I am nothing if not committed. Yet, my commitment—and, more importantly, my intentions—are often called into question because my animosity for the ideology doesn’t automatically extend to individual people—particularly men—who identify as trans. Yes, I believe there are “good ones.”
Trans activists, of course, refuse to accept that I don’t harbor hate against trans people. Because I don’t believe that humans can literally change sex or that “gender” (whatever that means) should take precedence over sex, I am accused of denying their existence—which an accusation equated with hatred. This is, of course, absurd. I am no more denying the existence of people who believe they are trans than I would be denying the existence of a child who insists they are Spider-Man, even when I know they are not. It’s not hateful to acknowledge reality. When Jordan Peterson once denied the existence of lesbians, I laughed and used it as inspiration for an essay arguing that my existence isn’t negated just because Peterson’s interpretation of my sexuality doesn’t align with mine.
Over the past year, however, my refusal to paint all trans-identified people with the same broad brush has sparked backlash from many on my own side, especially over the issue of pronouns. It’s not that I don’t expect or welcome disagreement on this matter—I do, and I understand the other side’s arguments. What shocks me is how quickly this topic has become one of the biggest and, in my experience, most toxic issues among those who critique gender ideology.
This wasn’t always the case—not to this degree. Two years ago, in January 2023, Reality’s Last Stand published “Pronoun Throwdown: Should ‘Preferred Pronouns’ Be Respected?”, a symposium in which many commentators, myself included, shared their views on the matter. My stance then was the same as it is now, and the same as it has been since I started speaking out:
At the end of the day, I am convinced that the countless harms of gender identity ideology stem from forcing people to lie about reality, not from individuals making a private choice about the words they use when speaking about a friend. In fact, I think it is the very human impulse to accommodate and make allowances on a personal level that helps us avoid a mindset which seeks to control others.
Looking back, what stands out about the response to that article was the absence of mobbing or cancelation attempts against those of us who took a less uncompromising stance on pronouns. There was plenty of discussion and disagreement, to be sure, which I welcomed. I hold great respect for the writers who took a much harder line on the issue, and I appreciated that they didn’t seem to harbor any animosity toward me for my views.
As I mentioned in my piece, this debate was already quite heated, and I had previously received some flack for having a transsexual friend for whom I chose (and still choose) to use female pronouns. But that was nothing compared to what happened a year later. In January 2024, the issue of pronouns and befriending trans-identified people resurfaced, as it cyclically seems to do in “gender critical” circles. Seeing people police not only others’ speech but also their associations bothers me, so I made a post about my friend. I also gave fair warning to anyone who might take issue with our friendship that they probably wouldn’t be happy following me.
I expected the post to get a few likes from like-minded followers and perhaps a few critical comments at most. After all, I had always been open about our then four-year friendship, often sharing photos of the two of us.
What actually happened hit me like a freight train. The post went viral, unleashing a relentless torrent of outrage that lasted for weeks. Hundreds of people flooded my mentions. They were “just expressing their concerns,” of course—but when you’re on the receiving end of hundreds of accusations, it doesn’t feel benign. I was called a hypocrite, a sellout, a grifter (because alienating a significant portion of your core audience is a great way to make money, apparently), and much worse.
In weeks that followed, things escalated even further. Some of my most ardent detractors hosted hours-long Spaces and livestreams dissecting the situation. These were often people I’d never liked or interacted with in the first place, yet they acted as though I had personally betrayed them.
The outrage reignited every couple of months over the course of the year. One resurgence coincided with the day I gave birth, nearly nine months after the original post that sparked all the fuss. Someone decided it was the perfect moment to remind people about my friendship (as if, once again, these are things I’ve ever hidden), and yet another round of weeping and gnashing of teeth ensued. I was, of course, blissfully preoccupied with far better things and might never have known about it if a few friends hadn’t come to my defense and informed me.
What I didn’t anticipate, however, was what happened when I shared the first photo of myself holding my newborn daughter on Instagram—a platform that has nothing to do with my activism and is devoted to my personal life. Even there, some “haters” tracked me down, leaving comments under that photo to express their disgust with me.
The outcry over views I’ve long held and never hidden—and which, just two years ago, caused nowhere near this level of controversy—has been dizzying. It reflects how quickly this issue has become deeply polarized. And let me affirm that even though I’ve been very personally hurt by this polarization, I can still understand it. Gender ideology profoundly overreached, causing significant harm to women, children, and society at large. Many people are desperate for it to end, and they genuinely believe the only way forward is through linguistic absolutism and not offering a shred of compassion to the men they see as its driving force.
But I would be betraying myself if I capitulated to appease the mob targeting me. I don’t believe the problem would be solved simply by insisting on sex-based pronouns at all times, nor do I believe all trans-identified people are undeserving of sympathy. First and foremost, I believe in approaching people as individuals because that’s the only way to effectively challenge collectivist and identity- and grievance-based movements like gender ideology.
I refuse to engage in the same divisive tactics gender ideologues use, reducing people to rigid categories like oppressed “trans” people and oppressive “cis” people. A trans identity alone will never be the reason I dislike someone before getting to know them. Of course, I may encounter trans-identified people who have fully bought into gender ideology and, in that case, I certainly won’t like them due to their views. But that’s true of anyone who subscribes to these ideas, regardless of whether or not they claim a trans identity.
Conversely, I might meet a trans-identified person who rejects gender ideology and opposes its core tenets—such as transitioning children and destroying women’s spaces. They may regret their own transition, or perhaps they don’t, but they are critical of how the medical community handles these issues today. Either way, they are nuanced individuals with full lives, and I don’t believe they should be written off entirely because of one characteristic.
Yet, some people do write them off entirely. “There is no good trans,” they say—though this sentiment is often directed to trans-identified males, while the trans-identified females are often approached with a measure of sympathy. I just can’t bring myself to go there. I understand the appeal of framing this issue in black-and-white terms and holding a hard line to eradicate gender ideology. I’ve also heard many argue that those who share my views will eventually arrive at a more hardline position after seeing more of what gender ideology entails.
But I’ve been deep in the trenches. I’ve seen everything there is to see and, if anything, my views have only become more cemented. I don’t believe we can win this fight by demonizing an entire group of people. Nor do I want to win it that way.
As difficult as it’s been to hold my line, it has been worth it. And I know I am not alone. In fact, I believe the more popular position is to focus on freedom of speech, association, and expression. Many people take issue with the authoritarian nature of gender ideology but would otherwise have been happy to embrace a “live and let live” approach. J. K. Rowling’s iconic 2019 tweet that began with “Dress however you please” resonated deeply for a reason, and it still does. Yet even that sentiment has become controversial today among those who have adopted a more hardline stance. Their thinking goes: There are no good men in dresses; they are all dangerous, fetishistic abusers.
Trust me that I recognize the harm caused by many of these men—much of my writing focuses on exactly that. But I can’t make the leap to tar and feather them all.
Perhaps I’m especially sensitive to assumptions based on group affiliation because, as a lesbian, I desperately do not want be associated with all of the harm and insanity of the queer movement. Today, when I meet new people and mention my wife, I’m no longer worried about old-fashioned homophobia; I worry that I’ll be seen as some kind of “queer activist” who might file a human rights complaint over being misgendered.
For me, this comes down to a deep resistance to reducing individuals to their group identities. It’s a core part of how I approach life itself. That’s why I can understand, respect, and even sympathize with those who hold more hardline views, even if I can’t adopt those views myself. I want to always leave room for individuals to defy my expectations and surprise me.
Reality’s Last Stand is a reader-supported publication. If you enjoyed this article and know someone else you think would enjoy it, please consider gifting a paid subscription or making a recurring or one-time donation below. Your support is greatly appreciated.
If you enjoyed this article, you may also like…
 | A guest post by
|
I'm living the nightmare of having a 20-something year old trans son (who believes himself to be a woman). The nightmare isn't so much his belief but rather his adamancy that I share it. And until I do, according to him, there's no point in having any discussions (especially since his one-way screeds directed at me didn't move the needle). In fact, according to him, there's no point in having any relationship at all. I told him that I'm fine using his preferred pronouns in his presence and that I do accept that this is what he believes but that I can't stop believing what I believe (namely, lopping off some parts—which he thankfully hasn't done yet—and adding others doesn't make you a woman). I'm heartbroken at having lost him (for now) and am furious at the ideological movement that has seemingly swallowed him whole, convincing him that his (diagnosed from an early age) gender dysphoria can be resolved by mutilating his body to such an extent that he's admitted he can no longer feel pleasure. And further, that that's somehow worth giving up in order to find his "true" self. I feel like he's joined a cult. I'm not sure if I had a point to make but it sure feels good to get it off my chest.
I completely agree with your nuanced views.
I am impressed by the humanity of your response to the negativity you have received from some on "your own side" - you talk about how you understand and sympathize with them, and why the overreach may have pushed some into such reactivity, but make arguments for why that movement should not follow that "take no prisoners" approach, for both humane and functional reasons.
I think you are right that there are a large number of people who would "live and let live" if the forces pushing gender ideology were not so bent on conquest and domination.
We cannot let ourselves become mutated mirror-world clones of social justice warriors, rigorously policing against any hint of heresy within our ranks. Many of those who push back against critical social justice ideology today were first swayed by noticing how nasty the "side of love" was to any dissent. I don't want to see the same kind of nastiness push people away from the gender critical movement.