Peikoff’s latest howler

[9thdoctor]

Doctors who perform sex change operations are in the same category as Nazi concentration camp doctors. “Without qualification”. Special request to WSS, this calls for another YouTube video.

http://www.peikoff.com/2010/12/13/is-it-proper-for-a-doctor-to-perform-a-sex-change-operation-for-a-patient/

[Robert Campbell]

And those who request their services are necessarily acting on whim, which puts them "at war with reality" …

If you tried to explain to the wider world how this man came to be regarded as a moral authority, no one would believe you.

Robert Campbell

[PDS]

Imagine having devoted one's professional/academic life to the Objectivist Movement, only to have LP issuing such clap trap every other month...

By the way, I could have done without the visuals in the top you tube video.

[Brant Gaede]

What's hard for me to understand is why people ask these questions of these people--not just Peikoff but Hsieh and others. They are probably young.

--Brant

I used to be young, btw

[9thdoctor]

I guess this means Wendy Carlos is equal to an Auschwitz survivor. The doctor should have intervened, refused, and probably had him locked up. When she was still a he. I'm starting to feel that this isn't as funny as I thought at first.

Is Peikoff contradicting his earlier statement with this new one? Ref the first video embedded, on free will and sexual identity.

By the way, I could have done without the visuals in the top you tube video.

The thread subtitle says “Brace yourself”, that’s called fair warning. If WSS produces something for this one, it’ll probably go even further.

Edited December 13, 2010 by Ninth Doctor

[PDS]

I guess this means Wendy Carlos is equal to an Auschwitz survivor. The doctor should have intervened, refused, and probably had him locked up. When she was still a he. I'm starting to feel that this isn't as funny as I thought at first.

Is Peikoff contradicting his earlier statement with this new one? Ref the first video embedded, on free will and sexual identity.

By the way, I could have done without the visuals in the top you tube video.

The thread subtitle says “Brace yourself”, that’s called fair warning. If WSS produces something for this one, it’ll probably go even further.

I thought you meant "brace yourself" for Peikoff, which was even fairer warning...PDS

[PDS]

What's hard for me to understand is why people ask these questions of these people--not just Peikoff but Hsieh and others. They are probably young.

--Brant

I used to be young, btw

The questions seem almost designed to make Peikoff say stupid things--almost as though somebody knows what Peikoff thinks on such topics and is simply goading him to make an arse of himself. If true, I must give this person his/her propers.

[sjw]

Other than the Auschwitz remark (comparing forcible "modification" with voluntary "modification") Peikoff's position is has the virtue of having some semblance of a philosophic argument behind it, unlike the posts here, which could have been written by a bunch of politically-correct indoctrinated teenagers. Just saying.

Surgery is a serious matter, it can cause irreparable harm and death, and you can't go back to the way you were before. It's important to take all sides of this issue seriously.

Shayne

[kiaer.ts]

Peikoff's statement is based on the pre-scientific notion that gender is an either/or proposition determined by the shape of one's genitals.

Peikoff here is ignorant in the extreme. It is entirely possible to have feminized or masculinized internal wiring which does not correspond to one's gonads, genitalia, and other outward gender characteristics. There are literally dozens of types of intersex conditions where, for example, various cells and organs do not respond to the presence of a certain hormone. Developmentally, the female form is the default form. People with XY chromosomes insensitive to the presence of androgens develop bodily as females. If the insensitivity of their brain tissues differed from that of their body tissues, they could have a masculinized brain and a feminized body. The reverse is also possible, a brain that was not masculinized during development although the body was. That he gives the example of hacking off one's fingers on a whim shows that he doesn't have even a clue as to the neurological and biological mechanisms involved.

Did he even look at wikipedia to get an idea of the biology? Of course not. What need? Philosophy trumps science.

Peikoff's notion of what a whim is is ignorance parading as philosophy. Does Peikoff think that transexuals simply wake up one day and, on a whim, say, "you know, I think I'll hack of my genitals"? This is a process of self-exploration that takes years for a person to come to terms with. Whim is the polar opposite of the sort of motivation that drives a person to such actions. When Peikoff says whim, he doesn't mean unconsidered idea. (As if Peikoff is a well-adjusted heterosexual male because he sat down and justified his desires to himself.) He simply means something that doesn't fit with his own unexamined preferences.

Edited December 13, 2010 by Ted Keer

[Robert Campbell]

Surgery is a serious matter, it can cause irreparable harm and death, and you can't go back to the way you were before. It's important to take all sides of this issue seriously.

Shayne,

No one here is denying the dangers of sex-change surgery.

Robert Campbell

[syrakusos]

Wendy Carlos may or may not have her philosophy down tight, but Dierdre McCloskey, author of Bourgeois Virtue certainly does.

She started working on Bourgeois Virtue 20 years ago when she was Donald McCloskey, first publishing essays in journals before coming out with her book, the first of three volumes. The second has also been published, Bourgeois Dignity: Why Economics Can't Explain the Modern World (University of Chicago Press, 2010).

She tells her story on her website and therein provides a ton of philosophy.

As the Higley Copper of colonial Connecticut said: "... Value me as you choose."

[sjw]

Other than the Auschwitz remark (comparing forcible "modification" with voluntary "modification")

Years ago I would have categorized a statement like this from Peikoff as hyperbole, but nowadays I think you are more likely to discern Peikoff's actual meaning by taking him literally. If you think "Oh, he couldn't mean that", you're usually wrong.

Shayne

[kiaer.ts]

Wendy Carlos may or may not have her philosophy down tight, but Dierdre McCloskey, author of Bourgeois Virtue certainly does.

She started working on Bourgeois Virtue 20 years ago when she was Donald McCloskey, first publishing essays in journals before coming out with her book, the first of three volumes. The second has also been published, Bourgeois Dignity: Why Economics Can't Explain the Modern World (University of Chicago Press, 2010).

She tells her story on her website and therein provides a ton of philosophy.

As the Higley Copper of colonial Connecticut said: "... Value me as you choose."

http://www.deirdremccloskey.org/

[william.scherk]

By the way, I could have done without the visuals in the top you tube video.

The thread subtitle says “Brace yourself”, that’s called fair warning. If WSS produces something for this one, it’ll probably go even further.

I didn't mean to offend but to surprise. The glamourous creatures were the subject of Peikoff's rant. They are who he was talking about.

Ted's points are solid. The brains/hormones/bodies/gonads don't always align into a happy whole. Peikoff is out on his own branch of morality here, morality fueled by personal ignorance and revulsion, and so we get heartless, thoughtless dicta from the grim old moralist. He doesn't appear to have inquired into transsexual reality at all.

I don't know if I will gin up another video. Maybe. I like that his rants exists on Youtube and not just in the roll of irrelevancies on peikoff.com.

On a positive note, I doubt that there is anyone taking psychosexual advice from him or the Party Of Crab. What the Living Examplar of Hardline Objectivism thinks about gender issues does not feature in any serious discussion, let alone in actual deliberations. People will do what they want with their bodies.

Edited December 13, 2010 by william.scherk

[kiaer.ts]

On a positive note, I doubt that there is anyone taking psychosexual advice from him or the Party Of Crab.

Party of Crab? (It has me laughing, even if I don't get the allusion.)

[9thdoctor]

I don't know if I will gin up another video. Maybe.

I don’t know how to make a movie like that, it can’t be too hard, will you send me an email with pointers, particularly what software you use? I’m picturing Olivier from Marathon Man, the Louvre hermaphrodite, Wendy Carlos before and after (love the smile on the after photo, she looks happy and normal), I’m piqued enough that I’ll make time to do it myself. Maybe.

[Mike11]

Wow.

Just, wow.

[9thdoctor]

On a positive note, I doubt that there is anyone taking psychosexual advice from him or the Party Of Crab.

Yeah, well in the early 30’s hardly anyone was taking advice from the vagabond son of a carpenter with a virgin mother.

Wow.

Just, wow.

Oh come on, talk about ambiguity! Are you wowing Peikoff’s statement, or the reaction it’s getting? I gather there's someone else on this thread already defending him.

[Starbuckle]

Ninth said: "Oh come on, talk about ambiguity!"

"Ambiguity" is one of the words that begin with the letter "a."

[Starbuckle]

I don't agree with Peikoff's analogy with the concentration camp doctors, since coercive mutilation or any assault cannot be equated to voluntary self-mutilation or any voluntary submission to physical punishment (like boxing, wrestling or s&m). But it does seem that cutting off someone's genitals just because he asked you to do that to him is pretty creepy.

What about Peikoff's example of the person who says "In my soul, I know that I am a fingerless being, not someone who has fingers," and wants to have his fingers amputated for that reason? Would a very strong feeling that one was born in the wrong body, a body with fingers, justify cutting off one's fingers? Could a surgeon feel good about undertaking that chore, so long as he had had a thoroughgoing discussion about it with the person wanting to be amputated?

Edited December 14, 2010 by Starbuckle

[kiaer.ts]

I don't agree with Peikoff's analogy with the concentration camp doctors, since coercive mutilation or any assault cannot be equated to voluntary self-mutilation or any voluntary submission to physical punishment (like boxing, wrestling or s&m). But it does seem that cutting off someone's genitals just because they asked you to that to them is pretty creepy.

What about Peikoff's example of the person who says "In my soul, I know that I am a fingerless being, not someone who has fingers," and wants to have his fingers amputated for that reason? Would a very strong feeling that one was born in the wrong body, a body with fingers, justify cutting off one's fingers? Could a surgeon feel good about undertaking that chore, so long as he had had a thoroughgoing discussion about it with the person wanting to be amputated?

Are you telling me that wanting to be a woman is being simply wanting to be a man who has had his penis chopped off? Or that the nature of masculinity is having one's breasts removed? The analogy is so puerile as to be insulting. The would-be-female transexual doesn't want to be a dickless man. She wants to be a woman. It is quite telling that Peikoff identifies a vagina not as another kind of organ, but as a lack of one.

Oh, and yes, there is a syndrome where people wnat body parts removed. I don't pretend to understand it. I won't offer baseless opinions, not having studied it. But it is not the same as wanting to be masculine or feminine, which are both positive qualities, not the mere lack of a property.

Edited December 14, 2010 by Ted Keer

[Starbuckle]

"It is quite telling that Peikoff identifies a vagina not as another kind of organ, but as a lack of one."

I'm not sure how you get this out of what he said. Perhaps a direct quote would be helpful.

I gather he'd say the operation is a mutilation in either direction (man to "woman" or woman to "man") and even if fake opposite-sex genitals are then installed. I don't think he'd disagree with what the attempt of the surgery is about.

[Rich Engle]

Oddly enough, last Sunday I just played a service at church featuring a guest minister who is transgender (a very high level academic and the only transgender minister in the UU church)--her sermon dealt with this in a very up-to-date manner. Let's just say some of the old timers got set straight. Peikoff is not even remotely close on this--period. I doubt he has any idea how archaic he comes off.

ND--making little movies is easy once you get into it. Windows Moviemaker is free, and is a good place to start out. But there are also other great apps like Wax, and the Video Pad Editor (with related audio mixing apps). There are others. Just dip your toe into the water. Warning, though: VERY ADDICTIVE.

rde

[Greybird]

[...] Just dip your toe into the water. Warning, though: VERY ADDICTIVE.

Yes, it is ...

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6L2wvrFVxc?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param'>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6L2wvrFVxc?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6L2wvrFVxc?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

... and I'm working on another one. Only about 5,000 more such artworks to go!

[Greybird]

As for the wretched Peikoff, he's put himself a few more miles beneath contempt with this latest absurd position. (Which, I am sorry to say, is shared by Thomas Szasz, a man of at least ten times sounder intellect. I'll cut Szasz a break, for he doesn't fling Holocaust analogies. But not Lenny the Leech.)

Any of the half-dozen transsexual (pre- and post-op) and intersexed (usually no-op) people I've known personally is twice the human being Peikoff is, as to nobility of spirit and basic decency. It is every bit as complex, fascinating, tragic, and transcendable a condition as the commenters here have said. It does not involve the slightest particle of "whim."

Peikoff gets attention in his dotage for only one reason: his legal choke-hold on Rand's works. Don't give it to him!