|
"Transgender" Lunacy THE FOLLOWING CONSISTS OF articles I have posted on the subject of "transgender" issues over the last few years. Articles are reproduced here in the order originally posted, with the original posting date and link given at the beginning of each. A Few Observations About Bitcoin, TDS, "Gender Dysphoria" And Section 230 An eclectic mix, I know. But the mind goes where the mind wants to go... ... I WATCHED AN INTERESTING FILM the other day, in which the refreshingly brash, witty and mostly-sensible Steven Crowder set up a table on a university campus inviting any one who cared to attempt to convince him that there are more genders than the two-- male and female-- which have been universally-recognized in all places and all times by all of human-kind, including the giants of philosophy, psychology, anthropology and sociology down through the ages-- even those from among cultures in which homosexuality, cross-dressing and other gender-bending practices were common and tolerated-- as the sum total in the category. I was prompted to a few thoughts. Transgendered people want to exercise or adopt characteristics of what they imagine to be gender roles incompatible with their biological selves. Their "dysphoria" is just an unhealthy embrace of Hollywood male and female stereotypes by which they are led to believe that biological men or biological women cannot have or exercise the desired faculties or behaviors, such as men being compassionate or nurturing, or women being strong or entrepreneurial. Equipped with a better-educated (or more thoughtful) grasp of the realities of human nature which is unbent by ideological nonsense (probably) from the radical feminist or homosexual communities (which are doubtless happy to be pushed toward the center of the spectrum by the growth of a new element on the fringe), those otherwise imagining "gender transformation" as the only route to their preferred social role would realize that their baked-in, natural, biological self is perfectly suited to the job (and much more so than the contorted Procrustean solution of pretending that they are what they plainly are not). At the same time, equipped with a better-educated (or more thoughtful) grasp of the realities of human nature unclouded by a pointless compulsion to be what they are not, today's "transgender" community would cease its pressure on a generously-spirited American population to accommodate its socially destructive delusions about the nature of sex and gender. It's a win-win outcome. *** Speaking Plainly About "Transgender" Madness No culture can long survive the embrace of delusions and denial. LET'S START OUT BY PUTTING DOWN a marker: Someone who would mutilate his or her own body with scalpels or chemicals in service to the delusion that they are-- or are meant to be-- a gender which they are not is deeply ill. Put another way, anyone so far gone into the delusion that they are, or are meant to be, a gender which they are not as to mutilate themselves with scalpels or chemical, is deeply ill. Further, anyone who would facilitate, encourage, or exploit such a harmful delusion or such harmful behavior-- for any reason, even what is imagined to be an exercise of compassion (but is really just moral and intellectual laziness)-- is deeply corrupt in intellect, or spirit, or both. And any culture that refuses to acknowledge the foregoing is doomed. IT'S VERY HARD to speak of these matters. A blitzkrieg on behalf of "trans" delusions storms across the country, weaponizing social media, the MSM, co-opted commercial interests and beneficiary professionals, all with the smirking support of the "brave new normal" Biden administration and its allies in Congress. The object of the assault is to discourage clear thinking and plain speech about this infection of madness which has lately erupted into the open like never before. These corrupt supporting voices mean to see "trans" and "gender fluidity" fictions normalized in America beyond any chance of uprooting. The declared objects of the blitzkrieg are "inclusion" and "tolerance" and, yes, "compassion". But experience teaches us that political and commercial capital is seldom, if ever, spent for such benign and altruistic purposes. I SUSPECT THAT THE REAL REASON (or one of the real reasons) behind this muscular push to mainstream manifest insanity-- which afflicts less than half of one percent of Americans, and therefore is plainly not defended and encouraged for direct political or commercial reasons-- is otherwise. I suspect the real reason behind this indefensible embrace of lunacy is to support the interests of the somewhat larger communities of homosexuals, those embracing a certain extreme strain of radical feminism, and advocates and apologists for the welfare state. All of the above-mentioned groups are inordinately influential in Democrat party politics and the superficial popular culture. All, I suspect, feel threatened in their ideological, legal and political arguments by the continued recognition by the rest of us that men and women are distinguishable from each other by inherent personality and psychological traits, the key fact disputed by "trans" and "gender fluidity" advocacy. That threat would lie in the fact that because men and women ARE harmonious but distinctly different complements of each other, same-sex couples and single-parent households-- in which one half or the other of the human whole is missing-- cannot raise psychologically-healthy children. Children raised in such an environment never have a chance to learn the complex dance of give and take by which men and women interweave their diverse interests, strengths, and interlocking supports to produce nature's proper social and psychological whole. In light of this fact, the handing over of children to same sex couples, and the evaporation of stigma previously serving to discourage unmarried women from having babies, become problems to be solved, rather than social evolution we all should continue to quietly tolerate and accommodate. Obviously, that transformation of perspective would gore a few oxen. Just as obviously, those oxen would be spared if "gender fluidity" settles into the public consciousness, with its "repudiation" of the notion of actual inherent differences between men and women. But a healthy society cannot last when abuse of its children is "normed", and when social, political and legal policy rests on the rejection of reality. NOW, I'M JUST SPITBALLIN' HERE, of course-- at least as to the motivations behind the defense of the "trans" thing. I will continue to watch and learn and consider, and perhaps I will conclude otherwise in time. The observations with which I began, however, about the insanity of "gender dysphoria" and "reassignment" surgery, and the intellectual and spiritual corruption of those who promote and enable it (especially those who promote and enable it in children), are a done deal. They are as certain and correct as the fact that the sun will rise in the morning. *** Potpourri Brief comments on selected subjects of interest. ... *** FINALLY, I HAVE SOME recommended statutory language upon which every state legislature can and should build: "Any act or practice which prompts, fosters, encourages or perpetuates the notion that a child is not fit or suited or proper to the biological sex with which he or she is born or the physical characteristics thereof, or which can reasonably be expected to prompt, foster, encourage or perpetuate such dysphoria, is child abuse." It's way past time to put an end to this "trans-gender" madness by which so many young lives-- and our language, our respect for rationality and our ability to (at least publicly) distinguish reality from self-serving or outright delusional fancies-- are being destroyed. *** Life Imitating Art... ...or something like that...
WHENEVER I THINK OF THE PATHETIC CHILDREN distorted from their natural and healthy body-mind integration into unnatural and unhealthy disintegration by monsters in the home or the social or institutional environment, resulting in "queerness" of either the conventional or (especially) the relatively-recently-added "trans" variety, a representative image comes into my head. That image is of the broken and unnaturally-reconfigured toys from the 1995 movie 'Toy Story'. In light of the Disney Company's recently outed and directly-stated goal of being one such social monster, it is ironic that the company itself, in an earlier persona, prefigured the plague of mental disease to the spreading of which it would later deliberately aspire in a particularly memorable and well-tuned fashion. HERE'S ANOTHER IMAGE that I think is useful for representing the pathology of "queer" disintegration-- the "woman suit" being sewn together from skin taken from the victims of Buffalo Bill in 'Silence of the Lambs':
The suit is Bill's effort to reconfigure his outward appearance in conformity to what his diseased mind imagines to be its "real" and "proper" nature. Sound familiar? Today, life for a growing list of victims has been made to imitate this horrific "art". While Buffalo Bill's psychosis was just a shocking element central to a gripping crime novel of the 1980s, today the mutilation of children to satisfy the same deeply disturbed notions of "gender dysphoria" is a commonplace. Girls around the country (as well as elsewhere in the world) are groomed into "wanting" (and submitting to) the lopping off of their healthy breasts and other extreme, irreversible harms for the purpose of "rectifying" an encouraged discomfort with their natural, healthily-integrated selves. Boys are groomed into "wanting" (and submitting to) the same mutilations and chemical abuses. It is a plague of mind-boggling insanity. THOSE ALREADY FALLEN PREY to the socially-engendered plague of gender confusion, who are made less uncomfortable in their illness by its normalization, have succeeded in heavily stigmatizing observations like these, I know. But healthy Americans cannot, in good conscience, leave that stigmatization unlaid, and allow these 'Brave New World' degenerations of our common culture to continue unchecked. Denounce this madness, and all those who defend and encourage it. "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." -Voltaire *** Other Voices (followed by an important afterword) How Sex Became Gender The modern denial of biology undermines an essential part of the human story. by Robert Lynch Jim Gaffigan has this joke about a scientist who mistakes the male seahorse for the female and then stubbornly refuses to admit his mistake after learning that the one he’d called the male is pregnant. It’s a funny bit, but it hinges on a common misunderstanding that sex designations are arbitrary. The biological definition of males and females is entirely based on the size of the sex cells, called gametes, that they produce. Males produce the smaller gametes and females produce the larger ones. When scientists discover a new sexually reproducing species, gamete size is how they determine the sexes. In humans, males release between 200 and 500 million tiny sperm in each ejaculation while females have a lifetime supply of around 400, much larger, eggs. This initial asymmetry in gamete size may not seem like a big deal, but it leads to a whole cascade of evolutionary effects that result in diverging paths for each sex, which we call sexual selection. If male and female bothers you, call them little and big, but regardless of what you call them, this foundational cell-sized difference in gamete size has profound effects on both evolution and behavior. Sexual reproduction that involves the union of gametes of different sizes is called anisogamy, and it sets the stage for phenotypic differences between males and females. Robert Trivers laid down the basic argument, which he later described in biblical terms (“the scales fell from my eyes”), in one of the most cited papers in biology, when he wrote “What governs the operation of sexual selection is the relative parental investment of the sexes in their offspring.” This fundamental insight provides the framework for understanding the emergence of sex differences across all sexually reproducing species. Because male animals can produce millions of sperm cells quickly and cheaply, the main factor limiting male reproductive success is their ability to attract females, whereas the primary limiting factor for females, who, in humans, spend an additional nine months carrying the baby, is access to resources. The most reproductively successful men (e.g., Genghis Khan is likely to have had more than 16 million direct male descendants) can invest little and let the chips fall where they may, while the most successful women are restricted by the length of pregnancy. By replacing “female” with “the sex that invests more in its offspring,” however, we can extract Trivers’s general argument, and one of the most falsifiable predictions in all of biology—the sex that invests more in its offspring will be more selective when choosing a mate, and the sex that invests less will compete over access to mates. Find a single species where the sex that invests less in offspring is choosier, and the entire theory is disproved. The brilliance of this insight is that it explains both the general rule and all of the exceptions. Because of the initial disparity in investment, females will usually be more selective in choosing mates. Trivers explained something that had puzzled evolutionary biologists ever since Darwin and also explained why the male seahorse, which really does get pregnant, is choosier, and the female seahorse is bigger. The assertion that male and female is an arbitrary classification is false on every level. Not only does it confuse primary sexual characteristics (i.e., the reproductive organs) which are unambiguously male or female at birth 99.8 percent of the time with secondary sexual characteristics (e.g., more hair on the faces of men or larger breasts in women), it ignores the very definition of biological sex. Although much has been made of the fact that sex differences in body size, ornamental features, hormonal profiles, behavior, and lots of other traits vary widely across species, that these differences are minimal or non-existent in some species, or that a small percentage of individuals, due to disorders of development, possess an anomalous mix of female and male traits, none of it undermines or challenges this basic distinction. Sex is binary. There is no third sex. Click here to read the rest of this article ...and then proceed to the afterword below...
Afterword "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." -Voltaire ROBERT LYNCH HAS FURNISHED US with a great refresher on the simple realities of biology, a scientific discipline currently under sustained attack by the sort of demented, nihilistic forces once remarked upon in a popular film of a few years back as simply wanting to watch the world burn. I share my own sense of these monsters in this article from last edition. Some illuminating observations about the technical and social dynamics by which the contagion of these delusional enemies of reality is spread can be found in this excellent piece by Jared Eckert. An excellent and importantly-disquieting sense of the depth of the depravity involved in these attacks can be had by way of Matt Walsh's recent film, 'What is a Woman' (97% audience enthusiasm on Rotten Tomatoes). AS I ALLUDED-TO ABOVE, "transgender" insanity is threatening the health and integrity of biology as a science. This results primarily from the huge and alternative-eclipsing footprint of tax-funded government grants to research and educational institutions which reward only "research" and "scholarly" output consistent with the ascendant political agenda. That is, either see that your "research" and "scholarship" supports the "trans" contrivances (and other politically-correct positions), or say goodbye to funding. The corrosive effect of this dynamic on the quality (or even basic validity) of the affected body of work and the discipline in which it dominates is obvious. And all fields of study are potentially subject to this ruinous effect-- think "climate science", for example, or epidemiology for a couple of examples. How about law? The threat of which we speak arises from one simple factor-- the enormous resources handed over to the federal government which can be turned into oppressive weapons taking politically-driven control of information and inquiry, with the result being an ignorant or misinformed population, vulnerable to manipulation, and an increasingly incompetent technical sector being relied upon by all consumers-- public and private-- of what is supposed to be the best possible understanding of reality. There is an answer, of course-- take from the state the resources by which independent research and scholarship are corroded and twisted to political ends. Starve the eight-hundred pound gorilla currently skewing research efforts into demented snark-hunts by which nonsense is "supported" down to its Constitutional dimensions by which no federal money is devoted to research grants at all, and let the true and unfettered spirit of inquiry rule, as it used to do for the most part throughout the first 150 years or so of American history. One simple act by each individual American will do the trick, and it needs no approval or agreement from any institutional authority. That one simple thing will function as a catalyst, compelling the beneficial reorganization of our whole societal and political structure as a natural and inevitable process. You can see a learn all about this solution in this little two-page paper. Read it, think about it, share it. *** A Legislative Agenda For The Protection Of Our Children And Our Culture ...from grotesque medical and judicial malpractice, and from a dangerously arrogant technocratic governmental apparatus. I WAS SHOCKED AND DISMAYED the other day... I saw a report that a three-judge panel of the 8th federal Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of Arkansas's 2021 ban on the mutilation of children with the chemical and surgical destruction of perfectly healthy body parts and functions under the influence of so-called "trans health care" madness issued by a federal district court judge in a suit against the ban brought by the ACLU. The ban was enacted with a super-majority of the Arkansas legislature-- the gold-standard of the people's expression of their sovereign will-- but is thwarted (for the moment, and for so long as the people of Arkansas are willing to let their sovereignty hinge on approval by judges appointed for life by those with their own political agenda and who reside 1500 miles away). The judicial reasoning for the interference by these arrogant judges, as reported by Jurist.org, is that the Arkansas act, "prohibits medical treatment that conforms with 'the recognized standard of care for adolescent gender dysphoria,' that such treatment 'is supported by medical evidence that has been subject to rigorous study,' and that the purpose of the Act is 'not to ban a treatment [but] to ban an outcome that the State deems undesirable.'" LET'S START BY OBSERVING THAT "ban[ning] an outcome[s] that the State deems undesirable" is the very point of a state's police power. Any judge that doesn't understand this-- and the federalism that leaves such matters solely in the hands of the individual states-- should be removed from the bench. It may be little known in this ill-educated day and age, but the notion of federal veto power over state legislation was proposed in the Constitutional Convention in 1787 and was defeated. The Fourteenth Amendment, often cited as a justification for federal interference in state sovereignty of the sort to which Arkansas is now being subjected, merely obliges states to apply their laws even-handedly, employ due process before depriving anyone of life, liberty or property, and (perhaps redundantly) respect the "privileges and immunities" of citizens of the United States. Nothing in these provisions can reasonably be construed to thwart a state's authority to prohibit the mutilation of children, as long as the mutilation of ALL children is prohibited, not just the mutilation of Asian children, for example, or just the mutilation of left-handed children. Almost amusingly, the once-respectable, now clownish ACLU, recognizing the problem for judicial interference outlined above, tries to spin its way out by turning the inconvenient truth sideways and applying a ridiculous tautology. The Union argues that because the "treatments" involved are related to "gender transition", the Arkansas law targets only "transgender patients" (while risibly suggesting that "transgender patients" are a distinct and protected class of individuals), and therefore: "discriminates on the basis of sex and transgender status by prohibiting certain medical treatments only for transgender patients and only when the care is 'related to gender transition.'" But the Arkansas law does no such thing. As suggested above, the Arkansas act prohibits the "treatments" involved from being inflicted upon anyone below the age of 18: (a) A physician or other healthcare professional shall not provide gender transition procedures to any individual under eighteen (18) years of age. (b) A physician, or other healthcare professional shall not refer any individual under eighteen (18) years of age to any healthcare professional for gender transition procedures. Pages and pages are devoted to defining and explaining "gender transition procedures", so as to leave no doubt as to what is prohibited, but "any individual under eighteen (18) years of age" stands on its own and means just what it says. PAST THE FEDERALISM PROBLEM (which is enough by itself to invalidate this judicial interference in Arkansas's exercise of its People's will) let's look at these prohibited "treatments" which the court (and the ACLU) choose to describe as "medical" (in an effort to stigmatize the Arkansas act as though it equates to a prohibition of chemotherapy for cancer patients). Cutting off (or chemically destroying) perfectly healthy and functional body parts, such as "top surgery" where the healthy breasts of (in cases relevant to this issue) adolescent girls are lopped off, or "bottom surgery" in which existing, healthy primary sex organs (penises and vaginas) are cut off (usually followed by grotesque and inevitably futile attempts to recreate in their place the organs of the opposite sex) are not "medical treatments". Nor is the chemical neutering of children by way of puberty blockers and massive doses of opposite-sex hormones. Instead, these are evil acts inflicted, for lots of money, upon pathetic victims who are obviously not of sound mind-- often due in part to the encouragement of delusions, confusions, and deeply-harmful self-loathing by the very parties profiting from the procedures-- and who are, in any event, below the age at which they are legally and mentally capable of informed consent. THEN THERE'S THE REFERENCE in the interfering judge's ruling to "the recognized standard of care for adolescent gender dysphoria". This effort to elevate technocracy to sovereign status is especially pernicious and obnoxious. Some healthcare administration bureaucrat's (or bureaucracy's) views of what is appropriate care for what he or it imagines to be a "medical condition"-- or those of some "professional organization"-- in no way mandates the acceptance of such views or practices by the people of Arkansas, any more than the practice of abortion in California-- or its enthusiastic employment or endorsement by the "Abortion Providers of America" (or whatever such folks might call themselves collectively)-- can be labeled the "standard of care" for unhappily-pregnant women and therefore imposed in other places. As much as the "progressive' mindset would like to have it otherwise, in America neither the People nor their state agents are subordinate to the views of professional organizations, such as the American Psychiatric Association or WPATH. The People and their state agents aren't even subordinate to their own in-state medical communities (something starkly illustrated by the widespread disregard-- and even suppression-- of the views of vast numbers of their resident medical professionals concerning COVID-19 by the governments of many states during 2020 and 2021). "Standard of care" is entirely irrelevant to any proper judicial consideration of Arkansas's enactment. Furthermore, the very term "care" is being promiscuously abused in this ruling. After all, rather than make any effort to explain to the deluded child seeking "care" that he or she is just having a not-so-unusually-confusing transition to adulthood which will all resolve itself in due course, the "providers" turn straight to assuring the victim that he or she is-- as though by dark magic-- bizarrely trapped in the wrong body, and that drastic sausage-factory chemical consumption and slice and dice surgeries can actually make him or her into a member of the opposite sex (or at least something other than the natural sex to which they have been steered into finding uncomfortable). This behavior is hardly an administration of "care". It is, instead, service to trans-enthusiast agenda, an effort by the "providers" to affirm their own prior bad choices by producing another apologist for those choices, or a simple satisfaction of a financial interest. FINALLY, THERE IS THE PROBLEM in the ruling by the courts with the very use of the term "medical". There is no medical issue involved with "gender dysphoria", even if it is accepted for purposes of argument as a real distress (rather than a corruptly and maliciously-- or at best, recklessly-- instilled and nurtured anxiety, delusion and fixation). Under its own terms, "gender dysphoria" is a mental disease. It's not, after all, the cause (or product) of rashes, joint pain, lumps, organ compromise or failure, or any other physical dysfunction. It is, rather-- on its own terms-- all in the victim's head. In short, "gender dysphoria" is not a medical condition, calling for medical care. It is a mental condition, calling for therapy, perhaps psychological, or perhaps spiritual or philosophical, designed to heal the deluded notion that the body into which one is born is somehow not the right one. Treating "gender dysphoria" as a medical condition requiring medical intervention-- especially radical, irreversible chemical and surgical intervention-- is as inappropriate as treating protracted grief or anxiety with a lobotomy. What's the saying? The operation was a success, but the patient died... With "trans-genderism", the operation cannot succeed-- men can never become women, nor women, men (and mentally-healthy members of either sex have no interest in such transformation even if it were possible). As shown by the insane and corrupt judicial rulings by the federal district court and now even a panel of a federal appellate court in the ACLU's suit against Arkansas, trying to pretend otherwise is killing respect for objective truths and the most rudimentary medical and scientific principles and observable facts, and hence, the culture that nourishes and protects us all. I'M GOING TO CLOSE THIS SEGMENT with a few words about the Arkansas law prohibiting the "trans-gender" mutilations of kids. It's a good law, but I have a few constructive comments that I think might help other states when enacting their own versions of the same. My first comment is that while once it gets to the statements of prohibition the act is very nicely straightforward and simple, there is too much explanation and apologia beforehand. No legislature needs to justify prohibition of the chemical or surgical destruction of healthy and functional body parts of minor children, even when others may be all enthused to do such heinous things. It is not, in other words, necessary to expressly ban (and hence, oblige oneself to define at great length) "gender transition procedures". Indeed, just using such labels is way too accommodating of the lunacy being prohibited. It should be enough to criminalize the administration of function-destroying chemical or surgical procedures to physically-healthy children, period, whether for purported "gender dysphoria relief" or any other purpose. After all, for what other purpose are such things done? It says a lot that none can be named (except as will be tellingly seen in the "ONE LAST THING" portion below). Second, I recommend cold-eyed clarity in any statement of purpose or "sense of the legislature" serving as a preamble to the legislation. For instance, WHEREAS SO-CALLED "GENDER DYSPHORIA" is an induced distress resulting from parental and/or professional misconduct by which minor children become afflicted with severe confusion and anxiety over their natural and immutable biological sex... ...going on to criminalize function-destroying chemical or surgical procedures administered to physically-healthy minor children in the pursuit of "gender dysphoria" relief or for any reason whatever; prohibit the use of state funds for any such procedure, etc.; and impose criminal sanctions upon anyone found to have encouraged "gender dysphoria" in any child by any means or method-- including the use of biologically inappropriate pronouns or names, even at the request of the supposedly gender dysphoric child. The "trans" agenda, and the political and social dynamic to which it gives rise, brings to my mind nothing so much as William Golding's horrifying cautionary tale, 'Lord of the Flies', with some notes of Orwell, Huxley and Kafka blended in. Our children and their children need to be spared this insanity and its evil effects, and it falls to us to strangle this serpent before it becomes too big to handle. ONE LAST THING: Arkansas attorney general Leslie Rutledge has said that she will take the rulings in the ACLU lawsuit to the full 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, and good for her. I wish her well in that endeavor. I also recommend to her the study of American law and jurisprudence regarding female genital mutilation for some authorities that will be helpful in formulating her arguments. Here is an excerpt from the Wkipedia article on the subject which shows how and why that study will likely be productive: In 1996 the Federal Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation Act made it illegal to perform FGM on minors for non-medical reasons, and in 2013 the Transport for Female Genital Mutilation Act prohibited transporting a minor out of the country for the purpose of FGM. The first FGM conviction in the US was in 2006, when Khalid Adem, who had emigrated from Ethiopia, was sentenced to ten years for aggravated battery and cruelty to children after severing his two-year-old daughter's clitoris with a pair of scissors. A federal judge ruled in 2018 that the 1996 Act was unconstitutional, arguing that FGM is a "local criminal activity" that should be regulated by states. Twenty-four states had legislation banning FGM as of 2016, and in 2021 the STOP FGM Act of 2020 was signed into federal law. I ask anyone reading this who might have Ms. Rutledge's ear to please forward this article to her attention asap. The permalink is here. *** More Comments And Observations, In Brief Overlooked "trans care" crimes; mislabeling of abortion; the real purpose of "identity politics"; and the truth about "emergency powers". IT IS ARGUED that interfering with so-called "trans care" threatens the lives of children upon whom that "care" (actually, chemical and surgical mutilation-- see an in-depth discussion here) is to be administered. This hinges on the notion that without the "care" purporting to transition these children in facsimiles of the opposite sex, the children will suicide due to the unrelieved distress at being in "the wrong body". But the distress experienced by these kids only arises because monsters have implanted into their naive, vulnerable and malleable minds the delusional "wrong body" notion, along with the idea that every anxiety the child experiences as he or she moves into adolescence (and as all children similarly situated have always experienced for all of human history) can be relieved by the provider-profiting mutilations being offered. Absent those implanted delusions, no child is going to harm him-or herself over the lack of "trans care". The protection of the children from threat rationale, then, lies in cleansing the child of the distressing delusions, not in feeding or affirming them. And in the larger view, the protection of the children lies in harsh punishment of the monsters promoting and implanting the distress and the delusions. Every state legislature should, if found necessary in its current interpretation of its laws, add to its definitions of child abuse such promotion and implantation efforts, and any form of encouragement of the delusions. *** The Ugly Face Of Gender Confusion Disorder ...and the even greater ugliness of its promoters and exploiters. LAST WEEK AMERICA WAS TREATED to a disturbing display of disturbed Americans occupying the Oklahoma state Capitol. These folks, all afflicted with Gender Confusion Disorder (GCD), seized the building in an effort to intimidate the Oklahoma legislature and governor Kevin Stitt into backing down on the criminalization of "medical" exploitation of the syndrome, which involves the lucrative but appalling practice of chemical and surgical mutilation of the deluded victims, in manifestly futile and counter-productive efforts to convert males into females (or provide the appearance thereof), and vice-versa. Among the long-term effects of these horrendous abuses is the sterilization of the victims-- who are often young children induced into the disorder and led to believe that its remedy is "affirmation" of the confusion, rather than its correction, by pushers with a financial or psychological self-interest in swelling the numbers of these poor sufferers. Even when falling short of that level of irreversible tragedy, the mere encouragement-- active or passive-- of GCD sets its victims up for long-term psychological harm as critical adolescent growth of comfort and confidence in a young person's true identity-- sexual and otherwise-- is lost in the fog of the illness. I'LL FOREGO THE OPPORTUNITY to compare the governmental and media reaction to this GCD "insurrection" and the reaction to the much more peaceful and respectful behavior in the US Capitol on January 6, 2021 of folks there to see evidence of now well-established election-rigging given a fair hearing in front of the whole of Congress before the certification of disputed election results (see here, here and here). My focus here is on the so-called "trans" community and its agenda and its recent adoption of a militant demeanor. I had no personal experience with militancy among the GCD-afflicted during the first few years of its eruption. Indeed, my only direct experience with such folks at all was by encounter now and then with a man pathetically and futilely pretending he is a woman, or a woman pretending to be a man at some business. Off-putting and creepy, but quiet. Lately, however, the GCD "community"-- fortified by a now familiar, seemingly coordinated, campaign of ubiquitous exposure and celebration in the mainstream media-- has taken a page from the "loud and proud" gay playbook, escalating rapidly into in-your-face confrontations like the one seen in Oklahoma. And lately, I have had some personal experience of that. BACK IN OCTOBER, my daughter and I participated in a rally at the Nashville War Memorial in support of legislation in Tennessee to ban the mutilation and other "affirmational" abuses of children under 18 in the name of gender confusion. I've attached a video, below, consisting of several segments I recorded with my phone during the affair, stitched together into about ten minutes of total footage. My recordings weren't taken with an eye toward exposing or illustrating GCD militants. Rather, I meant simply to memorialize the impressive size of the turnout by supporters of the legislation-- about 10,000, it is estimated-- who gathered with little prior notice. This is important, in my view, as activism and visible support for a virtuous position encourages more of the same, and the position being supported here is VERY virtuous. That virtue is found in that "affirmation", rather than correction of GCD is pernicious, and a great evil to those individuals upon whom it is practiced-- especially the children among them. It is also found in that allowing the persistence, and worse, the growth, of delusional notions like the existence within a female body of what really is a male person-- and all the assaults on language and logic and the rational foundation of civilized society that necessarily proceed from the toleration and embrace of such delusional notions-- are a grave danger to all the principles and practices that have elevated Western Civilization to the inestimably-valuable engine of liberty and prosperity that it had been prior to the onslaught of progressivist assaults over the course of the last 85 years or so, of which the "affirmational" ambitions of the GCD-afflicted and their exploiters are but the latest wave. Those of us who love liberty and the American experiment on its behalf must draw a line, and this is now the place to do so. Again, I did not focus on the GCD militants who crashed the Nashville rally-- indeed, to have done so would have been near intolerable, as they made a point of being as noisy and obnoxious as possible, in the hope of drowning out or distracting attention from those on hand to address the gathered crowd in support of the legislation at issue. It was not possible to get too close to that unpleasantness and cacophony, and I had my quite pregnant daughter to keep safe from both hooliganism and excessive noise. But something like 50 to 75 disrupters were in attendance, armed with bullhorns and boom-boxes and practiced chants. These annoyances, amongst whom were a contingent wearing some form of body armor and masks and who strove to appear menacing, did everything they could to hinder the organizers of the rally, despite a considerable police presence who were rigidly oblivious to the fact that the rally organizers had a permit and the disrupters did not. I actually made this point about permits to a couple of the statue-like cops, and was told that they were simply doing as instructed in doing nothing. It appeared that they were on hand to ensure that the protestors didn't get driven off by the vastly-larger crowd of rally attendees...
YOU WILL HAVE HEARD some of the disruptions during my little film segments, and references to them by the speakers they were meant to hamper. As I said, I did not attempt to capture footage of these creatures specifically, but I did pull a snapshot from one of my segments which I think nicely illustrates this contingent of disruptors:
The people involved can't be readily distinguished here, I know. But take note, please, of the sign in the middle left. "Nazi lives don't matter", with a graphic image of an execution about to take place. The opposite side of that sign read, "F*ck around and find out" (without the muting asterisk). This sign, depicting the attitude of these nutcases toward the rest of us, is representative of many on hand. It is also representative of the political position solidifying around us, in which any application of judgment, or standards of comportment or rationality are condemned and denounced, and Americans find themselves increasingly resident on the island in Golding's 'Lord of the Flies'. It's not a healthy place to be. Across the country in pockets, so far, but growing pockets, grown-ups are rising to do something about this madness, as are the legislators in Tennessee on whose behalf the rally in October was held, and those in Oklahoma where the mob descended last week. Utah, Arkansas and other oases are also emerging. I hope that every good American rises to support to these efforts and helps roll back the onslaught of this corrosive "trans" madness. For too long the good among us have let our natural courtesy and generosity of spirit dictate our behavior in this regard, and that restraint has been exploited to our ever-more-serious and enduring, deeply-rooted harm. It's time to remember that while the chivalric code calls for soft words, it also calls for hard knocks, when appropriate. "A nation of sheep begets a government of wolves." -Edward R. Murrow
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." -Voltaire
“There is no safety for honest men but by believing all possible evil of evil men.” – Edmund Burke *** Do We Have More Time Bombs Walking Among Us? Audrey Hale's explosive meltdown taking six innocents with her is a warning America must take seriously. LAST MONDAY THERE WAS A MASS MURDER at a private Christian school in Nashville by Audrey Hale, a "trans" delusional man/woman. A few days later the Kentucky state capital was invaded by a mob of "trans"-delusion victims for the specific purpose of inducing an outcome in the Kentucky legislative process by other than democratic means (and arguably by way of intimidation). That invasion was scheduled to be followed this past Saturday by a "Trans Day of Vengeance" rally in Washington, D.C. It seems time for a few more words on this noxious subject. "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." -Voltaire LET'S START WITH THIS: The real issue in regard to "transgenderism" is American mental health policy. The obvious and indisputable fact is, those suffering from Gender Confusion Disorder (GCD) are mentally ill (albeit in most cases with an induced affliction). Over the last few years it has been increasingly reported that a strong correlation exists between autism and GCD. Further, the very foundational concept of the disorder-- that one is somehow in the wrong body-- coupled with the distorted cognitive function needed to embrace the ridiculous notion that it is possible to change one's male or female status by surgery, or even just by attitude alone, are inarguable indicators of a serious mental illness. Further still, being "trans-identified" is directly associated with dramatically-increased suicidality. Little could be more profoundly indicative of serious mental illness. There are several things to say about this suicidality issue. I'll start this: Despite the strong association of GCD with suicide, public school personnel (and others) routinely encourage-- or at minimum, fail to discourage-- "trans-identification" by kids in their care. How does this parental or custodial irresponsibility escape being treated as child abuse (or at least, gross negligence)? The argument that the increased suicidality is to some degree exacerbated by disapproval-- and even bullying-- from peers and others is irrelevant to this point. For one thing, the contributions of such external factors to suicidality do not diminish the contributions to the problem of the mere notion in the mind of a child that he or she is somehow afflicted with the bizarre alleged malady of being in the wrong body-- a notion encouraged (or not discouraged) by these irresponsible actors. That is, just planting, nourishing, or not striving to excise the confusion and dysphoria at the heart of "trans identification" generates suicidality by itself. At the same time, it is that planting, nourishing, or failure to excise which sets the stage-- and thus must be held responsible-- for all the subsequent and attendant external pressures to which we allude above (and at which the enthusiasts for an expanded epidemic of GCD try to point as the purportedly exclusive source of increased suicidality, even though the argument is contradicted by the insistence of the same voices that "affirming health care" is needed to ease the mental suffering of the supposed "trans" child). Further, even if we leave aside the inherent mental stress predictably arising in a child encouraged to imagine themselves the victim of a bizarre and cruel cosmic mismatch of mind and body, encouraging or nourishing or failing to discourage beliefs and behavior predictably certain to invoke disapproval or bullying or other unwanted reactions-- which cumulatively might contribute to increased suicidality-- is by itself irresponsible, cruel and abusive. For instance, all would agree it to be irresponsible, cruel and abusive were parents or teachers or others to encourage-- or not discourage-- a child in the notion that he or she could only find happiness in public nudity, a notion sure to result in disapproval and bullying. Likewise, and for the same reason, all would agree it to be irresponsible, cruel and abusive were parents or teachers or others to encourage-- or not discourage-- a child in acting like a dog or a cat among other people. All would agree it to be irresponsible, cruel and abusive were parents or teachers or others to encourage-- or not discourage-- a child in embracing the "natural" life by relieving him or herself wherever they happened to be, and in whatever company they happened to be when the need arose. So, too, is it irresponsible, cruel and abusive to encourage-- or fail to vigorously discourage-- a child from the scorn-and-derision-inducing notion that he or she is somehow a boy in a girl's body, or vice-versa. For all the foregoing reasons and more, the encouragement, nourishment or failure to discourage "trans-identification" in a child is irresponsible, cruel and abusive, and even life-threatening. Those guilty of these ugly behaviors should be discouraged accordingly, as provided for by the child-abuse laws already to be found in every American jurisdiction (as well as by the new laws specifically targeting "trans"-related child abuse which are thankfully appearing in various states across the country). BUT THE IRRESPONSIBILITY of all those encouraging (or failing to discourage) the suicide-associated mental illness of GCD and thereby harming individual children is actually the lesser concern for society in regard to this abusive practice. The greater concern was made manifest last week when the "trans" monster in Nashville declared herself to have planned the horrific crime in part to accomplish a "death-by-cop" suicide. As she said to the last person to have apparently communicated with her: "So basically that post I made on here about you, that was basically a suicide note. I’m planning to die today." "...I don’t want to live. I’m so sorry. I’m not trying to upset you or get attention. I just need to die." How many more such time bombs are now roaming among us, in a group more than half of whom ideate suicide, and up to half of whom actually attempt (successfully or not) to kill themselves? A group, what's more, in which a significant number are dosed with high volumes of artificially-introduced testosterone which is known to produce aggressive behavior and hence seems more likely to lead to violent "expressive" suicide plans of the sort that left three innocent adults and three innocent children dead in Nashville. Adding to the volatile threat of highly-suicidal artificially-aggressive people embracing a fundamentally-nihilistic worldview-- as shown by their futile struggle to remake reality in line with their self-hating fantasies-- is an atmosphere toxic with errant but endless assertions from all institutional quarters, government and private, claiming that the real source of the mental anguish of these broken people is the refusal of the rest of society to adopt and "affirm" their delusions. Obviously, this drumbeat sets normal members of society up as the villains in these GCD-victims' minds (remember that rally title, the "Trans Day of Vengeance"...), and thus the likely stage-prop targets of their future dramatic suicide theatrics, as illustrated by Audrey Hale in Nashville last week. For whatever reason, Americans tolerate of hordes of mentally-ill homeless drug-addicts infesting our cities. This indulgence is unsightly and unhygienic, but with (so far) fairly rare exceptions not especially unsafe for other people. But we cannot tolerate hordes of suicidal "trans" people waiting for their moment of not wanting to live anymore in the madness and despair in which they have enveloped themselves (or been enveloped by irresponsible custodians) and choosing to go out with a bang. *** A few more "trans"-related thoughts while I'm in this gear: IN AN EARLIER AND HEALTHIER TIME, the boyfriends (or fathers, or brothers) of the women against whom William ("Lia") Thompson sought to swim, and into whose locker room he insisted on being admitted, would have taken Thompson out behind the field house. They would have memorably explained to Thompson that it is, shall we say, unchivalrous for a man-- even one wearing a Buffalo Bill suit-- to compete against women in an athletic contest. Those boyfriends (or fathers, or brothers) would have further explained to Thompson that it is downright criminally improper for a man-- even one so deluded as to think that he is somehow exempt from such considerations-- to invade spaces set aside for women's privacy, to view them in such private refuges, and to expose himself to their unwilling eyes. Indeed, in a healthier civic environment the women on the team themselves would dog-pile Thompson and kick his sorry ass out of their locker room and out of their water. Any of these things could still happen, of course... *** FINALLY: It's time-- and past time-- for the trans-nutcase mobs who show up to heckle and threaten and obstruct speakers defending Western Civilization (and civilization, period) from their corrosive insanity to be met with twice as many stern, resolute and ready counterparts assembled to guard and support those speakers. Every such speaker, or those who schedule them, should diligently call for such support, just as the trans mob diligently assembles itself (and its frequently-on-hand Antifa dog packs). The sad fact is, while the Left (and statists in general) know it well, and act accordingly, the conservative community in America has forgotten that in the end, political power flows from the barrel of a gun. Normally, America relies on the ballot box to reveal which side of a political debate has more guns, so that power can be peaceably distributed accordingly. But if a minority proves to be the only faction willing to throw its weight around, even an outright majority can be rendered impotent and powerless. How, for instance, do you imagine judges will begin to lean in their rulings when violent leftists mobs rage at will in the venues of their choice (sometimes even the homes of judges), unopposed, and in the end, unpunished? How will corporate boards react to that national atmosphere? Or government bureaucrats? Or even your local sheriff or other law enforcement persons? This is not a call for violence in response to the kind of mob thuggery we have seen throughout the country since the summer of 2020 (other than what is involved in enforcing the law). But it IS a call for a show of force and will, so that the judges and corporate actors and bureaucrats and cops know that the good guys have their backs when they defy the threats and do the right thing. *** A Few SOTFPWTWGB Thoughts ...that is, sitting-on-the-front-porch-watching-the-world-go-by thoughts, on the Ukraine war fraud, the unconstitutionality of the EPA, the LGBTetc. "genocide" trope, and more. *** I AM SICK OF THE EXPRESSION "gender-affirming care" The behavior so labeled is actually delusion-nurturing abuse, and should be plainly referred-to as such. After all, even taken with respect for the manner in which the misleading and improper phrase is used, it simply refers to "care" by which the imaginings of the one being "cared for" are endorsed or given a corresponding superficial costume (i.e., you think you are a woman; we will "affirm" this by making you look like one). Since the notion of a man that he is a woman (or of a woman that she is a man) is plainly delusional, and encouraging or enabling delusions is plainly abusive, so-called "gender-affirming care" is really delusion-nurturing abuse, full stop. *** ON THE "TRANS" SUBJECT, I have a possible decryption of the often-heard plaint of the LGBTQRSYADAYADA community that opposition to their efforts to sexualize and acclimate children to queerness is "genocidal". Perhaps what is behind this apparently inapt language is the fact that sexualizing and queer-acclimating children is actually the way that community reproduces, and thus ensures its continuity. After all, no one is "born queer". Like the pod people in 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers', the queer community must subvert normal healthy children in order to produce another generation of their kind (and, perhaps, secure the political power and related security which comes from what might end up being expanded numbers). Obviously, I'm just speculating here. Perhaps there is some other explanation for the "genocide" language. Maybe it is merely political rhetoric meant to evoke sympathy from poorly-informed members of the larger community who could be misled into imagining that the queer community is actually being targeted for deadly violence due to their peculiar choices and behaviors. Maybe it is just another example of the degeneration of language encouraged by the left by which any failure to embrace is deemed somehow an act of violent rejection comprising a sort of "spiritual genocide". I don't know. But I think my speculation makes sense, though it might be difficult to imagine anyone within the queer community really thinking it through this way directly. After all, that community has marinated itself for years in idiotic notions like the existence of a "queer gene", and that kids are born knowing that they are in the wrong body. Nonetheless, even with those blinders firmly in place, I think that at some core level, those impelled to conduct drag shows in front of little children, sexualize kindergartners and encourage them to question their "gender assignments", and do everything else possible to promote their lifestyle to little kids understand. They know, at some core level, that all this impelled grooming behavior is along the lines of a species-preserving imperative. *** A Few More SOTFPWTWGB Thoughts ...that is, continuing to sit-on-the-front-porch-and-watch-the-world-go-by thoughts, this time on "National Security" secrets and the JFK assassination; on using accurate language in public discourse (and refraining from reflexive, counter-productive virtue-signaling); on fixing the "Section 230" problem; and a little bit more. ... Getting Our Condemnations Right JUST BEFORE CHRISTMAS a story made the rounds about a woman arrested in Britain for silently praying-- not on her knees, but while standing-- on the curb across the street from an abortion clinic (a closed clinic, by the way). See the video here. Predictably, every pundit sharing the story treated it as an outrage based on characterizing the arrest as being simply for the act of praying. But simply praying is NOT what the woman was doing, and it is NOT why she was arrested. Getting these things right is critically important if the conservative (classical liberal) community wants to effectively fight back against the leftist totalitarianism represented by this arrest. In fact, what the woman was doing was shaming the abortionists. Her silent, standing presence was a rebuke to the clinic and those who work there, and it is that-- not her silent inner thoughts-- that prompted the violence against her by the state enforcers of leftist control. In this display, the leftist ascendant power seeks to nullify and subsume the competing power of society to set standards and enforce them through judgment, criticism and ostracization. Like the nuclear family and independent organized religions, societal power to modify unacceptable behavior by the pressure of shaming is a threat to the progressive state's claimed authority to determine all things right or wrong (and to enforce those determinations). SIMILARLY, CONSERVATIVES MISSTATE and therefore fail to properly respond to accusations that their exposure or criticism of progressive behavior is dangerous-- if not outright violent. Conservatives respond to those accusations with scorn and an air of mystification, but this is simply due to being unable or unwilling to acknowledge and address what is really being said by their progressive accusers. What is really being said by those accusers is that revealing to a wider audience the outrageous offenses of, for instance, LBGTQAI+ activist schoolteachers against the children entrusted to their care, or therapists and counselors and medical professionals who encourage, practice and facilitate "affirming" and often mutilative responses to what is always really just induced "gender dysphoria" will predictably incite angry and possibly violent reactions by those becoming aware of these outrageous offenses. WHILE ON THE SUBJECT of LGBTQAI+-claimants and habitual (or encouraged) misstatement, those of us in the normal and healthy majority must stop using the expression "identifies as" when speaking of "trans" persons. The better expression is, "pretends to be", or, in the more extreme cases, "delusionally believes him- or herself to be". Also, the non-lunatic, non-intimidated majority must stop pretending (overtly or by silent acceptance) that LGBTQAI+ status (in any of its several manifestations) is inherent and immutable, like race, sex or ethnicity. This is a plainly false notion promoted by that collection of self-indulgent or outright mentally-ill people in order to support anti-discrimination protections under the law to which they are no more entitled than are heroin addicts. (It is worth pointing out at this juncture that in addition to a complete lack of evidence of any genetic underpinning for LGBTQAI+ dispositions, simple common sense, and the obvious implications of the sudden explosion of LGBTQAI+ pretenses in the West as grooming opportunities and efforts have become more widespread, the "gender-fluid" and "non-binary" subdivisions of the LGBTQAI+ alphabet-spaghetti crowd flatly refute the baked-in-the-cake "inherent and immutable" proposition... The absence of LGBTQAI+ claimants-- or despairing queer suicides in the face of alleged oppression-- as notable percentages of populations outside of the groomer-friendly West similarly disproves the absurd assertion.) IN THE SAME VEIN, and having recently come across a commentary on the lack of a precise (or at least, reasonably functional) definition of "gender ideology" (see that commentary here), I would like to offer this simple solution: Gender ideology is the belief that valid and accurate sexual presentation and categorization (gender "identity") is or can be unconstrained by biological facts (and that the rest of the world is morally obligated to play along with whatever "identity" pretense is chosen by the gender ideologue). I think this is a good working definition, and that it helps limn the impropriety of according any stature to the assertions of gender ideologues concerning themselves or others. I also think it important to not confine the implications of that definition to just the "trans" or "non-binary" or "gender fluid" categories of gender ideologues. The definition is just as applicable to the "gay" categories as well. After all, the "gay" pretense is that one's sexual proclivity is (supposedly, naturally) at odds with one's biological reality, just as a "trans" person's pretense is that one's sexual "identity is at odds. In both cases the delusion is that the adherent's true nature in the relevant regard is unconstrained by biological facts. TO FINISH THIS CATEGORY, here's an image from a recent "pride" parade-- and one typical to many of such parades that polluted the American landscape last month (which I share at risk of nauseating the reader). This image of a child learning about men who play at beings dogs subordinated to the grotesque sexual whims of their homosexual "master" reveals the dark, rancid, psychopathic reality of "LBGTQAI+" ideology that should be imprinted in the mind of every legislator and every parent:
The corruption vividly on display here is but one example of the foulness attendant upon tolerance of the "gender ideology" infection in our society. Think about it the next time you are tempted to refrain from condemning this noxious scourge. Here's another illuminating image:
The man on the left was just crowned "Miss Netherlands" and will go on to represent that shameful and degenerate, once admirable, country in this year's upcoming Miss Universe pageant. The woman on the right is the runner-up. Plainly, the winner was not chosen due to being the most outstanding representative of Dutch femininity in the contest. Rather, the man was chosen in obeisance to "gender ideology" and in defiance of reality. While not as startlingly and wrenchingly disquieting as the little girl being groomed into the normalization of intensely corrupt sexual depravity, this latter image is as significant in its own way, both for its representation of the assault on truth (and its implicit demand that everyone partake in that assault) typical of "trans" madness, but also for its inescapable indication that some authority-wielding entity imposed the indefensible selection on the judges of the Miss Netherlands contest. This imposition indicates an agenda, and a party or cabal whose special-interest purposes are served by that agenda. The existence of such an agenda, and of such special-interest wielders of that kind of power, indicates in turn that a dangerous and deliberate assault is being made on those places in which the "trans ideology" infection is taking root. We need to know the identities behind all this. I hope that someone with the investigative resources to do so exposes these enemies of Western Civilization. (See more on this subject here, here and here.) *** A Few More SOTFPWTWGB Thoughts ...that is, continuing to sit-on-the-front-porch-and-watch-the-world-go-by thoughts, this time on Russia's ban on "trans" madness; on redemption for Disney; on 'Oppenheimer'; and a legal Easter egg to close with, as well. Russia stands up for truth and sanity; American nutcases stay revealingly mum LAST WEEK VLADIMIR PUTIN and the Russian legislature outlawed throughout Russia the insane and destructive "trans" practices afflicting America. Interestingly, this news is getting little to no airing on mainstream media in the US (and precious little even on purportedly non-presstitute outlets). I have to conclude that the reason for the silence is the recognition that the majority of even those captured by state media would be appreciative and respectful of the Russian law, and therefore at risk of having their mindless support for the US proxy war in Ukraine eroded. Surely, if it was believed that the majority of those who get their "news" from NBC and the like would find the Russian law a reason for increased hostility toward Putin & Co., its adoption would be trumpeted far and wide, with Joe Biden's handlers shuffling him out for an angrily-scripted podium-thumping denunciation of those Godfull (rather than "Godless") Russkies. Instead, crickets... from the chirping of which much can be learned. *** A "Trans"-Related Legislative Model (Updated) ...for virtuous lawmakers across the country; along with a few more readily deployable culture-war cudgels. ANYONE WHO instills, cultivates, affirms or in any way encourages any notion in the mind of a child which causes that child to seek or consent to chemical or surgical alteration of his or her body in any kind of effort to thwart, overcome, reject, conceal or disable the natural development and manifestation of characteristics common to persons of the child's biological sex, or anyone who imposes upon a child any chemical or surgical alteration of his or her body for any such purpose, is guilty of felony child abuse. ANYONE WHO encourages any child to adopt dress, deportment, or mannerisms inconsistent with predominant cultural norms for a child of his or her biological sex is guilty of misdemeanor child abuse. Upon conviction... [each state legislature will need to fill in this portion in a manner consistent with its existing criminal structure]. *** This page is permalinked here. |
