The Muse is Sick

Back to normal in the bars after the 'election' and a bit of soulful music from the crypt. By normal, of course, I mean the continuation of some of the more notable conversations regarding our times and the very odd folk we have dominating social discourse. I have been struck by just how many 'entertainers' feel the urge to pontificate on political matters when frankly their only claim to qualification is a following of brain-dead 'progressives' yet still with the cradle marks on their bums. The 'Yoof'.

Were their word their bond the airlines would be doing a roaring trade in ferrying them to other countries. But of course the threats to leave if Trump was elected have come to naught. "I know I said it but I wasn't singing for him, but for the choir". 'Entertainers' have a lot to answer for, and with the kindest will in the world I might excuse them with 'They know not what they do". Kindness can sometimes be hard work, and sometimes a knotted rope is more appropriate.

Rod Liddle and some 'Ladies' (not that they were together) were  in expanding some musical scores. Who could have guessed that some obscure musical half-wit had a hand in creating the mess we are in.

How Pete Burns helped to create our fatuous modern world

The 1980s popstar who paved the way for our current obsession with gender fluidity

So RIP Pete Burns, transgendered Scouse popstar. His indescribably awful song ‘You Spin Me Round (Like a Record)’ — clever allusion, no? — reached number one in 1985 and, as part of the band Dead Or Alive, he had a couple of minor follow-up hits.

 http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/10/how-pete-burns-helped-to-create-our-fatuous-modern-world/

When David Bowie died in January of this year, a lot was made of his supposed pioneering androgyny. I said here at the time that Bowie was deservedly famous for having written many melodically clever songs, rather than being at the forefront of the LGBT liberation movement, which he emphatically was not. Bowie may have been fashionably androgynous — so were Mick Jagger and even Marc Bolan before him. But one always knew that Bowie was a man and he did not pretend otherwise.

Burns, who possessed much chutzpah but not a single discernible shred of talent, [ Like so many of today's 'idles'] might have a greater claim to the old ‘breaking down barriers’ stuff. He looked like, and kind of became, a parody of a woman, resembling in his later years the New York socialite Jocelyn Wildenstein, horribly disfigured by plastic surgery, the skin on his face stretched taut and with a giant cod nailed to his mouth to resemble luscious lips.

The mid-1980s were really the first time we had seen this kind of thing and the still popular Top of the Pops was full of it — Pete Burns, the equally untalented Marilyn, a partially dreadlocked Boy George caterwauling his facile, syrupy hits and the marginally talented but charmless Grace Jones looking cross and very mannish. They had all probably been emboldened by Bowie but this was unquestionably a large step further.

I remember a review of a Boy George concert in the Evening Standard at the time — ‘Loved him, hated her’, the critic joked, without being prosecuted for a hate crime. The word ‘transgender’ was not, at that time, part of the popular lexicon — if the populace had a word, it would have been transvestite, or just tranny — and nor were there dire imprecations if you sniggered or made coarse and cruel jokes whenever Marilyn or Burns hove into view. Still less the insistence that their recent manifestation as women was more authentic than the gender they had been ‘assigned’ at birth. Cissexism, or the fatuous notion of it, did not exist. Even the singers themselves did not make such claims, even if they wanted to, which they did not.

But we move onwards and ever upwards towards a new age of enlightenment and I suppose we should thank Pete Burns for playing his minor role. So last week it was reported that a ‘Christian family’ — can you imagine having used that description in 1985? Isn’t that what we all were? — are at war with its local council and, more specifically, the social services department over the gender of their daughter. 

Next month the family will be hauled before a panel of these ideologically committed busybodies to decide whether the girl should be known at school by her given name, a girl’s name, or a boy’s name, which she says she would prefer.

The decision will not be made by the parents. 

The decision will be made by the social services. 

They will tell the parents that the scientific fact of their daughter’s gender is wrong and insist, contrary to the chromosomal evidence, that she is a he. 

And if the parents kick up a fuss, or carp or suggest that maybe we wait a few years, she’s very young and early adolescents are often confused about gender issues, then the parents may have their daughter taken away from them. 

The council has already begun addressing letters to the girl as if she were a boy and using the name she wishes to take — so that gives you some indication of which decision they’re likely to arrive at. And a psychiatrist has demanded that the child be referred to the Tavistock Centre in London so that, after a brief assessment, she can be injected with drugs to prepare her for a full sex change.

I should point out at this juncture that the child is 14 years old. Fourteen. The parents have suggested that their child has depression and that perhaps she should wait until she is 16, or preferably 18, before the authorities drug her. Until that point, they say, surely there must be an acceptance of parental control and the assumption that the mother and father know best for their child. 

But nope, not set against this weight of fervent and, to my mind, fascistic right-on ideology — and especially not, I would guess, when the parents have made the crucial mistake of describing themselves as ‘Christian’. 

Red rag to a bull, 

I would respectfully suggest to Ma and Pa. The redoubtable Christian Legal Centre is looking after the case for the parents and obviously any sane person would wish them luck.

This story came about in the same week as it was revealed that a seven-year-old boy, who was a boy, and looked like a boy, and wanted to be a boy, was being raised as a girl by his transgender-obsessed mother. 

On this occasion the social services were fully behind Mum — yep, put him in a nice frock, shove some ribbons in his hair, we’re right behind you. Luckily, when the case came to court, a judge lambasted the social workers for having encouraged the mother to cause real distress to the child. The judge placed the little boy under the care of his father who is, one assumes, less markedly deranged than the mother. He said he could not understand why so many concerns were ‘disregarded so summarily’ by social services staff. He added that social workers had ‘moved into wholesale acceptance that (the boy) should be regarded as a girl’.

But I suppose we cannot blame Pete Burns for all of this lunacy. 

Social services departments are in thrall to a more malevolent agenda than Pete ever envisaged.

Let us take a quick look at that case, Rod spoke of.........

A seven-year-old boy has been removed from his mother’s care by the high court, after he was found to be suffering “significant emotional harm” due to his mother raising him as a girl.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/10/22/boy-treated-as-a-girl-by-his-mother-suffered-significant-emotional-harm-court-hears/

The judge in the case slammed social services who had simply accepted that the boy should be treated as a girl.

The High Court judge hearing the case, Mr Justice Hayden, told the court that he believed the mother had been “absolutely convinced” that the boy “perceived himself as a girl” and was therefore determined to treat him as a girl, according to reports.

However, the boy, who cannot be named and is now living with his father, has naturally reverted to having masculine interests since leaving the care of his mother, the court heard.

Not all mothers are sane.

In fact the evidence is now pouring in that most 'transgendered' people are not altogether sane.

I do not particularly care, m'self, if a chap wants to dress in girly kit (even if he looks daft) or a girl wants to wear trousers. The female of the species does - and always has done - wears whatever she wants in the way of clothing. Some of that looks daft too. I will even be polite to them in the Tavern.  But kiddies are a different matter.

And the adults who 'progressively' encourage, even force children into the image that the adult's sick mind demands deserve to be taken aside and gently corrected. That knotted rope would be handy.

Even worse is the craven kow-towing we see from 'authorities, as Rod mentioned. One cannot help but get the well-evidenced impression that many of the 'staff', supported by sick politicians, are all too willing to engage in persecution, using transgender-claiming loons as their weapons. They go after those Christians, Rod also mentioned. Even archbishops !

In Tasmania we have one such.  A parody of woman that should get most ordinary women up in arms. But of course few dare say a word.

 But, to the evidence, and the resistance that is latterly coming forward. The ladies I sopke of, sitting at a table in the Canadian Bar.

The LGBT fraud has been exposed, and they’re definitely not happy about it

Those who are setting our so-called “values”, such as the small but powerful group of academics, mainstream media, and homosexual activists, do so by attempting to impose strange myths and ideas that have no scientific basis.

 https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/deceit-and-lies-we-have-been-told-on-homosexuality

These myths include the one that homosexuals are “born that way”, can’t change, and must be accepted for “who they are”.

We are, indeed, who we are, until we go to sleep, and then who are we? We wake the next day an entire eight hours (or so) further down the road to person we are becoming.  We are not so much a 'what, right now' as a 'work in progress'.

Further, those claiming they are a different gender than that with which they were born, i.e. the transgendered, who “feel” they belong to other than their gender at birth, must be accepted as such.

The public is supposed to put aside its intelligence and common sense, and respectfully bow collectively in obeisance to these “expert” opinions. 

These opinions, however, are complete and utter hogwash.

We know instinctively that they are not authentic, or worthy of our belief. However, the myth-makers attempt to force their nonsense on us by the heavy hand of the law, claiming that it’s “discrimination” to refuse to accept the myths as truth.  Jurisdictions which don’t obey their rulings are economically punished, parents are forbidden to protect their children from the monstrous “bathroom” laws that permit males to use girls’ showers, lockers and change rooms.  It’s all a fraud based on propaganda with no scientific legitimacy.

Bombshells Explode The Myths

However, two bombshells have exploded that have shattered these myths, and the opinion-makers haven’t yet controlled its fall-out.

The first bombshell was a landmark study published in The Journal – The New Atlantis, (August 23, 2016). The Journal is a well-known journal of science, technology and ethics based in Washington D.C.  This article analysed the scientific evidence of LGBT issues published to date in scientific journals.

The report was authored by two eminent scholars. Dr. Laurence Mayer, a professor of psychiatry and statistics and biostatistics at Arizona State University, stated in the preface to the study that he has testified in dozens of federal and state legal proceedings strongly supporting equality and opposing discrimination for the LGBT Community. However, Dr. Mayer stated he supports every sentence in this report without reservation since it is about science and medicine.  He also stated he was alarmed to learn during his review of over 500 scientific articles that 

the LGBT community bears a disproportionate rate of mental health problems compared to the population as a whole.

The other author is Dr. Paul McHugh, one of the leading psychiatrists in the world. He was psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore from 1975 to 2001.  These scientists reviewed hundreds of peer reviewed studies on sexual orientation and gender identity from the biological, psychological and social sciences.  Their conclusions were as follows:

• The belief that sexual orientation is an innate, biologically fixed human property – that people are “born that way” – is not supported by scientific evidence.

• The belief that gender identity is an innate, fixed human property independent of biological sex – so that a person might be a ‘man trapped in a woman’s body’ or ‘a woman trapped in a man’s body’ – is not supported by scientific evidence.

• Only a minority of children who express gender-atypical thoughts or behaviour will continue to do so into adolescence or adulthood. There is no evidence that all such children should be encouraged to become transgender, much less subjected to hormone treatments or surgery. 

• Non-heterosexual and transgender people have higher rates of mental health problems (anxiety, depression, suicide), as well as behavioral and social problems (substance abuse, intimate partner violence), than the general population. Discrimination alone does not account for the entire disparity.

The second bombshell was exploded by a top researcher for the American Psychological Association (APA), lesbian activist, Dr. Lisa Diamond, co-author-in-chief of ‘the APA Handbook’ of sexuality and psychology and one of the APA’s most respected members.   

She admitted that sexual orientation was “fluid” and not unchangeable.  By doing so, Dr. Diamond confirmed that the myth that “homosexuals can’t change” is now a dead-end theory.   

She summarized the relevant findings in a lecture at Cornell University stating that abundant research has now established that sexual orientation – including attraction, behaviour and self-identity – is fluid for both adolescents and adults for both genders.

Her announcement flies in the face of legislation in several US states and Ontario, Canada, which ban “reparative therapy”, which seeks to help patients experiencing same-sex attraction.

It also destroys the argument by homosexual activists that sexual orientation is the “civil rights movement of our times”.   

This is poppycock.   

Sexual desire is based on something other than genetics, including primarily, a person’s relationships, culture and other experiences, not genetics or prenatal hormones.

The only thing that science actually tells us is that we are born either male or female.

Errant, harmful ideologies and lies, especially those which diminish and endanger the lives of children, should be condemned without delay.

Clearly, the laws on sexual orientation and the transgendered must be reassessed in light of the truth now being exposed. We can waste no more time on such inanities.

Reaction of Homosexual Activists and the Media

The mainstream media ignored these bombshells. The homosexual Human Rights Campaign (HRC), however, was not about to allow them to affect its continued existence, and the estimated nearly $49 million it hauls in annually from contributions, which maintain its luxurious headquarters in Washington D.C.   

More importantly, it was not about to relinquish the tremendous power and influence it holds over society – especially the law makers and the media.

The HRC reacted as it usually does when its power base is threatened. It is to attack, attack, and attack.  On this occasion, it went for the jugular of the New Atlantis Journal, which had defied it by exposing the true facts about homosexuality.  The HRC published a criticism of the Journal’s research review, characterizing Drs. Mayer and McHugh as “Anti-Trans All-Stars”, and “anti-LGBTQ” promoters seeking to “marginalize” and mock people.  They accused the authors of intentional “misleading statements” and “biased interpretations.”

Golly. They will be denouncing Doctors next as anti-virus and anti-fractures, 

The editors of the New Atlantis Journal, however, were not about to put up with HRC’s nonsense.  The latter was only lies and distortions.   

In a special publication entitled 

“Lies and Bullying from the Human Rights Campaign” 

it delineated how HRC had distorted the journal’s recent publication on homosexuality stating in the introduction “Most of the HRC document is an exercise in distortion”.  It then tackled in detail these distortions.

We can also be assured that HRC is scrambling behind the scenes to find suitable ideologically correct researchers to commence a study, funded either by the HRC directly, or, more probably, by one of the corporate mad dogs held in its kennel, to dispute the study in the New Atlantis Journal and APA.   

When this new study is released, probably within a year, it will be with great fanfare and extensive coverage in the media.  It will be presented as “The Truth”.   

It will, however, be a fraud and deceit based on flawed methodology.  How can it be otherwise, when its findings are pre-determined?  

There is much practice in this sort of 'advocacy' research. The entire Feminist Ideology runs on it and provides a very comfortable living for academic and media liars intent on the ruination of western society. 

The purpose of the study will be for propaganda only and it will be merely a feeble house of cards.  It should be disregarded by those with any intelligence and common sense with the knowledge that such a study is only an attempt by well-funded homosexual activists to continue their control over society.

Meanwhile, I will continue to pull pints for all souls who drop by, whatever their ilk. I do not judge against them until they piss on the carpet, As some are wont to do!

Then the Bouncer comes to sort them out.

Pax