In Defense of (Natural) Diversity

The transgender movement obscures the natural differences between man and woman. Conservatives should defend them.

The militant transgender movement has become so ingrained in popular culture that criticizing it almost seems a minor act of bravery. Their collective demand is one of at least acquiescence. However, the movement prefers downright, full-throated acceptance. In the eyes of those who allow themselves to be swept along, the trans movement is just another chapter in human evolution of the physical and emotional variety. But others stand firm against these biological crimes and remain horrified and resolute. 

For women, the push to accept biological males as females is not only at odds with reality, it's utterly offensive. A feminist movement that began in an effort to provide basic protections and securing the right to vote has morphed into a strange beast that betrays its original intent. Somehow, we are to praise a male to female transition as if we're adding another "girlie" to our midst. Instead, it is men encroaching upon our territory and boasting that they beat us at this game, too. Feminists clap. It is appalling. 

Women are not tools. Unfortunately, those who wish to turn the tide of opinion often place women in the pawn category. This is especially evident in political and cultural scenarios. 

When it concerns the transgender movement, the current consensus is that hormonal and surgical manipulation is what creates a female. (That combined with the feeling of being the opposite sex.) If a man, convinced he should have been a female, undergoes breast augmentation, grows out his hair, wears makeup, and adorns himself with women's clothes and accessories, he believes he has passed the test. Trans allies believe he has, too. 

With this acceptance, the transgender movement loudly tells women: "Your claim to womanhood is secured by clothes, makeup, and breasts. Nothing more." 

Women are reduced to superficial qualities which can be added or erased rather quickly. This is no different than sexism that reduces us to incapable creatures simply because we are female. But the sexism emanating from the transgender movement is far more nefarious. It is sold as a celebration of women, but it is nothing more than mockery. 

So, what really makes a woman? Is it outward adornment? Is it others confirming someone's womanhood? Is it whether or not she attracts a large amount of male attention? Is womanhood measured by how many children a female has or whether she has any at all? Is it the approval from others if she excels in a traditionally submissive role? 

More so than men, women encounter the thorough review of the world because we are judged by our physicality more than anything else. A woman who has "lost her looks" is no longer of any measurable worth to society at large. Not only is this decidedly untrue, but it contributes to the mindset that male to female transitions are achieved through looks alone. 

There is so much confusion about human worth in general, but especially the value of women in the modern age. The trans movement is partly to blame for the gendered conflict. Beyond that, however, there is a conflict between polar opposites: radical feminists and the radical trad crowd.

Neither exemplifies the average American female; or at least neither should exist as a comprehensive spokesmodel for femininity. With the former, we are told to be at conflict with biological reality, our bodies, our wombs, and men. With the latter, we are told the height of being a woman is homesteading, homeschooling, and homemaking. We do a real disservice to women in general, and leave room for easier acceptance of transgenderism, if we do not recognize that there is a broad spectrum of femininity. 

Women in today's culture must walk a fine line. If too traditional, we are told we don't think for ourselves. If too independent, we are told we think too much for ourselves. It does not help that the vice presidential running mate for the Republican Party has used the phrase "childless cat ladies" more than once to describe Democratic women. As if a woman's worth is dependent on her ability to have or interest in children. The fertility rate in the United States is below replacement levels. To put it mildly, this is very concerning. But it does no good, and certainly does not encourage the establishment of families, to speak of childless women as easily discarded or not important members of society. Not everyone finds a partner. Of those who do, not everyone is able to have children. Still others consciously choose not to have children. And placing the onus on women entirely is unfair as there are two parties in any pregnancy scenario. 

According to a Gallup poll released in March, a record 7.6% of American adults identify as LGBTQ+. When breaking down the numbers by generation, it is further confirmation that social contagion is real. Approximately 22.3% of Gen Z identifies as LGBTQ+ compared with 9.8% of Millennials and 4.5% of Gen X. These are staggering numbers. It is clear that social media, social pressure, and the trend of pushing "your truth" over "the truth,” among other things, has led us to this point. Because of this mass delusion, it is more important than ever to embrace the natural diversity that exists among both males and females. Not doing so creates a society where confusion runs rampant and transgenderism takes a foothold. 

This is where conservatism comes in. Rejecting the transgender movement and any and all gender deception requires a greater acceptance of natural diversity. Yes, that term is shunned by too many who hold traditional views as it's used by political opponents as an excuse. But diversity is good. And a modern conservative movement more comfortable with accepting the less and more versions of femininity (and masculinity) will do much to stem the tide. 

The diversity conservatives should promote is one that accepts biological realities of the sexes. There is no room for acceptance of a mentality that says someone was born in the wrong body. At the same time, that diversity should not try to cram females and males into boxes of appearance and behavior. "Not fitting in" doesn't mean you should have been someone else. The same goes for interests and pursuits that vary from person to person. It is this kind of diversity that would make the modern conservative movement healthier in the short-term and long-term. 

It is so easy to feel disgust at a society that praises rather than questions transgenderism. It is easy to feel disgust when society maligns traditional roles. But the alternative, a focus too rigid and extreme to allow for nuance, is not healthy either. 

Diversity as a word and concept in 2024 carries with it negative connotations. It need not do so. Reality is full of good diversity, and conservatives should defend it.

Kimberly Ross is a freelance opinion writer who has written political and cultural commentary since 2015. She has bylines at The Federalist, USA Today, The Bulwark, Arc Digital, and ACN Ireland, among others. She was a senior contributor at RedState from 2015-2019. She has been a contributor to Washington Examiner's Beltway Confidential Blog since 2018 and frequently appears in Washington Examiner magazine. She is co-host of The Right Thoughts Podcast. She holds a BA in History with graduate work in political science. She lives with her husband and two energetic sons in the Southern United States. Follow her on X, formerly known as Twitter, at @SouthernKeeks.