Dr. Michael L. Brown says that he doesn't mean to be cruel and then exhibits extreme cruelty.
Michael L. Brown claims to be non-judgmental and not cruel. Then he judges others and cruelly criticizes people he disapproves of.

“If Michael L. Brown insists on being a schmuck, why announce it to the world?”

Singer Demi Lovato has revealed that they are nonbinary and are changing their pronouns. This, in turn, energizes Dr. Michael Brown to spin into a transphobic fit. With all respect, Demi Lovato, you’re not non-binary, you’re deeply confused.

Mr. Brown has some very odd notions about what “respect” means.

According to Michael L. Brown:

I do not write this to be cruel or judgmental. And I certainly don’t want to hurt anyone. To the contrary, I want to help. But I do write with a sense of urgency, both to the nation and to confused individuals like Demi Lovato, the latest to identify as non-binary and wanting to be called “they.”

Yet, “judgmental” is precisely what Brown is. As for not being cruel. Well, you’ll see.

But first, let us discuss what non-binary means. Three things are a scientific certainty:

  1. Gender identity exists as a separate construct from chromosomal sex.
  2. Some people have incongruent gender and sex.
  3. Gender is a continuum with male and female at the extreme ends. People who are somewhere in the middle of the spectrum are non-binary.

Why, pray tell, is Demi Lovato’s gender identity any of Michael Brown’s business? Furthermore, while I am at it, what training and experience does Brown have with respect to understanding human sexuality? Scripture doesn’t count.

I reiterate my question about Brown’s qualifications. What enables him to make this pronouncement?

To Demi Lovato, I say this: You are not non-binary, existing outside the realm of male or female. You are a confused woman needing help from the inside out. That’s why I will not refer to you as “they.” And I truly say this in love.

“Love?” Brown makes a declarative statement about someone he knows nothing about, someone whom he has never met. Brown, having no qualifications to do so, effectively diagnoses his target as mentally ill. Then Brown claims that he will not honor the convention of polite society to address people as they choose to be addressed. Yet somehow all of that is out of “love?”

Does lying depict love? Does arrogance demonstrate love? Is being rude a means of showing love? Does doing all of that in a public forum mean that Michael Brown is being loving?

Yes, those are rhetorical questions.

Let’s see where love takes us. Just how cruel and insulting is the following:

…if perception is substituted for reality, there is no end to the social madness that follows:

You do not just have a man being named Woman of the Year.

You do not just have a white woman who identifies as black.

You have a father of 7 who identifies as a 6-year-old girl.

You have a man who identifies as a dog named “Boomer.”

You have a young lady who believes she is a cat trapped in a woman’s body.

You have a man who has his ears removed because he identifies as a parrot.

And you have a man who changed his identity to female but who has now had “her ears and nose REMOVED to transform into a ‘dragon lady’ with scales, a forked tongue and a horned skull.”

“I do not mean to be cruel Michael L. Brown but attempting to conform reality to ancient texts is a form of mental illness.”

With the exception to the Woman of the Year reference to Caitlyn Jenner, none of that has a damned thing to do with gender identity.

We have heard it all before. Comparisons to the guy claiming that he is Napoleon. Comparisons to people with body dysmorphia.

The difference is that gender identity is a scientific reality. There is no science to support the the notion that people can identify as animals or that adults can identify as children.

The reference to Caitlyn Jenner only highlights the fact that Michael Brown refuses to accept the reality of gender identity. The reference to the white woman who claimed to be black (Rachel Dolezal) is irrelevant. Dolezal knew that she is a white woman and claimed a racial difference for economic reasons.

All of the above comparisons are highly offensive, … and ignorant. A person who claims that they are a parrot is presumably mentally ill. Michael Brown is claiming that Demi Lovato is mentally ill in order to defend scripture.

I do not mean to be cruel Michael L. Brown but attempting to conform reality to ancient texts is a form of mental illness.

I have already answered Brown’s idiotic rhetorical question:

Why is this perceived (or made-up) reality any less real than a biological male identifying as a woman or a white woman identifying as black? Where does one draw the line? And based on what?

The line, Michael Brown, is drawn by science. Here we have someone who believes that the Bible represents the literal and inerrant word of his god in spite of its many errors. That same person, in defense of what he believes is the word of his deity, is denying the scientific fact of gender identity.

“Apparently, comparing Lovato to someone who thinks that he is a parrot is not ‘mockery.'”

Regardless of scripture, regardless of superstition, regardless of Michael L. Brown’s ignorant disapproval, gender identity is a scientific reality. It has been a scientific reality for over 100 years.

Let us remember that Michael L. Brown’s PhD is in the humanities (Greek literature if I recall correctly):

Put another way (and using my words, not hers), “I am deeply confused.”

That’s why compassion compels me to say, “Let’s pray that she will get the help she really needs,” rather than saying, “They are doing a good thing and I am so proud of them.”

No one desires, let alone requires, Michael Brown’s phony compassion which, in most instances would be to simply accept people as they are. But do tell us, oh scientific wizard. What help does she “really need?” Is that via a medical diagnosis or those ancient chronicles of dubious provenance?

Brown is proficient at finding problems that do not exist:

And what if, tomorrow, Lovato says, “I’ve rediscovered my female identity and wish to be referred to as ‘she’”? Then the media will comply again, and “they” becomes “she” (unless, of course, Lovato ends up identifying as transgender, in which case “she” would become “he”).

If Demi Lovato’s gender identity changes, I see no problem whatsoever with conforming. It certainly does me no harm to refer to them as they or she or he. It does Michael Brown no harm to refer to them as they, she or he. So why all this obnoxious noise?

“Demi Lovato is non-binary. What’s it to ya?”

If Michael L. Brown insists on being a schmuck, why announce it to the world?

Apparently, comparing Lovato to someone who thinks that he is a parrot is not “mockery:”

Such people do not deserve our scorn or mockery. God knows, that is the furthest thing from my mind. But such people do deserve our love, and love will always tell the truth.

That parrot and the one who thinks that he is a dragon are the furthest thing from Brown’s mind and they certainly are not a form of mockery. Sure.

Oh, and Brown is not judgmental but he is omniscient:

But if I truly respect someone, I will not be a partner to their own delusion. Instead, I will commit to helping them to find their way back to reality, since our biological sex is not subject to our emotions or perceptions. It is what it is.

One more fucking time (yes, I am losing patience): Gender identity is a scientific reality regardless of where it is in the spectrum. Believing that prayer actually works is a delusion.

You knew it. You asked for it. You got it:

Unfortunately, in keeping with today’s cultural insanity, in which right is called wrong and wrong is called right, for making this compassionate suggestion, I will be branded a hateful bigot.

Who the hell is Michael L. Brown to assert that a gender identity he does not approve of is a “wrong?” Who the hell made Michael L. Brown the arbiter of right and wrong? Michael L. Brown is, indeed a “hateful bigot.”

Brown is wed to the notion that different is bad. That is at the core of most forms of bigotry. When the battle for marriage equality was at its peak, Keith Olbermann intelligently asked: “What’s it to ya?” of the Michael Browns of this world. That eloquence is deserving of an encore.

Demi Lovato is non-binary. What’s it to ya?

By David Cary Hart

Retired CEO. Formerly a W.E. Deming-trained quality-management consultant. Now just a cranky Jewish queer. Gay cis. He/Him/His.