If men can identify as women and be taken seriously, we must also accept people who identify as dragons or transgender people, according to a controversial magazine article.
So-called trans-disabled people are people who identify as disabled, but are not.
A recent example is 53-year-old Norwegian Jørund Viktoria Alme, who was born a healthy man but now identifies as a woman paralyzed from the waist down and uses a wheelchair as a result.
While otherkin are people who identify as non-human entities, such as dragons, anthropomorphic animals, elves, vampires or plants, or a combination thereof.
They wrote: ‘Why shouldn’t LGBTQ+ add an ‘O’ for otherkin?
“Many trans allies will find the association embarrassing, but they will find it difficult to distance themselves from the otherkin movement for a variety of reasons.”
One academic argues that the same logic transgender people use to claim they are exactly the same as their preferred gender could apply to groups like ‘otherkin’. One group of ‘otherkin’ is called furries, people who identify as anthropomorphic animals, sometimes for sexual pleasure
Other examples of ‘otherkin’ include people who identify as mythological creatures such as elves and dragons (depicted a dragon from the fantasy HBO show House of Dragons)
Whittaker, whose view was published in the Diary of Controversial Ideassays one of these reasons is that, like transgender people, otherkin also reject their biology in favor of how they feel.
They wrote, “They might say they reject their ‘species assigned at birth’.”
Whittaker adds some members of the otherkin community, such as furries, people who generally dress as anthropomorphic animals for sexual pleasure, already mimicking the language of the trans-rights movement.
“The Furry Fandom even has a counterpart to ‘transphobia’: fursecution,” they said.
Trans-disabled individuals also present a different set of problems to the trans movement.
Like a trans woman who claims to be a woman based on her identity, without undergoing surgery or even dressing as a woman, Whittaker argues that a trans person can do much the same.
They then go on to ask if society needs to make changes to accept trans disabled people as it does for trans women.
Examples include offering the trans-disabled surgery on severe spines or amputating limbs to better match their identities, or giving people who identify as disabled the same right to priority parking as the actually disabled.
“Allowing anyone to identify as ‘disabled’ threatens to overwhelm these resources at the expense of those who need them,” Whittaker said.
Whittaker adds that allowing people to identify as whatever gender they want has real word implications.
Trans-inclusiveness requires female athletes to be willing to compete against male competitors (or leave the field), and for women in general to share previously exclusive spaces for women with men (or otherwise leave those spaces), ‘ they said.
It requires people of all genders to refer to some men with feminine pronouns and occasionally use non-standard pronouns.
“Compliance with these language norms may seem like a trivial inconvenience, but they are sometimes enforced with consequences that are not trivial.”
To conclude their paper, they say, using the examples of trans-abled and otherkin, demonstrates the need for society to consider the wisdom of accepting a self-determined gender identity.
“The idea that we must fully accept trans self-identification forces us to absurd consequences,” they said.
“Most of us recognize that there are limits to our first-person authority over our own identity.
“If what I’ve argued is correct, then we should seriously consider that the same could be true for sex/gender: whether someone is a man or a woman is one of those things over which we have no first-person authority. ‘
Whittaker adds, however, that their work is not intended to imply that transgender, trans-disabled, or other relatives as humans should only be treated with respect.