The daily wire

NBC News inadvertently dismantles trans ideology.

Breaking the ‌Narrative: NBC News Accidentally‌ Debunks Transgenderism

It’s not every day that a news article from a mainstream media ⁢outlet truly shocks you. We’re all ⁣used to the predictable narratives at this ⁣point. Most of it’s just⁤ noise. But the other day, there was a very notable exception to this ⁣general rule.

An article published by NBC News, of all places, just‍ blew up the entire narrative ‍of transgenderism. Out​ of nowhere, NBC came out with a well-researched, in-depth piece ⁤that completely debunks the entire concept — eradicates the whole ideology,⁤ you might even say. They even quote⁢ several all-important experts⁣ at‌ prestigious universities, who concur that the madness needs to end. That’s right — after years of insisting that anyone can change their gender at ⁤will, simply by wishing it, they’ve given⁣ up. Sanity has prevailed. Not since ⁢NBC News aired Katie Couric’s colonoscopy, live ​on air, has the network produced content so unexpected and jarring. Yet it is a very welcome departure from the norm. I mean this article is welcome, not the colonoscopy.

A Surprising Revelation

Now, to be clear, as you might have guessed by now, NBC News published this‍ in-depth analysis without realizing what they were doing. Self-awareness, as ever,⁤ is in short supply in the ⁢mainstream media. But there’s no denying that’s what they did: they obliterated, point-by-point, any ​logical argument in favor ⁢of‍ transgenderism.

How did they do it? The piece in question is on NBC News’ website‍ right⁢ now. It’s headlined, “Inside the online ⁤world of people who think‌ they can change their race.” The ‌article is, apparently, intended to disprove​ the idea that you can⁤ “opt into”⁤ another racial category. And along the way, accidentally, every argument from NBC News and their “thought leaders”⁢ ends up refuting the idea that people can change their gender too.

The piece begins by describing a teenager living in Maryland who thinks she’s transforming into a Japanese woman. She’s changed her name. She also thinks⁢ that, just by wishing it, her⁢ hair is getting‍ darker, ⁤her eyelids are ⁣getting smaller, et cetera.

Right away, the​ keen observer might‌ note, that sounds exactly like the lingo ​that trans activists use. According to NBC, this girl also watches videos like this one, apparently to help her ‘transition’ proceed at some mental ​level. Here’s the video, but be forewarned that it might turn you Asian ⁣apparently:

Well I don’t know about ⁤you but I’m feeling ⁤more Japanese already.

Now, any sane person might‌ look at that clip and conclude that it’s crazy — and that anyone who watches this, thinking it changes ⁢their race, is delusional. Case closed.

But at NBC News, they weren’t ready to move on so quickly. This is something of a​ sensitive subject for⁢ them. They’ve spent the last few years telling us that anyone ⁢can change their gender at will.​ So, they understand that they have to respond to the obvious question, which is: why shouldn’t ⁤we affirm the ⁢identity of this teenage trans-Japanese girl? She says she’s Japanese. She ⁤watched a few YouTube videos and maybe even bought a kimono or two.‍ She ⁢feels more at home, more herself, in her Japanese identity. She recognizes inside ‌herself her innate Japanese-ness. Why isn’t that good enough? Who are ⁤we to⁤ deny⁤ her lived experience? Who ⁤are we to reject her truth?

Well, here’s the crux of NBC News’ argument, “Experts agree race is ⁣not genetic. But they contend that even ⁢though race is a cultural construct, it is impossible to change your race because of the systemic inequalities‌ inherent to⁣ being born into a certain race.”

Think about what ‌they wrote‍ for more than two‍ seconds, and the logic falls apart. They’re saying you can’t change your race because there ⁤are “systemic inequalities inherent to being born into” certain races. But ‍wait a minute. Aren’t these the same experts who tell us that women live under the⁣ thumb of the patriarchy — that they can’t even earn an honest living because of how sexist ⁤our society is? That sounds a lot like “systemic inequality.” And yet​ they have no ⁣problem with men deciding to identify as women, ‍despite all the “systemic inequality” women have allegedly ⁤endured.​ Why is that?

The NBC piece doesn’t say, which ⁣is strange, because they’ve had a lot of time to prepare for this question. Remember when they destroyed Rachel Dolezal a few years ‍ago? She claimed to be black, and she drove them ‍absolutely crazy because they had no way of refuting it. Here was Matt ⁣Lauer’s attempt at taking her‌ down:

Notice Matt Lauer uses all these “transphobic” ‍arguments to disprove Rachel Dolezal’s claim that she’s black. ​First, he confronts her with a photo of her in her teenage years. ⁣He suggests that because she ⁣was​ white then, she can’t possibly be​ black now.⁣ Matt Lauer then⁣ calls in Dolezal’s parents, who deny her lived experience as a black woman. We’re meant to take⁤ that as proof that Dolezal is lying.

So why exactly aren’t we allowed ⁤to refute transgenderism on the same basis? Why exactly can’t we show photos of William Thomas, before he started pretending to be a female swimmer, as proof that he’s ⁢really a man? Why aren’t we ‌supposed to call the ⁤parents of transgender activists, and ask them what gender their kid ⁢really is?

At the time, Matt Lauer and NBC ‍News didn’t resolve that question. But now NBC​ is intent on addressing it, because ⁣there’s a lot more Rachel Dolezals coming out of the woodwork all of a sudden.​ And⁣ that’s a big problem for the trans ⁣movement. They ‍desperately don’t want you to apply the incoherent logic of “transgenderism” in order to justify “trans-racialism.”

It’s clear why that is, and in a moment‍ I’ll get to that. But for now let’s focus on NBC’s argument, such ⁢as ⁣it is. NBC News called in‍ a series of experts for their article. Unfortunately for‌ NBC, ‍every single one of ​them managed to accidentally undercut the trans argument even further.

They quoted a trans activist ⁣named Tiq Milan, for example, who objects to “trans-racialism”⁢ on the grounds that people ‌with fetishes are into it. ​Can you imagine? Milan says, “It’s not just putting on the⁤ hair and the makeup⁤ and talking and walking ‍ [in] ‍ a kind of way. That is fetishizing, and ⁣it’s objectifying, ‌and it reduces the beautiful and ⁢complicated cultures of ⁣people of color.”

In other words, going full Trudeau and‌ layering on the blackface doesn’t⁤ make you black; in​ fact it fetishizes and targets black people in a way that’s totally‌ inappropriate. That seems intuitive enough.⁢ But strangely ⁣enough, the expert did not condemn⁤ autogynephiles who dress up as women for the sole purpose of ⁤arousal ‍and debasing women. Why not? NBC News was, again, silent on that point.

Let’s pause for a second.⁢ You might be⁣ wondering whether this article was a kind of “cry for help” from deep within the bowels of NBC News. And honestly, it might be. The author of the piece is a college student at the University of Pennsylvania who’s ‍currently interning at the ⁤network. This intern is majoring in philosophy. Why would ​NBC News assign a college kid ‍to write their big takedown of ‘trans-racialism’? Who knows. ‍Maybe they ‍got played.

Either way, it’s entertaining.

And the more you​ read, the better it gets. At one point, the ​piece tries to rebut the idea that trans-racialism and​ transgenderism are comparable. They⁤ quote‌ that same activist, Tiq Milan, with ⁢this ⁢line — which may be the single dumbest statement ever uttered by ‌a trans activist, as mighty a hurdle as that would be. “Race historically emerged as a social construct to establish a racial hierarchy with the white race at the top, whereas variances in gender ‍identity⁢ have⁣ existed for thousands of years, he⁣ said.”

It’s hard to know where to‌ begin. The first line is simply false, for one. The concept ⁤of race ⁢did not begin with colonialism. It began in antiquity. The Roman poet Virgil ‌called his people the “toga-ed race,” for example. And many cultures, like in Asia, established “racial hierarchies” that had nothing to do ⁢with whites. Other cultures ‍created “racial hierarchies” ⁤that put the white race at the bottom. In fact, they’re calling for a white genocide in South Africa⁣ right now. In case you missed it, here’s footage of a leading political‍ figure ‍in the country chanting “kill the ⁣white farmer”​ as a massive crowd cheers ⁣him‌ on:

That doesn’t ‌seem like a “racial hierarchy⁣ with the white ⁣race at the top.” So we’re left with the trans activist’s claim that “variances ⁣in gender” identity that we’re seeing ‍today have been around for ⁢“thousands of years.” Yes, we all know that ⁣there were a bunch of pansexual aromatic non-binary’s walking around in the 1600’s. It’s just that nobody ever mentioned ⁣them. ​We have to believe this on faith, I suppose. It takes faith, because in fact,‍ as it turns out, there is no recorded history —‍ anywhere in the world, in any culture — of people believing that men could actually be women and women could‌ actually be men. This concept did not exist anywhere until it was invented by ​gender⁤ ideologues in ​the 20th century.

But even putting all the factual issues to ‌the side,‌ what that “expert” said doesn’t begin to explain ⁤why​ people can’t change their race. Even if‌ you assume it’s​ true⁢ that gender identity has been around for longer‌ than racial distinctions, there’s still no answer to this basic question: Why can’t we change our race?​ Do we have to wait‌ a thousand years or ‌so, and then‌ we can do it? Besides, if race ‍is a new concept then doesn’t that make it even more fluid and negotiable? Doesn’t that make it even more valid to reject the social construct of race entirely?

Who ⁣knows. The NBC piece​ just moves ⁣on. They flail a bit and cite Jamie Cohen, a random Queens College professor, for some support. He says people can’t change their race because, “It’s just belief. … It doesn’t ever really work, because it’s not doing anything, but they have ⁤convinced themselves that it works because there’s other people who⁤ have convinced themselves, as well.”

Social⁣ contagion, anyone? By the way, Jamie Cohen, like the author of this piece, is not a scientist.​ He’s a culture​ and media studies professor. On his website, he says he ⁣specializes in “memes,” something​ called “advertising inequalities,” and social media. That’s ⁢not to say‌ he can’t comment​ on this topic, of‌ course. ‌But it’s⁢ notable that the very same people who yell things like, “You can’t comment ‌on transgenderism; you’re not a member of ⁤the American Medical​ Association,” — ‌those ⁤same people are now quoting⁣ meme ‍professors to explain away trans-racialism.

It’s worth pausing to ‍note something that’s curiously absent from this NBC bombshell.⁢ And that’s the word “sex.” Nowhere in this ‍five-page article does the word “sex” come⁤ up. They talk about “gender” and “social constructs” throughout the piece, but never sex. Why is that?

Here’s one possibility.⁤ Maybe it’s because they know that sex​ has a clear ​biological component. And at a biological level, there’s⁢ an ​objective, genetic explanation for why some people are men, and some people are women. And these genetic differences between‌ men and women are far more substantial than any ⁤conceivable ‍genetic differences between racial categories. Men have a ⁢completely different‍ set of chromosomes than women do, and that affects⁣ the entire body and how⁤ it functions. What that means is that trans-racialism, while⁢ completely crazy, is a lot less crazy than transgenderism. The ‌transracial‍ Japanese girl has a much more valid⁤ claim to her Japanese identity than any man has to a female identity or vice versa. ​Race actually is fluid,​ after all. Everyone is a mix of races and ethnicities.

So why do they want to avoid talking about ⁣genetics and objective reality? Why can’t they ⁣just come out and⁣ admit that, yes, if you support transgenderism, then ⁢you must also ‍support trans-racialism? The truth is, they embrace transgenderism,‌ while rejecting trans-racialism, for a ‍simple reason — one​ that has nothing to do with logic or science. The Left has constructed a race-based spoils system that punishes their political opponents​ and elevates loyal members of their party. They don’t want that⁢ system to come crashing down on them. Self-identified transgenders are the ​Left’s dependable political allies. The people who could take advantage of a trans-racialism are ​not. If ‍Asians and​ white people could instantly claim ⁢to be oppressed black men, then all of their cynical ⁣racial politics would⁤ collapse⁤ overnight. And ​they can’t have ‌that. It’s that simple. The pseudoscience is a cover, and not a particularly effective one.

A lot of people have tried ‍to make that case ‌over the years, especially since the Rachel Dolezal ​episode. But few of them have done it better than ​NBC News⁤ and their intrepid philosophy intern. In their attempt to shut down trans-racialism, they have exposed transgenderism. ‍To be sure, like a confused teenager in Maryland who⁣ thinks she’s Japanese, NBC ‌has no idea what it’s doing. But in this case, they accidentally did some journalism. And‍ for that, ‍we should⁣ all be grateful.

CLICK HERE​ TO​ GET THE DAILY WIRE APP


Read More From Original Article Here: NBC News Totally Obliterates Trans Ideology By Accident

" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

Related Articles

Sponsored Content
Back to top button
Available for Amazon Prime
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker