disturbed by bruce jenner’s logic.

i don’t think bruce jenner is a woman. i will never think he is a woman. his DNA says he’s a man.

no, i’m not being ‘transphobic’. i’m just calling a spade a spade.

he may look pretty in lingerie and big flowy hair but it will never change the fact that he is a man.

i think Matt Walsh was the one who wrote something to the effect of, “if i go to a psychologist and tell him ‘i feel like i’m a dog trapped in a man’s body,’ he’d definitely say i have a condition. but if i tell him ‘i feel like i’m a woman trapped in a man’s body’ and we consider this ‘normal’?”

which i can definitely understand.

some people might argue, “a dog is an animal! of course that’s crazy!” but what separates us from dogs scientifically speaking? is it not our DNA that tells us if we humans and not chimpanzees? that a man’s DNA is different from a woman’s? XY is not XX. XX is not XY. but XX feeling like XY is fine? where’s our science?

another argument might be ‘identity’. and it will prove troublesome. how long can an ‘identity’ last? can you fault someone who identifies as a woman in short bursts of time — (i.e. enough time to do bad things in the other gender’s bathroom) and claim innocence because ‘at the time, i identified myself as a woman’?

it’s not about bruce jenner really. it’s about the logic. i can’t see any of it.