Spencer Case: "When Philosophers Fail To Do Their Job"

link
It won't matter much to philosophy per se what the psychological details about transgenderism ultimately turn out to be like--even if, indeed, it turns out to be a real phenomenon. But as for the patently unsound arguments for transgenderism's most notorious propositions--that it's possible for females to be men and males to be women--those are entirely indefensible. They would have been laughed out of the room immediately had they come from the right rather than the left. Explaining why those propositions and arguments are "non-starters" (a term I find annoying, but which is irresistibly apt here) is pretty easy for any competent philosopher.
   But philosophers fled. They are some combination of bamboozled by the progressive left and afraid of it. You can be as derisive as you want of the right in philosophy...but you take on the PC left at your peril. Very simple, straightforward facts about the concepts and the meanings of the terms rule out any possibility of men being female or women being male. It's humiliating to the discipline that everyone but a few feminists has cowered before the wrath of the progressive left--and some vocal, angry, and sometimes not-entirely-balanced individuals with personal stakes in the debate.

   Philosophers have, indeed, failed to do their job in this case--and this is one of the few cases in which they actually could have helped. The case is so simple that it's actually possible to conclusively refute the view in question. But, instead of helping, they've abandoned the field....except for those who have pitched in to defend and advance the sophistry.