For fuck's sake, dude, what makes your reality the Real one? Besides that you like it best?

Solipsism?

I was not impressed by his logical abilities. His excuse for introducing Frazer and sympathetic magic was an egregious straw-man argument—I don't think anyone has ever claimed that transition works a magical retroviral transformation on a person's chromosomes, as five minutes with a resource on actual trans people rather than the inside of his own head would have told him. It's funny that he's so welcoming toward the idea of complex sexual orientations, but not identities. (He's not very well-informed about it, to be fair: "our neat little categories of sexual orientation" after a mention of "simple homosexuality," as though he is unaware of the existence of bi people, asexual people, people whose sexual orientation is not toward other people . . . He does not sound more open-minded for his ignorance.) Though his insistence that "homosexual acts as such seem to me a matter that is obviously, and almost by definition, private" does cause me to wonder whether his comfort with gay people maxes out when he has to watch them being, you know, gay. In public. And everything.

[edit] I see he responds with consistent nastiness and muddled thinking to the Sun-Times' removal of his article. Bonus misogyny on top of his transphobia.

I guess I'll have to complain to the National Review.