The Dystopian Dreamers

How transgenderism is really an early transhuman movement - and those who think dystopian cyberpunk is a dream worth fighting for.

Artwork by Joseph Gonzalez, “deathburger” - inspired by William Gibson’s book, “Neuromancer”

‘The sky above the port was the colour of television, tuned to a dead channel’.
Opening line in Neuromancer, by William Gibson

One of the more interesting people I follow on Twitter is Wesley Yang, who asks very interesting questions. Over the weekend, Yang posted a link to an article on MIT Technology Review with a headline that asks: We can use stem cells to make embryos. How far should we go?

Yang made this comment on Twitter about the article:

It's of course not coincidental that transgenderism has taken hold at the moment when 1.) techno-medicine stands on the cusp of obviating the need for human sexual reproduction and 2.) AI generated virtual pornotopias beckon

This led to some interesting links and comments in the Twitter thread. Another user, simply dubbed “Shako”, said this:

I don't think it's a coincidence either. But the latent process that is driving human preferences to modify in anticipation of a transhumanist future is one of the strangest things I've ever observed. A latent process unknown to those to evangalize [sic] it.

I think this is correct. As I listen and observe what people are saying, I’ve come to similar conclusions. The move towards mainstreaming transgenderism in our culture is a move ultimately towards transhumanism. Most people have simply not thought about that. In fact, both detractors and supporters of transgenderism seem to have simply not thought through these larger implications, focusing a great deal on the political movement(s) or ‘transphobia’ vs ‘human rights’. The focus on ‘human rights’ is particularly interesting because human rights is based on some fundamental principles about humanity that transhumanism itself aims to undermine.

Once you remove the idea that a big part of what fundamentally makes us human is our bodies (our embodied nature) and replace it with the idea that human beings are merely mind—which is precisely what mainstream transgenderism asserts (gender identity is said to be neurological)—why would anything about our bodies ultimately matter at all?

From transgender to transhuman

This seems to be the conclusion reached by the transhumanist Martine Rothblatt, whose name came up several times in the thread, especially as noted by Jennifer Bilek.

¹

Rothblatt is a very influential, hugely successful entrepreneur with a strong law background (helping pen the lawful basis for many of the transgender laws happening today), the creator of SiriusXM Radio, and founder of United Therapeutics, a biotechnology company; and is also the founder of at seems like a quasi-religious organization, Terasem Movement, Inc. As summed up by Wikipedia:

TMI’s mission is to educate the public on the practicality and necessity of greatly extending human life, consistent with diversity and unity, via geoethical nanotechnology and personal cyberconsciousness, concentrating in particular on facilitating revivals from biostasis. The movement focuses on preserving, evoking, reviving, and downloading human consciousness.

Extending human life, even to immortality, appears to be one of Rothblatt’s passions, especially after her daughter was diagnosed with a life-threatening disease. But it seems there is more to it than this. Rothblatt, now a woman, was born a man. In 1995, Rothblatt wrote a book The Apartheid of Sex, in which it was argued that segregating people according to sex is a form of apartheid. This is one of the transgender identity movements founding documents (Google “Transgender and Transhuman” and see). A self-published revised version in 2011, called From Transgender to Transhuman, makes the point a little clearer: the goal is to move beyond our bodies. In the preface (I’ve bolded important bits, but need to keep it context):

During the fifteen years since The Apartheid of Sex was published I’ve come to realize that choosing one’s gender is merely an important subset of choosing one’s form. By “form” I mean that which encloses our beingness – flesh for the life we are accustomed to, plastic for the robots of science fiction, mere data for the avatars taking over our computer screens. I came to this realization by understanding that 21st century software made it technologically possible to separate our minds from our bodies. This can be accomplished by downloading enough of our neural connection contents and patterns into a sufficiently advanced computer, and merging the resultant “mindfile” with sufficiently advanced software – call it “mindware.” Once such a download and merger is complete, we would have chosen a new form – software -- although we would be the same person. It would be quite like when I completed changing my gender from male to female. I had chosen a new form although I was still the same person.

Hours can be spent debating whether or not a mind made of software can ever be the same as a mind based in flesh. We won’t know the answer until the experiment is done. My view is that as the mindfiles become increasingly complete, and as the mindware becomes increasingly sophisticated, the software-based mind will be as close to the flesh-based mind as the flesh-based mind is to itself over the course of one’s life. In other words, I believe that our self is a chacteristic [sic] visualization of the world and pattern of responding to it, including emotions. Because visions and patterns are really information, I think our selves can be expressed as faithfully in software as they are in our brains. We can clone ourselves in software without copying every single memory because we see ourselves as a pattern of awareness, feeling and response, not as an encyclopedia of memories.

Photo by Judeus Samson on Unsplash

It’s all happening as tech reaches new heights in our culture and A.I. emerges

Is it really a coincidence that the rise of a mainstream transgender movement is happening at the exact same time that technology has become so integrated into our very identities and A.I. is emerging from the mass, almost like a Beast rising from the chaos of the sea in Revelation 13? (I interpret Revelation to be a book of pictures that unpacks the circular nature of human history, with many beasts rising and falling). I think this is not a coincidence, especially given the widespread influence transhumanism has on our current tech thought-leaders and influencers.

It seems to me that the way our technology has developed in the last few decades has prepped us for this. It’s no wonder the kids are confused as they have increasingly been unable to separate their identity from technology. And of course, the politics has been prepping us for this too. The phrase “specieist” has already started appearing on the scene. An article at The Conversation titled Transgender, Transhuman: technological advances offer increased choices but also create new prejudices, probably makes the case most clear: any pushback against transhumanism will no doubt be seen as bigotry and regressive—for, after all, transhumanism is the ultimate leveler. If we all become software, what could we possibly use to discriminate against each other? A disembodied existence is the ultimate answer to our increasing quest for equality.

I loved science fiction and technology as a kid. Little did I know that the dystopian nightmares of cyberpunk would become the utopian dreams of others. Soon I too will no doubt be branded as an intolerant, backward luddite. But, we must have the conversation. To be quite honest, I think transhumanist technology will ultimately fail—and what of the many confused, hurt people in its wake? Technology can do much better for us than what our present brand of tech elites is pushing. And ultimately, the best way (I can see) to push back is to once again re-envision people on what it actually means to be human—starting with asking them, have they even thought about that?

1. I must credit Bilek and her website uncommongroundmedia.com for unpacking Rothblatt’s activities and highlighting many of the philosophical links between transhumanism and transgenderism. I must also make clear that I don’t necessarily agree with Bilek’s particular style and mode of journalism, or everything she has written, but I am grateful for the research she has uncovered.