Transgender rights (privilege, if you prefer), are an intractable issue in contemporary Western culture.  Is a man who decides he’s a woman entitled to be treated as one?  In the novel Quantum Cannibals Aarluk, a major character, changes from male to female as part of becoming a powerful shaman. (S)He marries and copulates with a nice man, and even adopts a daughter.

Aarluk doesn’t physically change.  In fact, as prelude to adopting Osnat, he uses his male body to rape her.  It’s not easy for a man to completely shed his masculinity.

Conflicting Rights

Abigail Shrier agrees about the problem of transformation in a Wall Street Journal op-ed :

“…in contests of strength and speed, the athletic chasm between the sexes, which opens at puberty, is both permanent and unbridgeable. Once male puberty is complete, testosterone suppression doesn’t undo the biological advantages men possess: larger hearts, lungs and bones, greater bone density, more-oxygenated blood, more fast-twitch muscle fiber and vastly greater muscle mass.”

Martina Navratilova was named the greatest female tennis player in the world for thirty years.  She came out of the closet in 1981 (before it was trendy) but recently has come under heavy criticism for violating the official progressive narrative.  She said that transgender ‘women’ taking part in female athletics “is insane and it’s cheating… It would not be fair.”  How long till she’s silenced by social media?

President Biden seems to disagree.  One of his first Executive Orders was to force schools to allow transgender women to compete with biological women in athletic competitions.  While some see this as a great advance for respect and dignity, others claim that it erases women from sports. Girls competing against people with male bodies will inevitably lose in many sports (and maybe scholarships that go with them).  In some activities (such as wrestling), biological females will inevitably suffer real injuries at the hands of transformed persons.

Transformed Person Shamanism

Aarluk, the fictional transvestite shaman is based on a real phenomenon.  Among some Aboriginal Siberian peoples (and elsewhere in the world), the spirits would order a young man to wear women’s clothes.

“He loses masculine strength, fleetness of foot in the race, endurance in wrestling, and acquires instead the helplessness of a woman. Even his psychical character changes. The transformed person loses his brute courage and fighting spirit, and becomes shy of strangers, even fond of small-talk and of nursing small children.”

Everyone in his village is too frightened by his physical and shamanic power to challenge Aarluk’s gender identity.  Nevertheless he turns out to be a good mother, protecting, teaching, nurturing Osnat.  It takes time, but eventually his daughter (an accomplished scientist) chooses to love and appreciate Aarluk.

What’s Your Equipment?

Is Aarluk a man or a woman?  Is a six-foot, two hundred pound athlete with X & Y chromosomes and male genitals a man or a woman?  Would a one-hundred twenty-pound person with ovaries want to enter a physical competition with such a transformed person?  Would she want to share a locker room with a person with male equipment?  The actress Keira Knightly recently said she would only do sex scenes with a female movie director.  Would she feel comfortable, for example, with a transformed person like Dr. Richard/Rachel Levine, a respected pediatrician and high government official?  It’s never simple.

It’s not simple even with the brute Aarluk:

“Osnat looked at the person who had raped her when they first met. Now the overwhelming feeling she had for Aarluk was – well, she didn’t know what it was. There was no word, no concept that encompassed gratitude, deep affection, revulsion and terror. It wasn’t love, it wasn’t hatred, nor was it somewhere between those feelings. But it was absolutely what she felt.”

If someone sees themselves differently, as a transformed person, to what extent are other people obliged to accept that vision?  Are we allowed our own view?

The post What Are You, Transformed Person? appeared first on Quantum Cannibals.

Much of stereotypical science fiction has courageous heroes traveling into deep space to fend off some kind of alien threat.  In stereotypical fantasy literature, the hero fearlessly battles dragons, demons, or wicked sorcerers.  Given all these brave figures that speculative fiction authors create, should speculative fiction writers be afraid to offend?  More specifically, should they be afraid of antagonizing people, of scaring off a part of their potential market? A colleague recently commented that the words “murderous savages” on the back cover of my novel will repel some readers. He suggested that I delete them. My book though, deals with murderous savages (hence the second word of the title “Quantum Cannibals“).  It’s really the best way to describe them. “Homicidally-gifted sanguineous collectivity”doesn’t do them justice.

Offensive Classics

There is certainly precedent for offending people through literature.  The Merchant of Venice shocked and offended me.  Shylock is the archetype of the unscrupulous,greedy Jew, trying to literally rob the flesh off those he encounters.  How many people, having read Shakespeare, would assume I was unscrupulous and greedy? On the other hand, if Shakespeare had been afraid to offend, would any of his works have any value?

The characters of the American classic Huckleberry Finn have terribly demeaning attitudes towards negros; the word”nigger” is used over two hundred times.  Had the author used the term “black”or “African American” would the reader have been able to get a true sense of the people and atmosphere of the pre-Civil War south?   A school in Pennsylvania pulled the novel from its grade 11 literature program on account of the racist nature of the characters.

Similarly, To Kill a Mockingbird has come under fire for immorality, dealing with rape and racism, and using the word “nigger.”  Nonetheless, the book and the movie educated many Americans about the evils of prejudice and vigilante justice, along with the danger of reflexively believing a woman who accuses someone of rape.  The novel also emphasizes the value of charity and empathy with the mentally challenged.  Nonetheless, sixty years later this book’s depiction of mid twentieth century America offends people.

Wells’ The Time Machine appears initially to be about conflict between an enlightened society and a bunch of savages but resolves itself as a discussion of intense class warfare.  Critics have called the Lord of The Rings “racist,” for among other things, condoning prejudice against Orcs, “a brutish,aggressive, repulsive and generally malevolent species.”  Should Tolkein have explained them better; their broken homes, deprived childhoods, the oppression they suffered at the hands of humans, elves and hobbits?  The very concept that some species, races or people are worse than others is unacceptable to many readers.

A Call to Action!

So what is a writer to do?  Should he be afraid to offend and thus preemptively avoid upset, or should he take the Lenny Bruce approach, saying nigger, nigger, nigger, kike,kike, kike often enough that it stops being offensive?  In one of his comedy monologues Bruce suggested that hotels should describe the breasts of their female patrons to their male guests and advise in which room these horny women could be found.  A person would likely be arrested today for that kind of talk.  It landed Bruce in jail many times during the 1960’s.  If he feared, he did not let him stop him.

Western democratic nations generally don’t arrest novelists because of their fiction. In countries with totalitarian governments a provocative story in which a protagonist acts against social norms could land the author in jail, or worse.  Sci-fi author Philip K. Dick was quite concerned about the scope of totalitarianism:

The greatest menace in the twentieth century is the totalitarian state. It can take many forms: left-wing fascism,psychological movements, religious movements, drug rehabilitation places,powerful people, manipulative people; or it can be in a relationship with someone who is more powerful than you psychologically.

Dick suffered more at the hands of his own personal demons rather than any totalitarian entity.  Nonetheless he’s been castigated as a neo-con libertarian for statements such as these, and some readers turn away from him. Progressives have savagely denounced Orson Scott Card on account of his conservatism.  Readers who love Ender’s Game ask whether they should boycott Card because of his radical conservatism, an outgrowth of his strong Mormon beliefs.  Although there is little in his fiction to disturb people, he is not afraid to offend people by upholding his values.  Should a writer’s politics or values be separated from his writing?

In some cases, the politics are part of the creation.  Terry Goodkind’s Sword of Truth series features a brutal antagonist in the process of conquering the world in the name of collectivization.  In Faith of the Fallen, Goodkind presents a close-up view of the misery imposed by socialism.  Even though the setting is the equivalent of an alternate-world medieval society, the story provides a sense, an understanding of contemporary life in places like Venezuela or North Korea.  This has made Goodkind and his works an anathema to many progressive readers.

Some have argued that fantasy fiction tends to be conservative because of the setting: usually lands ruled by kings and princes.  Urban, or modern fantasy is growing in popularity, but has far to go to catch up to the medieval approach.

A Writer Should Not be Afraid to Offend

Should a writer be afraid to offend people, afraid of driving away potential readers?  The answer depends on another question: why is he writing?  If he wants to get a message across to readers,whether the evils of socialism, the depredations of capitalism or the hazards of conformity, he can be sure that someone will get ticked off .  Is the offensive material an essential part of the message?  Could Lenny Bruce or Mark Twain have made their points without saying nigger?

Vegan Cannibals

If the story is trying to teach about a real place or population that has repulsive practices, it would be dishonest to whitewash those.  The Aztec  fed on captives and members of their own population.  You can’t depict them as vegan, claiming to present an alternate reality.  When you take away the essence to make something palatable, you are not left with the same thing.  A bland Jalapeno pepper is not a Jalapeno.

If the story is for the sake of entertainment (whether of the writer or the reader), there is a lot more flexibility.  The author isn’t watering down any message.  There is still a matter of accuracy (eg. vegan Aztec), but with the lower goal of entertainment, the risks are reduced.

Yes, I said the “lower goal of entertainment.”  I’m taking a chance that I’m offending you with this.  For me literature is a means of conveying truths about the world, about people and their relations.  On the other hand, if a story is not entertaining, no one will be interested in its truths.

Fear of Cannibals

When I was advised to delete the term”murderous savage” from the cover of Quantum Cannibals, I demurred.  When I was advised to remove the homosexual sex scene near the start of the book, I did so.  I agreed that it was too distracting and concluded that deleting it would not detract from the message I wanted to convey (one of the characters was modeled after the pederast poet Allan Ginsburg).  Though I don’t believe in transgender “rights,” I did not water down the transvestite shaman in Quantum Cannibals.  It (he/she) is based on a truth which has been documented in the records of the American Museum of Natural History and elsewhere.  It was more important for me to convey this truth to my readers than to worry about whom I might offend (including myself).

“Though people differ in color and creed, they all love, quarrel, protect their children, etc., exactly as we do.  The message is clear: we should love them because they are like us.  But that statement has its questioning brother: what if they aren’t like us?”
—Dr. Edmund Carpenter

The post Should Writers be Afraid to Offend? appeared first on Quantum Cannibals.

It’s time to modify Descartes’s famous line I think therefore I am.  It should now read I think I am, therefore I am.  The original is no longer relevant, because if thinking was a condition of existence, there would not be many people left in our part of the world.

Proof can be found on the front page of the National Post of October 24^th, 2017.  “Women’s prison left to cope after getting male inmate who identifies as female.”  A fully functional, unaltered male, in a living unit with eleven (other) women.  She thinks she is a woman, therefore she is a woman.

Another story on the same page of the newspaper discusses an acupuncturist who posed as a neurosurgeon.  The article is vague on whether he actually thought he was a neurosurgeon, or was just pretending, like a cross-dressing man pretending to be a woman.  One of the “doctor’s” victims reported him to the College of Physicians and Surgeons. “The (regulators) knew about it and did nothing,” he said.  Perhaps the College felt it would be offensive to challenge the acupuncturist/ neurosurgeon’s identity.

Comparing the two articles it seems that the newspaper accepts the prisoner’s identity as a woman, but refuses the “doctor’s.”  This is inconsistent, probably hypocritical.  Gender is much more innate, more immutable than profession.  If someone identifies as a surgeon, a lawyer, an accountant, why do they have less rights than someone who, through no fault of his/her own, was born with male DNA?

I Think Therefore I’m Not

It’s true that an untrained neurosurgeon can cause grievous harm.  The article about the acupuncturist who worked as a surgeon discusses a three-hundred thousand dollar payment awarded to a victim.  But is harm just a matter of scale?  Is there harm in letting transgender men, “transitioning” women, into a ladies’ locker room?  What about a white civil rights activist who thinks she’s black?  Fake Indians?  Or even smaller in scale, what happens when a former man takes part in a women’s athletic competition, overwhelming the competition with size, strength and speed?  Women (from birth), who could be athletic stars lose out to the (former) men.  Or what about women who just don’t like men gawking at them in the ladies’ room?

I Think Therefore I Clean

A man becoming a women isn’t limited to post-modern industrialized civilization.  Among hunter-gatherer cultures, at the behest of the spirits a man could undergo a shamanic transformation and become a woman.  Most often though, all this meant was wearing a woman’s hairstyle, sometimes even donning women’s clothes.  Rarely, there were men who were considered fully transformed.  These latter kept their male names and their male physique as they tended house, cleaning, carrying out all the domestic duties of a wife.  In the novel Quantum Cannibals (remember, this website is about the novel ), a bellicose man is a rapist and a loving mother.

I Think Therefore I’m Silent

One had to be a powerful shaman to fully (so to speak) change gender, so the ongoing ridicule was done in whispers.  The threat of harm was too strong.  If one wants to go against a transformed man in a contemporary post-modern high-tech Western society, it’s also best to speak in whispers, or not say anything at all.  If word gets out that you think a man becoming a woman (or woman becoming a man) is perverse, that such transformations are absurd, you will be scorned as trans-phobic, perhaps as a racist or Nazi (though none of those appellations make sense).  The spirits will apply their power through social media to attack you.

In California you can be prosecuted for using a male pronoun for someone who thinks they are female.  “I think I am, therefore…” you better accept it, no matter how ludicrous it may be.  The spirits, perhaps demons have subjugated reality.  An acupuncturist does surgery.  A computer scientist is an influential health and nutrition author, though her information is all wrong.  A billionaire drama teacher is Prime Minister of Canada.  A man walks into the women’s bathroom, and nobody says a word.

I Think Therefore I Speak

If we want reality to prevail over the spirits, maybe it’s time we start thinking.

The post I Think Therefore I Really Am… appeared first on Quantum Cannibals.

Dangerous Classification

Classification can help you sort things out, make informed decisions.  If someone was to threaten you with a gun, it would be helpful to know whether it was an assault rifle or a Nerf gun (soft foam bullets).

Sometimes classification can be used to obscure, to prevent the making of informed decisions.  The Obama administration classified the Fort Hood massacre of 2009 as workplace violence, even though the perpetrator had been in touch with Al Qaida just before.  The death of a teenager throwing Molotov cocktails at civilians was classified as “tragic.”

There is a debate going on whether the Ottawa shooter at the Parliament Buildings was driven by a dangerous religion or mental illness.  The classification of his motives is a meaningless discussion.  He was a terrorist.

Another example of misleading classification is the concept of “religion.”  It has countless definitions; some positive, many pejorative.  They reflect the many different  aspects of life it contends with, from environmentalism to disease, from meditation to massacres.  Is a belief system that has no compunction about slaughtering non-believers in the same category as one that says life is sacred?  In the same category as a system that declares all humans have a right to religious freedom?   While Christian and Jewish fundamentalists may at times be annoying, they threaten no one’s life in the name of God.  Does anyone fear a pious Hindu?

“A religion is a system of symbols which acts to establish powerful , pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by formulating conceptions of a  general order of existence and clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic.”
– Clifford Geertz

When we bring Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, shamanism, animism, etc. all into one big category, religion, it says they are all similar.

Dangerous Assumption

They’re not.  A mosque is not a church, which is not a synagogue, which is not an ashram.  Their symbols are different, their beliefs are different, but most importantly, their actions based on those symbols and beliefs are different.  If we assume that leaders from all religions promote peace and kindness, like Pope John Paul II, or the Dalai Lama we will be unable to respond when they act otherwise.

Dangerous Religion

When homicidal youth flock to only one particular system of beliefs and symbols, that system deserves its own, unique classification.  When the historical death toll of that system dwarfs all the others put together, we can’t say it’s like Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism or any of the others.  It’s not.

Your comments are welcome

The post Dangerous Religion appeared first on Quantum Cannibals.