NOTICE the happy, warm faces of the “transgendered” freaks, I mean, individuals in the shocking publicity campaign by the Washington, D.C. Human Rights Commission. The point of these ads, ostensibly inspired by brutality toward transgendered individuals, is that men in lipstick, cross-dressers, self-castraters and women who have undergone barbaric mutilations, and physically injured themselves to a degree that almost certainly surpasses the harm any bullies who have threatened them have inflicted, are very nice people. Only a bigot would turn against such warmth. “You are a hater,” the posters seem to say, “if you object.”

I’m sure some of these confused individuals are very nice.

But these male women and female men, for all their smiles and friendliness, are part of an aggressive, bullying movement that is not warm and cuddly. It seeks to force-feed us with demonic confusion and ultimately it demonstrates disregard for the individuals it showcases. It doesn’t effectively care if these individuals are victimized because if it did it would encourage them at least to be discreet with their psychological disorientation and help them work toward being normal, which would be the greatest protection against any victimization.

Bureaucratic tyranny, as James Kalb put it, imposes softly and with smile. If it were brutal, how much easier it would be to spot the enemy. Its success in making the real victims seem like bullies and Nazis makes it an overwhelming force for evil.

—- Comments —–

Constance writes:

Thank you for posting about transgendered people. I attended a very feminist college where we were taught that gender is a matter of cultural norms and presentation. But our professors and student body took these ideas farther and argued that biological sex itself was similarly constructed — after all, there are many components of biological sex (chromosomes, hormone levels, reproductive organs, to name a few) and how they were evaluated to determine sex depended on the society.

Many of my female classmates were moved by this philosophy to become “transmen.” Some are now experiencing the parental urge and are trying to get pregnant as men. This article was posted by one of these pregnant men.

This particular paragraph stands out:

Within the needs of trans people in pregnancy and birth is the challenge of addressing what seems like an obvious connection: between pregnancy and femaleness. Trans people are often neglected in the arena of pregnancy and birth because of the strongly-held notion that only female-identified people experience pregnancy and birth. While not all trans people, whether they were assigned female at birth or not, can experience pregnancy (because of infertility or hysterectomy), some can and do, prompting the need for our pregnancy and birth providers to accommodate.

It’s not easy, as it’s a process that is intensely gendered. Everything from maternity clothes to the language of health care providers carries the assumption that the pregnant person identifies as female (and often that the other parent identifies as male). Language is an obvious barrier from the get-go: maternal health, pregnant women, all of the language associated with pregnancy and birth is gendered. From body parts to actors, all is coded in a way that would make a pregnant person who is not identified as a female feel uncomfortable.

Can you believe it?!

Keep up the good work.

Laura writes:

Thank you.

We are living in a mass mental ward. Thank God you got out of that college with your wits intact.

You see. Everything must be changed to suit the transgendered. Pretty soon we won’t be able to even use the term “maternity ward.” We are being bullied to embrace clinical insanity.

Buck writes:

This has melted my thin wiring: “But these male women and female men,…”

I’ve apparently wasted a good bit of time by going to the effort to properly and consistently use “man/woman”, “male/female” in discourse. I’ve explained why and how I make a clear distinction.

You’ve ruined it.

Male female and female male makes no sense. Male man, female woman and man male and woman female are redundant. A female is not necessarily a woman, and a male is not necessarily a man. “Man” and “woman” define a host of non-physical, co-dependent characteristics. There would be no such thing as a “man”, if there was no such thing as a “woman”. Man means that there is woman, and woman means that there is man. The world could be overrun by males and females and shemales when man and woman are gone.

All women are females and all men are males, but not the reverse.

I’m going to hate this, but I’m going to have to discuss this in the core defining physical feature: gonads. Sperm or egg? There are only two kinds, so far, in humans, right? …No, I’m not going to do that. It’s not like it’s not material, but it’s really kind of crass for everyday public discourse between MEN and WOMEN.

Do you see what you’ve done?

Laura writes:

I guess I should stick with “transpeople.”

Texanne writes:

Liberals also employ the “Children as Human Shields” technique which is highly effective. Get the adorable, innocent children to carry the bombs and no one will be able to intervene. This is what’s happening with the alternative “families” — children who live in same-sex households enter the public schools, and the curriculum must be revamped so as to embrace the realities of their home life. Vulnerable children are encouraged to imagine and identify their sexual orientations, and then must be protected from any inference that they are not “normal.” IVF clinics are increasingly catering to same-sex couples whose own parents and extended family must then deal with the fact of an innocent baby in a disordered home. Should the “grandparents” collaborate with the illusion for the sake of the child? How are they to reconcile truth and love?

Marriages and families, as well as all social and cultural institutions, are being destroyed “softly and with a smile” — in accordance with the strategies laid out in the book “After The Ball.” Evil creeps in on little cat paws . . .

Laura writes:

“Children as Human Shields.”

Exactly. That’s a brilliant analogy.

Paul writes:

The use of the innocent or unfortunate as shields seems similar and perhaps a part of using exceptions as shields against reason or action. These unfortunate children are exceptions that need to be dealt with appropriately. Perhaps we can better discover deceit or weak arguments if we analyze arguments by checking for the use of an exception that is being used to wag the dog. Probably there is already a formal name for the type of argument at issue.

ANDY writes:

These people belong in a padded white room in a mental institution. Its truly a shame we have shut most of them down and turned loose the mentally diseased upon normal society.

Full stop.

Andy adds:

In the “Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy” series, author Douglas Adams invented a character called Wonko the Sane, who built an inside out building as an insane asylum for the poor crazy world, which he then proceeded to live outside of.

He was quite prescient.

Please follow and like us: