You slowly wake up in a dark room, the only light is the blinding one directly above your head that seems to be slowly incinerating your eyeballs, the rest of the room is black. As you gain consciousness and your brain begins to make sense of your surroundings you notice you're lying on an uncomfortable cot, your extremities bound. You turn your head from side to side and discover beside you is a familiar face, however although it is familiar it brings no comfort. On the opposite side a stern faced man with a hypodermic needle is stationed next to a machine with dials. Upon further observation you realize that you are connected to this machine. The familiar faced man slowly moves closer into your pan of vision, he turns his hand so that the back of it faces you, all fingers extended with the thumb tucked.
"How many fingers am I holding up?"
"Four." You reply
He reiterates his question "and if I say it is not four but five, then how many?"
"Four." You again reply
The stern faced man adjusts the dial and suddenly a sharp pain surges through your body. The air tears into your lungs as you clench your teeth and sweat beads from your forehead. The interragotor remains standing over you with his four fingers extended. The dial is than turned back down and the pain eases slightly.
"How many fingers?" He asks again
"Four"
The dial is than cranked higher this time.
"How many fingers?" He asks again as you contort in pain.
"Four! Four! Four! What else can I say four!"
The needle is than turned up further. Your vision blurs due to the pain, the four fingers like pillars in your face
"HOW MANY FINGERS?"
"FOUR! FOUR! HOW CAN YOU GO ON!? FOUR!"
The dial turns higher, the familiar faced man shouts
"HOW MANY!!"
"FIVE! FIVE! FIVE!"
The above scene is essentially ripped from the pages of George Orwells novel 1984. In it the main character Winston is taken to a political prison for thought crime. Leading up to the above scene the character O'Brien who acts as the interragotor asks Winston "Do you remember writing in your diary freedom is the freedom to say two plus two equals four?" The diary entry is Winston's way of trying to convey that the truth lies in the external world separate from ideology. The torture scene, that takes place shortly after O'Brien reminds Winston of the writing is a painful lesson that the parties reality supercedes objective reality and therefore whatever the party says is true IS true despite objective evidence.
This construction and subjection to an ideological alternate reality in the novel 1984 is actually reminiscent of real world totalitarian governments. North Korean escapee turned author Yeonmi Park actually read 1984 after defecting from her home country. In her book "In Order to live" she references 1984 and uses a major theme from the book 'doublethink' to describe the mindset of North Koreas people. She's quoted as saying "North Koreans have two stories running in their heads at all times, like trains on parallel tracks. One is what you are taught to believe; the other is what you see with your own eyes. It wasn’t until I escaped to South Korea and read a translation of George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four that I found a word for this peculiar condition: doublethink. This is the ability to hold two contradictory ideas in your mind at the same time—and somehow not go crazy. This “doublethink” is how you can shout slogans denouncing capitalism in the morning, then browse through the market in the afternoon to buy smuggled South Korean cosmetics." She also describes the feeling of the Government's control in the book, and the last part of this quote sounds eerily similar to the lesson O'Brìen was attempting to teach Winston "They need to control you through your emotions, making you a slave to the state by destroying your individuality, and your ability to react to situations based on your own experience of the world."
They control you from the very root of you, your thoughts and emotions and in turn your reality and dilute your ability to interact with the actual, objectionable world. The intention of the state whether it be the fictional one of Ocenia in 1984 or the very much real one of North Korea is to dilute actual reality so they can create an alternate maluable version that they can control.
So what does this àll have to do with gender fluidity and non binaryism? Well the core of it is within the language. Healthline.com defines non binary as "The term “nonbinary” can mean different things to different people. At its core, it’s used to describe someone whose gender identity isn’t exclusively male or female. If someone tells you they’re nonbinary, it’s always important to ask what being nonbinary means to them. Some people who are nonbinary experience their gender as both male and female, and others experience their gender as neither male nor female." Wikipedia and dictionary.com offer similar definitions. So let's analyze this, the very first sentence of the definition says "nonbinary can mean different things to different people." Right away the definition is subjective and is defined differently depending on the individual. Than it further "defines" the term as not male or female, this like someone asking you to define the word tree and you respond with not sky. Than the definition doubles down on the subjectivity by explaining that you have to ask the individual what the term means to them than gives some examples of how the definition can change based on the individual. This is not how language works, this is never how language worked. The point of language is to have words that mean specific things separate from the individual that represent a common reality. If I use the word rock for example everyone knows what I'm talking about there's no need to ask me well what does "rock" mean to you? Dictionary.com offers a similar definition of the word gender fluidity "Gender-fluid refers to a nonbinary gender identity or gender expression that’s not fixed and is capable of changing over time." Again this definition is completely subjective and really just refers to two other terms nonbinary and gender identity to define itself. As already established the term nonbinary changes meaning depending on the individual making it subjective and Merriam Webster describes gender identity as "a person's internal sense of being male, female, some combination of male and female, or neither male nor female" again this definition is completely subjective to the individual as it is one's internal sense. So all of these definitions are left to the individual to make up within their own mind and these definitions can change depending on the person and in the case of fluidity it can change within the same individual at any time. So anyone who uses these terms can define themselves as what they want when they want and create their own subjective reality within their mind in regards to their gender that us external to them must respect and accept regardless of the objective physical and biological characteristics of the person. This is the equivalent of O'Brien holding up his fingers with his thumb tucked to our face and saying "and if I say it is not four but five, then how many?" Than demanding we agree with his statement.
Now I know this article has a harsh tone but I don't have a problem with the nonbinary/gender fluid community or them as individuals. I view the ideology through the same lense as I view religion. I myself am not religious but I believe that you as an individual have the right to practice whatever belief system you wish and if that's a practice that believes people can be both genders, no gender or that gender can flip with the direction of the wind than so be it. However you don't have the right to make people non consenualy participate in your ideology and in the case of preferred pronouns demand that they alter their speech to conform to it. This is what I and a free society should have an issue with, the forced participation in this whether it be through policies or worse, laws that enforce it. Laws and policies that limit speech or force people to accept a version of reality that is not grounded in objectional fact are very dangerous and mirror the types of policies seen in fictional and real world totalitarian governments whether or not they where started with the best of intentions. In fact there are already laws that do enforce this. Bill C4 in Canada that bans conversion therapy defines conversion therapy in a number of bullet points. One of those points stating to "Repress or reduce a person’s gender expression that does not conform to the sex assigned to the person at birth". Taken to its extreme me not using a persons preffered pronouns and addressing them by their biological ones (the ones grounded in objectional reality and fact) can be considered repression and is now illegal. In the end my hope is that society pushes back against this and stands up for individual freedom and our right to free speech over group ideology and identity before we become the brainwashed citizens of Oceania ending up in political prison for thought crime. Like Yeonmi said "North Koreans have two stories running in their heads at all times, like trains on parallel tracks. One is what you are taught to believe; the other is what you see with your own eyes..." This type of ideology and the laws that enforce them requires that type of thinking.
Sources
Non-binary definition, https://www.healthline.com/health/transgender/nonbinary, Mere Abrams, December 20, 2019
Gender Fluid definition, https://www.dictionary.com/e/gender-sexuality/gender-fluid/, Author Unknown, March 12, 2018
Ģender identity definition, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender%20identity, Author Unknown, Publication date Unknown
Quotes, "In Order to Live", Yeonmi Park, 2015
Canada: Bill C-4 Banning Conversion Therapy Comes Into Force, https://www.loc.gov/item/global-legal-monitor/2022-01-19/canada-bill-c-4-banning-conversion-therapy-comes-into-force/, Tariq Ahmed, 2022
Comments
No posts