Mother calls into the sky crying out for me to become woman. The womyn now close in on me running hands over my body and smelling me; now I smell of woman. (Alexandria) Gender and the developing identities surrounding it have stood in contrast to some traditional values, therefore, raising debates about the place of gender and gender discussions in education and in society as a whole.

The advent of modern technology has brought about many changes to our society, including a newfound freedom in how we define and redefine our identities. This new freedom, however, has also given rise to controversy, particularly when it comes to issues of gender and sexuality. 

In his essay “The Abolition of Man,” C.S. Lewis argues that there are certain universal values that are essential to human flourishing. These values are not determined by culture or tradition, but rather by the nature of the human person. For Lewis, the pursuit of truth and goodness is not only essential to individual happiness, but also to the preservation of civilization itself. In “Men without Chests” Lewis criticizes modern attempts to debunk natural values. Lewis argues that modern education is producing individuals who lack moral judgment and the ability to recognize and appreciate objective truth, goodness, and beauty. According to Lewis, the “chest” represents the place of moral judgment, emotion, and imagination. It is through the cultivation of these qualities that individuals can develop a sense of objective values and the ability to recognize and respond to them. Lewis claims, “We make men without chests and expect from them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.” (Lewis, 10). Without the “chest” or a sense of proper moral judgment (one rooted in traditional values), one cannot act as a proper member of society or be trusted. 

Lewis believes that modern education has prioritized the cultivation of rationality and utility over emotion and imagination, resulting in individuals who lack moral judgment and are unable to recognize the intrinsic value of things. Lewis believes that the decline of objective values and the cultivation of moral subjectivity is a dangerous trend that threatens the preservation of civilization. He argues that without a sense of objective values and moral judgment, individuals will be unable to make meaningful choices or form a just society. Lewis calls for a return to universal values and the cultivation of moral imagination and judgment. He believes that individuals must recognize the intrinsic value of things and develop a sense of duty and responsibility towards them. This requires a reorientation of education towards the cultivation of emotion and imagination as well as rationality and utility. Lewis calls on shared traditional values between most cultures referring to it as the “Tao” from the Taoist word for the ultimate “way” or “path” of reality and human conduct. Without the Tao, no value judgments can be made at all. Thus, there is a need for traditional values to maintain the proper path of life. Lewis calls on the Tao when referencing the ultimate foundations either of Theoretical or Practical Reason. He states that an open mind is “idiocy” within these topics. He emphasizes, “if a man’s mind is open on these things, let his mouth at least be shut. He can say nothing to the purpose. Outside the Tao, there is no ground for criticizing either the Tao or anything else. (Lewis, 16)  Essentially, Lewis believes that if one has an open mind about the fundamental values of society they have no area for judgments. The fundamental values of society are untouchable and should remain indefinitely. Lewis’s perspective raises interesting questions concerning what are the shared traditional values, especially in the individualistic and progressive societies of the 21st century. The increasing amount of polarization makes it difficult to interpret Lewis’s perspective in the context of life today.  

This idea of universal values is central to the debate over identity in our high-tech age. While technology has allowed for greater freedom in defining and redefining our identities, it has also brought about a clash of values between different cultures and traditions. In some cases, these clashes have led to attempts to restrict certain types of identity expression, such as the recent legislation in Florida that seeks to limit sex education and transitioning in schools for young people. However, such restrictions raise questions about the limits of freedom in a democratic society. From Lewis’s perspective, it could be argued that limiting certain forms of identity expression is necessary in order to preserve traditional values and protect vulnerable groups, such as children. On the other hand, such restrictions can also be seen as an infringement on individual freedom and an attempt to enforce a particular set of cultural norms. 

The recent decision by Amazon to drop Anderson’s book highlights the tension between these two perspectives. While some argue that the book promotes harmful ideas about transgender individuals, others argue that its removal represents a dangerous form of censorship that limits free speech and the open exchange of ideas. As Anderson says, “policymakers need to take seriously the question of what limits should be placed on the power of Big Tech” (Anderson paragraph 13). In either case, the debate over Anderson’s book highlights the complex relationship between identity and freedom in our high-tech age.

Paul Kingsnorth’s novel “Alexandria” explores the tension between identity and tradition in ancient Rome. In the novel, the protagonist, Menedemos, must navigate the complex social norms and expectations of his time to pursue his unique identity and goals. Kingsnorth highlights the limitations imposed by cultural norms and expectations but also emphasizes the power of individuals to transcend these limitations and pursue their identities freely. From the beginning of the novel aspects of gender are introduced and continue to be discussed throughout “great mother who is called Bree is called Erce is called Dine is called Maeri. enter in to body of this girl, take her blood and make her woman.”(Kingsnorth, X) The yearning for this girl to become a woman emphasizes the value that can be placed on gender and coming of age, especially in more traditional societies.

Alessandra Lemma’s, Transgender Identities, explores various aspects of transgender experiences, including the social, psychological, and biological factors that shape gender identity.

Lemma offers a comprehensive exploration of the complexities of gender identity and the experiences of transgender individuals. In the context of C.S. Lewis’s concept of “men without chests,” Lemma’s book highlights the importance of recognizing the emotional and psychological dimensions of identity, particularly as they relate to gender.

Lemma argues that gender identity is not just a matter of choice or willpower, but is rather a fundamental aspect of our self-understanding and experience. By exploring the historical and social context of transgender identities, she reveals the ways in which societal attitudes and norms can impact the experiences of transgender individuals, contributing to their marginalization and stigmatization.

In the high-tech age, technology allows for new and often controversial ways of defining and redefining identity, sometimes at odds with various cultural traditions. Lemma’s book highlights the importance of recognizing and valuing the diversity of gender identities and argues for the development of policies and practices that promote inclusion and equality for transgender individuals.

In this context, freedom must be understood not only in terms of the ability to choose one’s identity but also in terms of the social and cultural contexts that shape and influence our understanding of identity.  Lema discusses the mental struggles that many transgender individuals encounter and how supportive environments are necessary. Lema states, “Transgender individuals may experience significant psychological distress and may require support and intervention to promote their mental health and well-being” (Lema, 41). The recognition and acceptance of diverse identities can ultimately lead to greater freedom and equality for all individuals. Overall, Lema emphasizes the development of policies and practices that promote inclusion and equality for transgender individuals. She also highlights the importance of further research and education to deepen our understanding of transgender experiences and identities.

I struggle to draw the line between traditional values and free speech. The government already seems to employ an overwhelming level of censorship that inclines me to believe that restrictions on sex education and transitioning are not necessary. I do not think that children should be overexposed to these topics at an unreasonably young age as the discussions of particular sex-related concepts are usually irrelevant until certain stages of development. My overwhelming perspective is that censorship should be reduced in total however guidelines are necessary for public education. It is good to have safe spaces for individuals to express themselves which makes me inclined to disagree with Florida’s censorship but I understand fears surrounding the dissipation of traditional values and roles of education. However, as discussed in Lemmas Transgender Identities, it is important to promote inclusion and equity for transgender individuals. If Transgender individuals are never discussed in education they may be stigmatized and misconceptions may be promoted through younger generations. 

In regards to Andersons’ book, I believe Amazon has the jurisdiction to present what they would like to their customers but as such a large entity I do not think that they should be doing this filtering of material. As a large entity, filtering out opinions the company disagrees with has a large impact on materials most communities are exposed to. I could see amazon acting in a similar way to NewsGaurd by influencing people’s inclinations to access certain materials. The overarching question of where to draw the line is what makes it hard to say if this book should have been removed. I do not think that it is good for Amazon to be pushing particular narratives and removing what they do not like but I also believe that Amazon should have the power to remove materials that are seen as overwhelmingly detrimental to the overall population (ie: racist or hateful material). Furthermore, a variety of perspectives can lead to positive discourse allowing for exposure to new ideas and reasons for these ideas. If only one narrative is echoed throughout society, society is not functioning correctly. Disagreements lead to progress as problem-solving and understanding have to be employed. If people disagree with a certain narrative they should talk about it rather than shutting it down and as seen in Amazon’s case say absolutely nothing about it.