We are beset by a new epidemic:
Sudden Spontaneous Transgender Syndrome.
This Transgender bizzo conversation has occupied the corners of the bars, even into the snug, with different folk considering its impact on everyone from Feminists to boys in the classroom. Parts 1 & 2 have elicited more faces at the windows than most other conversations here, and the invective has been noted. Now we come to part 3 which considers its effect on our minds and society. I fully expect the 'tolerance' brigade to froth at the mouth again, and will keep them on the lawn.
By 'Executive' Decree, the deluded President of the increasingly deluded USA has obliged, under pain of arrest and punishment, that the poor folk of that distressed nation have to kow-tow to Fantasy. They must abandon reality and recognition of biology and affirm the fantasies of distressed folk, and increase the distress.
Now, to make my Tavern Keeper's view clear, I have little or no problem with someone having a fantasy. Indeed, neither does society in general. The biggest and most influential Industry in the world is built upon fantasy. The Entertainment industry. If you want to pretend to be a pirate in the Caribbean, then go right ahead - in your living room. It is when fantasies - particularly perverse ones, spread into the street that the worries start to mount up and disrupt the traffic and people going about their lawful occasions.
The Gay Mardi Gras is an imposition, but we put up with it, despite its trend towards more and more outrageous behaviour. That such public events distress many people is dismissed.
Other industries have tried to keep right out of it with limited success. Those that willingly follow the deluded President find themselves suffering the consequences.
The shareholders of Target are reeling.
Equally distressing is the dismissal of Reason and the substitution of 'feeling'. We are pushed into affirming that which is patently ridiculous and abandoning thoughtful analysis. We are forbidden, in fact, all too often, and the Law is brought to bear by vindictive fantasists in a bizarre game of "let's you and him fight", where the 'you' are the Police, the Courts, the media, and 'him' is some poor hapless person who simply wants to be free to choose how he makes his living, be it Baking cakes or providing cut flowers.
It is an assault on reason.
Brett was first up in the US Room. He brought some attention to the way thinking is done, and Undone. And the harm that brings to the most vulnerable.
The Assumption ParadoxWe’re often told not to make assumptions because they may be proven to be false. Yet, what happens when false is no longer defined as false?What do I mean by this? Well let me explain. In my younger years, I was often drilled with the importance of being careful in drawing conclusions based on assumptions. After all, I was told, assuming things without a basis – without proof – as to why we hold such views could not only put us in a position where our assumptions are proven to be wrong, but some assumptions could lead to harmful consequences to either ourselves (i.e. assuming we can handle things that we cannot) or to others (i.e. assuming that individuals wouldn’t mind certain actions we commit).
Assumptions can therefore be dangerous because they can divorce truth from reality. We should, we are often told, strive to come to conclusions based on the facts that can be derived from the objective reality we find ourselves in.
However, what happens when assumptions, which have no basis in objective reality, are affirmed? When assumptions are validated, despite the damage that these affirmations cause?
This is one of the issues people who experience gender dysphoria face.
OK, so Brett has his views linked to Religion. But if this displeases you, read on nonetheless and take stock of the logic.And it is precisely the dangers involved in affirming these ‘assumptions’ that should seek to give Christians pause as we are forced to ask: are we encouraging individuals towards a false hope, a defective solution, in lieu of the everlasting hope of the Gospel?
A disconnected ‘assumption’Gender dysphoria (sometimes also called ‘transsexuality’) occurs when people experience a conflict between their ‘assumption’, the subjective conviction of their gender, and the objective biology of their body.
Now. just to point to the obvious: were this assumption to be privately held we would have little problem with it. We may even be compassionate: treat it as eccentricity. But when it is enforced by Law, then we have to assume that someone is deliberately messing with our own thoughts. We are being deliberately distorted. When we are ordered to assume that the disphoric person's assumptions are superior to our own, and punished if we disagree, then we have a 'Freedom' problem too.In the past it was called Gender Identity Disorder and treated as a mental illness. But today, it’s assumed that the person’s subjective sense is somehow more ‘real’, therefore that their gender has been wrongly assigned, or is incorrect – despite the biological evidence to the contrary.
The mismatch between their subjective conviction and their objective body causes legitimate distress.
What’s interesting is that according to the narrative at hand, when it comes to conflict, the subjective has to win.
Yet, this disconnect between the physical reality and subjective conscious is akin to other disorders where the ‘assumptions’ of the sufferer are not validated by their objective body.
For example, Hypochondriasis, where an individual has a debilitating anxiety about their health despite evidence to the contrary, or Bulimia Nervosa, where someone who is dangerously thin believes that they are overweight. In these cases, we assume that the objective reality of the person’s body trumps their subjective anxiety.
But with gender dysphoria we assume the opposite – it is no longer seen as a disorder but rather something to be affirmed.This presents an inconsistency. In all three cases, the person’s internal conviction is opposed to objective physical reality. Why do we assume we should affirm one and treat the others?
Where do we draw the line?
It becomes progressively difficult to logically be able to do so.
If ‘personal identity’ is now fluid – which is increasingly becoming the underpinning argument of the transgender movement – and therefore not constrained by traits of physical reality, such as biology, then we have to likewise assume that both transracial and trans-species identity are legitimate assumptions.
After all, if we assume that biological gender is something which should be malleable to our personal preference inclination, and our choice is affirmed no matter how divergent it is to external, objective reality – like our biology – then other traits should be equally malleable in order for our ‘self-truth’ to stand, and these too should be similarly affirmed.Going back to the other disorders I’ve mentioned – why are these ‘self-truths’ not equally affirmed? The answer that I have heard from others is because the disorders are inherently harmful to the sufferer and thus shouldn’t be affirmed, or that those who struggle with gender dysphoria should be affirmed in order to help them cope with the distress that they feel.
However, these answers are problematic. Gender dysphoria is immensely harmful, the distress that an individual goes through is very real.
This distress can lead to self-harm, depression, and so forth. However, it is debatable whether the best way to manage the dysphoria is to affirm their subjective conviction. Rather, it is entirely possible that providing affirmation, or encouraging, transitioning or sex reassignment surgery is actually counter-intuitive to the mental wellbeing of the dysphoric person in question.The false hope of transitioningThere has been research conducted in the United States, Sweden, and the Netherlands to this effect, which demonstrate that those who undergo such operations still face notably higher mortality rates. The research conducted in the latter two countries is of note, as both Sweden and the Netherlands are highly socially progressive countries. Affirmation of those who seek to transition is quite high in comparison to many other western countries.
Yet the evidence suggest that the distress remain just as prevalent for those who underwent surgery, as for those who did not. Sometimes transitioning has increased mental distress, because the gender dysphoric person pinned all their hopes on their sex reassignment surgery solving their conflicted sense of self – and been let down.
While, there has been some evidence to the contrary, the general consensus of evidence either points to, at worse, the damaging effects that transitioning has (i.e. the providing sex reassignment surgery as a viable hope in managing dysphoria is proven to be false) or is, at best, inconclusive.
Neither of which support the overwhelming narrative which encourages transitioning. If anything, it reveals that the concept of transitioning provides nothing but a false hope.The problem is further compounded when we look at the issue of affirming the subjective convictions of children who may be experiencing gender dysphoria.
At the age where children imitate being superheroes, soldiers, mothers with babies, and so forth, we assume that those who insist that they are really the opposite sex are taken with uttermost seriousness and affirmed.
This is despite the fact that these children are in the stage where they are still developing cognitively, which is a process which will continue up to the end of adolescence.
They are unable to think through and rationalise decisions like adults,
.....and they often lack the intellectual capacity of thought for consequences.
This is the why criminal justice systems in the West treat children and adult offenders differently: children do not think like adults, and are tremendously more likely to make decisions which are immature or brash. Yet, an inconsistency forms when we assume that on one hand, children are unable to comprehend the ramifications from their decisions when they commit a crime, but that they are able to understand the implications of changing gender.It’s absurd to assume that we should treat children not as children, but as much more mature decision makers, in regards to this one particular subject. Affirming this kind of conviction while children are still undergoing considerable psychosexual development is tantamount to recklessness – especially as such feelings of distress may not be held in a consistent fashion throughout childhood.
A study, released earlier in the year, which sought to examine childhood gender dysphoria concluded, after reviewing several follow-up studies of children with GD, that “gender dysphoric feelings eventually desist for the majority of children with GD”. Only a minority of children who struggled with some semblance of gender dysphoria actually persisted past childhood.
Thus, to affirm the subjective conviction of children who may, temporarily, identify as the opposite gender may be detrimental to their psychosexual development. We are encouraging them to disconnect from their objective, anatomical, reality.It cannot be stressed enough that those who suffer from gender dysphoria experience genuine distress. This psychological distress needs to be legitimately affirmed, and needs to be treated.
Like others, I think it is beneficial not to adhere to too rigid a structure of ‘gender expression’. This is not to deny biblical notions of ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’, but to say that we should not be pushing particular cultural expressions which are not found in scripture. After all, each individual is different as neurological research has continually evidenced. Some girls may act in ways that a particular culture stereotypes to be ‘boyish’, and some boys, in that culture, a bit ‘girlish’.
Brett had more to say but other voices pressed to be heard. You can follow his link. Many of his points have solid research behind them that were noted in footnotes.However, for those individuals who struggle with gender dysphoria, we need to walk with them, sincerely loving them and helping them in the managing this distress.
Ryan Bomberger spoke to the issue of Freedom that I mentioned. Much of what passes for the 'transgender' issue is a front, a feint, a distraction, from the destruction of Freedom in the USA. The President rules - as he says - by the pen and the phone. Like any despot. He promised to 'Fundementally Transform' America, and by the Lord Harry he has been very successful. From the richest, freest, most 'devout' (in its way) nation it has descended into a facsimile of Hell. You are not allowed to think or speak freely without being shouted down and threatened, even arrested. A Fascist state is being born.
America in TRANS-ition: how LGBT activism turns freedom into fascism
Freedom doesn’t need reassignment surgery. But the scalpel is out. The anesthesia has been administered.
Tragically, most are asleep.
Overnight, we are witnessing the most radical (and destructive) transformation in America’s legal and cultural landscape than we’ve ever seen before. President Obama has long declared his intentions of “fundamentally transforming the United States of America”.
No one realized he meant the change would be of a sexual nature.
We’ve gone from “no one should have a say what goes on in the privacy of someone’s bedroom” to forced conformation through the loss of your job or business, the imposing of steep fines or even the threat of prison.
Bow to the rainbow god of LGBTQXYZ activism or you will be assimilated. I thought the Borg were some Star Trek fiction. But it’s the Obama administration and its fascist efforts to silence opposition and demand allegiance to the flag of the united states of LGBT fascism.
The recently fired baseball hall-of-famer, Curt Schilling, should have known better than to think free speech applied to him, personally. He dared to post a meme about transgenderism (not my style at all, but the First Amendment is more important than my own personal messaging preference). Silly conservative. It only applies to the Left as they parade their absolute intolerance through mainstream media, Hollywood, academia, public education, courts of law and now—aggressively—through the Department of (In)Justice.
Attorney General Loretta Lynch invoked Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX (as added in the 1972 Educational Amendments to the civil rights bill) in a press conference on C-SPAN attacking North Carolina’s recent House Bill 2, or HB2. She declared that these federal statutes were meant to cover “gender identity” issues because they bar discrimination based on “sex” (although the laws never mention this newly conjured up “gender identity”).
Well, if that’s the case, then scholarship-stealing former NAACP chapter president Rachel Dolezal is covered by “race identity”, too. Why can’t white people, who thinks they’re black, apply for any black minority-based scholarship?
Who are we to prevent their delusion…I mean, equality?
Lynch, who is adamantly pro-abortion, mentioned how the DOJ is concerned about discrimination against any American. Oh, but not those in the womb. Over 1 million a year have a lack of access to Life, but let’s pretend that the real injustice is the faux LGBT lack-of-access to bathrooms.
Never mind that the nation’s largest abortion chain has been caught on video and in documented evidence illegally selling aborted baby body parts for profit. Lynch wasn’t moved, as the nation’s top attorney, to act. But within weeks of #HB2 becoming law, the Civil Rights division of the DOJ moved with lightning speed to protect the “equal rights” of 0.1% of the population.
Lynch says that North Carolina’s common sense #HB2 “presents the problem that does not exist.” We haven’t yet legalized men (whether transgender or not, because those bathroom bills don’t require any proof of such “status") going into girls’ bathrooms and changing rooms on a nationwide scale. Of course, we’ve never seen any articles of men secretly videoing or photographing women in bathrooms or similar facilities. Lynch says “North Carolina’s HB2 is based on distinction without a difference.”
Really? No difference? Our sexual anatomy’s the same?
Lynch, like the rest of so-called progressives, compared the “transgender” issue with the struggle for dignity and justice of American blacks.
Comparing something that esteemed medical professionals like Dr. Paul McHugh (former psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital) and others call a “mental disorder” is nothing like the irrefutable innate characteristic of skin color.
Of course, the deluded NAACP’s leadership agrees that opposing men using women’s bathrooms (or vice versa) is akin to racist support of Jim Crow laws. This, from the organization that recently forgot the actual wording of the First Amendment and sued me (and The Radiance Foundation) for exercising my right to free speech. I accurately called the far-left, pro-abortion organization the “National Association for the Abortion of Colored People” in several of my articles. Thankfully, Alliance Defending Freedom defended my actual civil rights. The NAACP was crushed in court and smacked down by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals for trying to “censor speech it didn’t like.”
Here’s the thing. If we take this twisted liberal “logic” to its illogical conclusion by eradicating gender distinctions, it’s biological women (as if the term “women” needs a qualifier) who will always be harmed the most.Hmmmmm.
Since LGBT activists are hell-bent on pretending that biological binary sex is just a figment of our imagination, let’s just do away with all gender-divided sports, for instance. Men should now be able to play in all women’s sports.
Well, actually, there should be no women’s sports—just sports. Gee, I wonder which “gender” will dominate those records?
Science has shown repeatedly that even among the most elite of professional athletes, there is a huge gap in performance as evidenced by the 10%-25% difference in world records between men and women.
This isn’t sexism. It’s realism.
My wife and I are equal, but we’re not the same. She has a womb. I don’t. And I’m perfectly ok with that. She bore three of our four amazing children. She wins the Trophy of Strength Award for that category, all the way! We’re different, and no amount of political BS (bogus stuff) will change that.But ze Prezident hass ein Pen unt ein phone!
But Obama’s administration is desperately trying to force this nation into having reassignment surgery. Forget the Constitution.
Fundamentally transforming America requires ignoring the very thing that makes the United States great.
Law. Order. And a rich cultural heritage of Religious Freedom that “hold these truths to be self-evident”.
Apparently, common sense is not evident to this current President and those who work in our Executive Branch. Flagrantly disregarding the fact that they’re not in the legislative branch of government, they act like dictators, twisting the law to suit their gender-confused agenda.
This is no time to sleep, fellow Americans. The surgery is in progress, and it just might be irreversible.
This isn’t about loving anyone you want, tolerance, or equality.
Love illuminates the truth and lifts people out of their circumstances. Tolerance keeps people where they are and pretends there are no circumstances. (If you think that a perfectly healthy part of your anatomy needs to be cut off, there are definitely some circumstances.)
And equality is too precious to have it distorted and defined by those who do all they can to suppress the truth.America leads the world in many respects. The 'transgender' bizzo wasn't even on anyone's Radar until Obama put it there. Now all western, Anglophile nations are on the same bandwagon. The (SSTS) sudden spontaneous transgender syndrome may - or may not - pass away as quickly as it came but the ranters and froth-at-the-mouth-at-the-windows will always find some Trumped-up way of disrupting reason, social/civil discourse and sound behaviour.
Reason is diminishing. Tantrums are rising.
Better get the drinks in.