Does a man have the right to identify himself as a woman and enter their locker rooms and bathrooms, demanding equal rights for their self-identification? Does a person have the right to identify herself as a native American and, when filling out forms for employment or college, indicate her ethnicity as such, even though she is not? Should the force of law support such self-identifications which contradict the physical facts and insist that society accommodate any such self-identifications?
Where is the line between socially protected self-identification in conflict with physical facts and delusion? Can physically unrelated people identify themselves as family and represent themselves as such on legal forms? Can an adult self-identify as a child and thus obligate his parents to take care of him his entire life?
There are physical realities that exist which are not transformed by how one chooses to conceptualize themselves or others and which are not changed by altering clothes or body parts. Men are not women, and women are not men, no matter how much anyone believes that one can become the other. Even if the whole world calls a woman a man, it is not so. That’s just the physical reality. No amount of self or public identification as such makes Elizabeth Warren a Native American or Shaun King black or Bruce Jenner a woman.
A person can dress up, obtain surgeries and call themselves whatever they like; that does not obligate the rest of society to indulge their particular conceptualization of themselves. I don’t have a problem with people doing any of that to themselves and for their own personal reasons, but surely the rest of us should not be forced by law or even compelled by PC obligation to indulge their self-conceptualization.
Do people have the right to self-identify in contradiction to the physical facts and expect the force of law to make society accept and conform to their concept of themselves? If I refuse to indulge your particular conceptualization of yourself, or as a business refuse to indulge, am I being a “hater”? Am I being “intolerant”? Is it my job to protect the feelings and promote a sense of “equality” and “enfranchisement” for those that self-identify in conflict with physical reality?
Further, won’t the social and legal demand to ignore physical realities in favor of protecting the feelings of such groups, and in fact make it a crime to state those physical realities or act in accordance with them, most certainly cause problematic, even dire unintended consequences in the future? A population trained to ignore reality in favor of sentimental, feel-good, virtue signalling memes can be manipulated to do virtually anything given the right narrative-messaging.