I wonder how long it’ll take before the trans kids stuff gets memory holed and everyone forgets that it was once (& still is, there hasn’t been a complete reversal yet) government policy in some parts to take away your kids should you question their trans diagnosis.
What has already started and will likely grow are lawsuits from kids who were forced into this pathology and have ruined bodies. As it becomes easier to admit the truth, more will come out with their stories and how they were manipulated into providing "consent".
Hopefully we will be able to identify the subset of the medical community who took the oath "first do some harm."
We will have truly won when the liberal consensus is: "No one ever believed in puberty blockers or surgeries for kids -- anyway, who cares that was a whole 2 years ago!"
Much the same way that liberal consensus on years of Covid school closures is that they didn't happen and anyway it's dumb to be angry about it because it was *so* long ago.
We'll have won when the Liberal consensus is that Transgenderism was a right wing pseudoscience pushed by bigoted homophobes onto helpless gender nonconforming children and vulnerable adults. Just like how eugenics was a right wing pseudoscience that no good liberal ever had anything to do with...
"We'll have won when the Liberal consensus is that Transgenderism was a right wing pseudoscience pushed by bigoted homophobes onto helpless gender nonconforming children and vulnerable adults."
Yes. And that consensus will be 100% factually correct if we just replace the word "right" by "left".
Yeah. For clarification I guess I should've said "We'll* know we have won the argument when...". You'll only win completely if Trans goes down in the history books as a thoroughly liberal madness. It didn't happen with Eugenics or The Satanic Panic, though those movements attracted people from both sides of the political spectrum, libs did a better job of denying their own culpability and laying all the blame on the other side after the bubble had burst.
*I'm writing as a disillusioned lib, not a long term right winger btw.
It's not even fully denying them, it can be something as simple as asking to wait or for counseling. Anything less than immediate and unquestioning compliance is met with fury.
This is complete fiction. No state has a law that allows for a child to be removed from parental custody if denied gender affirming care. California has a law that allows for the state to provide temporary, emergency custody of a child that has traveled from out of state to receive gender affirming care in the state of CA. This law only applies to minors seeking gender affirming care in CA because they are unable to get it in their home state. Washington has a law that allows children living in shelters and youth homes to consult with the state family services agencies instead of their parents when seeking access to gender affirming care. But since these youths are already living in youth homes or shelters, the parental custody question is very much up in the air.
In all other states, the decision to remove a child from parental custody is up to a judge, which is the normal process for adjudicating any parental custody suit, regardless of reason.
The fact is there are more states (especially after this SCOTUS decision) that will have strict bans on receiving gender affirming care under any circumstance than there are states with laws designed to protect minors seeking such care.
That is NOT what the text of the law actually says. The text of the law makes no distinction between in-state and out-of-state kids. I will post the actual text of the actual law when I have a chance.
The CA court can only issue an emergency custody decision in cases where a minor has lost, or is at risk of losing, their legal guardian because of actions another state is taking against them. It is designed to protect children who live in states that will prosecute legal guardians - including parents - for pursuing gender affirming care for their child. The bill is designed to protect a child who is being threatened or harassed in states that are hostile to gender affirming care.
This bill is unique to CA so your statement that "[it] is STATE LAW in most blue states that a family court judge can take your kids away from you if you deny them 'gender affirming care'" is patently false. Its also completely misleading as the entire purpose of family court in any state is to adjudicate custody decisions so there's really nothing new about this at all. In states hostile to gender affirming care, family courts may decide to remove parental custody of parents that pursue getting care for their child. In states welcoming to gender affirming care, the courts may decide that denying a child care is grounds for removing custody. In both cases, a judge will decide.
From the text of the bill:
"The bill would prohibit the enforcement of an order based on another state’s law authorizing a child to be removed from their parent or guardian based on that parent or guardian allowing their child to receive gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care."
"A court of this state has temporary emergency jurisdiction if the child is present in this state and the child has been abandoned or it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because the child, or a sibling or parent of the child, is subjected to, or threatened with, mistreatment or abuse, or because the child has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care, as defined by Section 16010.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code."
Read that last paragraph. Nowhere does it say that the kid has to be from out of state. That is also not anywhere else in the law. This law governs in-state as well as out-of-state kids. Your claim that “the court can only issue an emergency custody decision in cases where a minor has lost, or is at risk of losing, their legal guardian because of actions another state is taking against them” is NOT anywhere in the text of California law. If you disagree, please give the specific citation.
Existing law in California (called the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act) already provides the state with the power to make emergency custody decisions. Existing anti-discrimination laws in CA also prohibit the denial of any medical treatment - which includes gender affirming care - based on protected traits, of which gender is one of them. So a child who is a resident of CA would never meet the condition of being "unable to obtain gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care, as defined by Section 16010.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code." That's why this law makes specific mention of superseding custody decisions made in other states when the decision involves removing a child from a parent or guardian. Even then, the CA courts must honor the custody decisions from another state and give them a chance to issue their own order:
"If there is a previous child custody determination that is entitled to be enforced under this part, or a child custody proceeding has been commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under Sections 3421 to 3423, inclusive, any order issued by a court of this state under this section must specify in the order a period that the court considers adequate to allow the person seeking an order to obtain an order from the state having jurisdiction under Sections 3421 to 3423, inclusive. The order issued in this state remains in effect until an order is obtained from the other state within the period specified or the period expires."
This issue is so toxic for the left because it is a clear political loser, but mainstream left institutions have sufficiently endorsed it to the point where it will be impossible to walk back. It will be incredibly painful to insinuate to people (and especially parents) that bought into this that they were fantastically and fundamentally wrong about such an important and personal issue.
The only way out is to politely ignore it, forget it, deplatform it. Trans people and activists will be given some space and a generally sympathetic approach but will never be allowed to direct policy again.
I won't be shocked at all if the libs who actively backed this mess turn violently against the people they damaged since to do otherwise would entail admitting their own culpability.
One need only read deranged libtard Jesse Thorn's account of trooning his own son based upon a stray comment from a clearly confused child in order to know that this ideology needs to be violently suppressed
If normal, functioning Americans take anything from this sorry trans episode, it’s that we shouldn’t, out of politeness, indulge leftist delusions du jour for even one nanosecond. The cluster B theater kids who told us that “gender is assigned at birth” will be back, no doubt with something so bombastic that it makes trans lunacy sound like the Magna Carta. And when they do we—as a nation—must respond with a howling reproach: “HELL FUCKING NO YOU FREAKS!”
You finish with the scary truth that artificial chimeras can increasingly be used as material evidence to legitimize unreasonable solipsism in a growing number of people, and the next imagined thing that they’re entirely sure is a thing as old as creation might be more antisocial than trans.
Excellent piece. I'm in a similar boat, the topic itself not being particularly interesting to me but feeling compelled to learn about it so I could coherently talk about the politics, and being shocked by how thin the actual evidence for the treatment is. I really think normie libs are going to be gobsmacked when the enormity of the deception is dragged out into the open, so many well meaning people were taken advantage of, to say nothing about the political malpractice.
It's important to literally see that TRANS is the core of "transgressive." It is the cultural normalization, celebration, and conduct of that which used to be marginalized. I don't think I need to expand for this crowd on what actually takes place at pride festivals, or the truth of the memes that put drag queens in children's libraries but not old age homes. The surgeries are the least of it. In theory every one of these "gender confused" minors will turn 18---how many will pursue medicalization of a tween fantasy? How many will be the children of Hollywood actors, of blue state politicians? This was the camel's nose under the tent of normalcy, private lives, parental control, and limited government.
It's even more broader than that. Queer Theory's (note: queer doesn't mean homosexual) teleology is the destruction of any and all societal norms. "Queer" isn't even really an identity, but instead is any counter-hegemonic political stance, which, according to progressive DEI dogma, must always be "included" and celebrated....this is what they mean by "Inclusion". When I hear some smoothbrain casually parrot this word to signal their moral virtue I want to vomit because they have no fucking idea what they are advocating.
Cannot. This was an interesting read but I don't care about "gender". I want everyone so concerned about it to F off. If they had a cause to begin with which is already a dubious notion, it was fed and watered by our culture and supported through a fraught. We just bombed Iran I wish that this particular piece was not run today yet maybe we will finally see that there are bigger fish to fry. I am not even sorry to say I do not care. I do not care what is between someone's legs or what they like in the bedroom. It is no one's business. It is so selfish. It is so "all about ME" never about helping others. Or it is about helping others in a very performative, disingenuous way.
I don’t care what’s between someone’s legs but some people think that means that cutting body parts off of kids (or atrophying them with cross-sex drugs) is a sane thing to do, and having a culture/institutions/teachers/political parties promoting and protecting that insanity is a huge f-ing problem, for everybody.
The first and initially successful strategy was #NoDebate. Most “conservatives” in the US didn’t even appreciate the toxic harms until relatively recently. Such was the success of #NoDebate.
It was very brave people (on both left and right) who started to speak out, often at a high cost, who opened up the debate to the point that the Republican Party realised its political power.
The lesson is never ignore something just because it makes you uncomfortable or fearful.
I just cant wade into the whole gender issue bc the Woke took it too far. They contributed to the loss of .. everything they wanted. Its bc, well men cant actually have babies and the drag queen bs in schools. And transgendering kids w/o parental permission.
Think Gavin Newsome.
No one fucking cares except the ones in it. Fine. Im in w my ilk. Not crowing about it. Sorry if feelings are hurt.
Get over your damn selves and live your life w dignity. To me that means keep your stuff in the bedroom or if an out person just discover and apply dignity. Sorry if this is a shocking notion.
I dunno. They still think Russiagate was real and Mueller was just "too nice". What the Times tells libs to think and what libs allow themselves to think are not the always the same.
Or to put it a different way: many libs will read or hear about the Times piece and take it as a cue to simply stop thinking about the issue at all and, if it comes up at the proverbial dinner party, pretend they didn't hear.
For myself, the two elements that are of the most interest are that the entire "gender" project is a transhumanist medical experiment at-scale with only a notional connection to "dysphoria," which is itself notional (undifferentiated from other memetic phenomena). All of this was obvious from the start.
The other element is the notion of a bespoke individuality, both as a social phenomenon (presentation, etc.) and as a kind of ontological hope.
Both of these phenomena are outcomes of our fundamentally atheist/technocratic order ("The Modern Project" which defines the terms of our civilization) and internal reactions against it/attempts to "spiritualize (finally, moralize) the interior" of that order (the faux religion of ideology).
One definition of Bougeois Radicalism is the appropriation of ideology by The Project itself, put forth as "dissent" - which is evident in the obvious Neoliberalism of our radical cadres.
One simply cannot transcend the terms of the Project "from within" - on its own terms.
Another person who doesn’t “care about gender” is my 16 y-o niece, who is so embarrassed of her changing body that she “identifies” as a boy. She slouches to hide her breasts, tries to talk in a low voice, wears clothes that hide her figure, yet nearly all of her friends are girls, and she is completely, Beatlemania-level boy crazy. But when we discuss gender, she completely disagrees with the politics of it, and makes fun of other “transgender” peers. I hope that this change in zeitgeist will trickle down to the victims such as my niece, and that she has time, before she turns eighteen, to learn to appreciate herself as a beautiful young woman.
This is actually a big part of the anti-trans movement. It’s ok for her to be this way, and adults do not need to tell her she is in the wrong body simply because she is uncomfy. Being a female is a broad spectrum of likes, dislikes, expressions of self or femininity, and none of us has the right to say what correct female expression is. Adolescence is the time to find your software without assuming your hardware is wrong. We can live and let live.
Great piece. I am going to take issue with this observation: "Every lib I know reviles the Biden administration and blames it for Trump II - Biden alums must be really feeling the heat.)"
It is possible that they are feeling some heat, but based on this Yuri Bezemov piece, it appears that Liberal Inc. has made generous provision for the continued well being of the likes of Antony Blinken, et al. https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/biden-sinecure-fauci-nuland
I am always bewildered at the book deals handed to ex pols. I honestly don't know what the market is for some ghost written claptrap touting the amazing accomplishments of Antony Blinken. I realize, having acquired a book or two this way, that they are bought in bulk by various groups as part of a speaking gig deal. I recall being at one where the book in question was placed on the table at the luncheon for every attendee and at the end, most were either left there or tossed in the garbage can (I took mine home as a potential regift possibility for someone I didn't especially like but had to provide a present for.) Overly cynical me is a little suspicious that these deals are sort of ex post facto bribe laundered through some publishing house.
Anyway, my guess is that the Biden crowd is mostly unscathed (as opposed to the "Team Kamala" losers), "Admiral" Rachel "Dick" Levine might be one exception -- I can't find any verification online that the Admiral has found steady work since the Biden administration ended and her unemployment benefits are going to run out at some point. The other is Our Karine, who lent her name to some hastily ghost written thing essentially conceding that her whole schtick was a scam all along and that the Dems are a bunch of lying losers. As the meme goes, "That's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it pays off for her."
"I do think that the epidemiological phenomenon of transgenderism is explained primarily by technology (for both the pre-adolescent/ adolescent female population that frequently has comorbid psychiatric diagnoses and for the middle-aged high-IQ heterosexual male demographic)"
Do you have any data whatsoever to back this up? Or is having actual data to back a sweeping assertion such as this a standard that applies only to others?
great read! please post more
Hear hear
I wonder how long it’ll take before the trans kids stuff gets memory holed and everyone forgets that it was once (& still is, there hasn’t been a complete reversal yet) government policy in some parts to take away your kids should you question their trans diagnosis.
What has already started and will likely grow are lawsuits from kids who were forced into this pathology and have ruined bodies. As it becomes easier to admit the truth, more will come out with their stories and how they were manipulated into providing "consent".
Hopefully we will be able to identify the subset of the medical community who took the oath "first do some harm."
We will have truly won when the liberal consensus is: "No one ever believed in puberty blockers or surgeries for kids -- anyway, who cares that was a whole 2 years ago!"
Much the same way that liberal consensus on years of Covid school closures is that they didn't happen and anyway it's dumb to be angry about it because it was *so* long ago.
We'll have won when the Liberal consensus is that Transgenderism was a right wing pseudoscience pushed by bigoted homophobes onto helpless gender nonconforming children and vulnerable adults. Just like how eugenics was a right wing pseudoscience that no good liberal ever had anything to do with...
"We'll have won when the Liberal consensus is that Transgenderism was a right wing pseudoscience pushed by bigoted homophobes onto helpless gender nonconforming children and vulnerable adults."
Yes. And that consensus will be 100% factually correct if we just replace the word "right" by "left".
Yeah. For clarification I guess I should've said "We'll* know we have won the argument when...". You'll only win completely if Trans goes down in the history books as a thoroughly liberal madness. It didn't happen with Eugenics or The Satanic Panic, though those movements attracted people from both sides of the political spectrum, libs did a better job of denying their own culpability and laying all the blame on the other side after the bubble had burst.
*I'm writing as a disillusioned lib, not a long term right winger btw.
I'm also a disillusioned lib.
Humbling, isn't it? Or is humiliating at better word?
It is STATE LAW in most blue states that a family court judge can take your kids away from you if you deny them "gender affirming care".
And these laws are still supported by 99% of Democrats holding elected office. (Not an exaggeration, this is the actual number, per voting records.)
It's not even fully denying them, it can be something as simple as asking to wait or for counseling. Anything less than immediate and unquestioning compliance is met with fury.
This is complete fiction. No state has a law that allows for a child to be removed from parental custody if denied gender affirming care. California has a law that allows for the state to provide temporary, emergency custody of a child that has traveled from out of state to receive gender affirming care in the state of CA. This law only applies to minors seeking gender affirming care in CA because they are unable to get it in their home state. Washington has a law that allows children living in shelters and youth homes to consult with the state family services agencies instead of their parents when seeking access to gender affirming care. But since these youths are already living in youth homes or shelters, the parental custody question is very much up in the air.
In all other states, the decision to remove a child from parental custody is up to a judge, which is the normal process for adjudicating any parental custody suit, regardless of reason.
The fact is there are more states (especially after this SCOTUS decision) that will have strict bans on receiving gender affirming care under any circumstance than there are states with laws designed to protect minors seeking such care.
That is NOT what the text of the law actually says. The text of the law makes no distinction between in-state and out-of-state kids. I will post the actual text of the actual law when I have a chance.
The CA court can only issue an emergency custody decision in cases where a minor has lost, or is at risk of losing, their legal guardian because of actions another state is taking against them. It is designed to protect children who live in states that will prosecute legal guardians - including parents - for pursuing gender affirming care for their child. The bill is designed to protect a child who is being threatened or harassed in states that are hostile to gender affirming care.
This bill is unique to CA so your statement that "[it] is STATE LAW in most blue states that a family court judge can take your kids away from you if you deny them 'gender affirming care'" is patently false. Its also completely misleading as the entire purpose of family court in any state is to adjudicate custody decisions so there's really nothing new about this at all. In states hostile to gender affirming care, family courts may decide to remove parental custody of parents that pursue getting care for their child. In states welcoming to gender affirming care, the courts may decide that denying a child care is grounds for removing custody. In both cases, a judge will decide.
From the text of the bill:
"The bill would prohibit the enforcement of an order based on another state’s law authorizing a child to be removed from their parent or guardian based on that parent or guardian allowing their child to receive gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care."
"A court of this state has temporary emergency jurisdiction if the child is present in this state and the child has been abandoned or it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because the child, or a sibling or parent of the child, is subjected to, or threatened with, mistreatment or abuse, or because the child has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care, as defined by Section 16010.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code."
Read that last paragraph. Nowhere does it say that the kid has to be from out of state. That is also not anywhere else in the law. This law governs in-state as well as out-of-state kids. Your claim that “the court can only issue an emergency custody decision in cases where a minor has lost, or is at risk of losing, their legal guardian because of actions another state is taking against them” is NOT anywhere in the text of California law. If you disagree, please give the specific citation.
Existing law in California (called the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act) already provides the state with the power to make emergency custody decisions. Existing anti-discrimination laws in CA also prohibit the denial of any medical treatment - which includes gender affirming care - based on protected traits, of which gender is one of them. So a child who is a resident of CA would never meet the condition of being "unable to obtain gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care, as defined by Section 16010.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code." That's why this law makes specific mention of superseding custody decisions made in other states when the decision involves removing a child from a parent or guardian. Even then, the CA courts must honor the custody decisions from another state and give them a chance to issue their own order:
"If there is a previous child custody determination that is entitled to be enforced under this part, or a child custody proceeding has been commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under Sections 3421 to 3423, inclusive, any order issued by a court of this state under this section must specify in the order a period that the court considers adequate to allow the person seeking an order to obtain an order from the state having jurisdiction under Sections 3421 to 3423, inclusive. The order issued in this state remains in effect until an order is obtained from the other state within the period specified or the period expires."
This issue is so toxic for the left because it is a clear political loser, but mainstream left institutions have sufficiently endorsed it to the point where it will be impossible to walk back. It will be incredibly painful to insinuate to people (and especially parents) that bought into this that they were fantastically and fundamentally wrong about such an important and personal issue.
The only way out is to politely ignore it, forget it, deplatform it. Trans people and activists will be given some space and a generally sympathetic approach but will never be allowed to direct policy again.
I won't be shocked at all if the libs who actively backed this mess turn violently against the people they damaged since to do otherwise would entail admitting their own culpability.
We can already see how they treat detransitioners. I have no doubt they are capable of even worse.
Hi Peebo, this is a mus listen for you.....about 2 minutes:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/7ao-bOxZlM4
One need only read deranged libtard Jesse Thorn's account of trooning his own son based upon a stray comment from a clearly confused child in order to know that this ideology needs to be violently suppressed
Any comment with the word troon or trooning get a like by me. I also reward the term "gender goblin".
If normal, functioning Americans take anything from this sorry trans episode, it’s that we shouldn’t, out of politeness, indulge leftist delusions du jour for even one nanosecond. The cluster B theater kids who told us that “gender is assigned at birth” will be back, no doubt with something so bombastic that it makes trans lunacy sound like the Magna Carta. And when they do we—as a nation—must respond with a howling reproach: “HELL FUCKING NO YOU FREAKS!”
The “theater kids” are the victims here, not the perpetrators.
"makes trans lunacy sound like the Magna Carta"
LOL great line. Hard to fathom they could, but I wouldn't bet against them.
You finish with the scary truth that artificial chimeras can increasingly be used as material evidence to legitimize unreasonable solipsism in a growing number of people, and the next imagined thing that they’re entirely sure is a thing as old as creation might be more antisocial than trans.
Excellent piece. I'm in a similar boat, the topic itself not being particularly interesting to me but feeling compelled to learn about it so I could coherently talk about the politics, and being shocked by how thin the actual evidence for the treatment is. I really think normie libs are going to be gobsmacked when the enormity of the deception is dragged out into the open, so many well meaning people were taken advantage of, to say nothing about the political malpractice.
It's important to literally see that TRANS is the core of "transgressive." It is the cultural normalization, celebration, and conduct of that which used to be marginalized. I don't think I need to expand for this crowd on what actually takes place at pride festivals, or the truth of the memes that put drag queens in children's libraries but not old age homes. The surgeries are the least of it. In theory every one of these "gender confused" minors will turn 18---how many will pursue medicalization of a tween fantasy? How many will be the children of Hollywood actors, of blue state politicians? This was the camel's nose under the tent of normalcy, private lives, parental control, and limited government.
It's even more broader than that. Queer Theory's (note: queer doesn't mean homosexual) teleology is the destruction of any and all societal norms. "Queer" isn't even really an identity, but instead is any counter-hegemonic political stance, which, according to progressive DEI dogma, must always be "included" and celebrated....this is what they mean by "Inclusion". When I hear some smoothbrain casually parrot this word to signal their moral virtue I want to vomit because they have no fucking idea what they are advocating.
Cannot. This was an interesting read but I don't care about "gender". I want everyone so concerned about it to F off. If they had a cause to begin with which is already a dubious notion, it was fed and watered by our culture and supported through a fraught. We just bombed Iran I wish that this particular piece was not run today yet maybe we will finally see that there are bigger fish to fry. I am not even sorry to say I do not care. I do not care what is between someone's legs or what they like in the bedroom. It is no one's business. It is so selfish. It is so "all about ME" never about helping others. Or it is about helping others in a very performative, disingenuous way.
I don’t care what’s between someone’s legs but some people think that means that cutting body parts off of kids (or atrophying them with cross-sex drugs) is a sane thing to do, and having a culture/institutions/teachers/political parties promoting and protecting that insanity is a huge f-ing problem, for everybody.
Stop feeding it.
You're the one feeding it, by saying it's OK to ignore it. "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing."
Exactly.
The first and initially successful strategy was #NoDebate. Most “conservatives” in the US didn’t even appreciate the toxic harms until relatively recently. Such was the success of #NoDebate.
It was very brave people (on both left and right) who started to speak out, often at a high cost, who opened up the debate to the point that the Republican Party realised its political power.
The lesson is never ignore something just because it makes you uncomfortable or fearful.
I just cant wade into the whole gender issue bc the Woke took it too far. They contributed to the loss of .. everything they wanted. Its bc, well men cant actually have babies and the drag queen bs in schools. And transgendering kids w/o parental permission.
Think Gavin Newsome.
No one fucking cares except the ones in it. Fine. Im in w my ilk. Not crowing about it. Sorry if feelings are hurt.
Get over your damn selves and live your life w dignity. To me that means keep your stuff in the bedroom or if an out person just discover and apply dignity. Sorry if this is a shocking notion.
There are plenty of articles about Iran. I, personally, have the intellectual capacity to process more than one crisis at a time.
Wow Andy. Good for you.
If that’s your idea of bragging, you go!
Will do. America first. Peace through strength. A president like no other. Alpha male.
Rare. Does not give a F either about what you like in bed or how ones package is... managed.
I dunno. They still think Russiagate was real and Mueller was just "too nice". What the Times tells libs to think and what libs allow themselves to think are not the always the same.
Or to put it a different way: many libs will read or hear about the Times piece and take it as a cue to simply stop thinking about the issue at all and, if it comes up at the proverbial dinner party, pretend they didn't hear.
This is another fine piece about how the activists pushed an evidence free agenda that was really indefensible as public policy. Restacking !
For myself, the two elements that are of the most interest are that the entire "gender" project is a transhumanist medical experiment at-scale with only a notional connection to "dysphoria," which is itself notional (undifferentiated from other memetic phenomena). All of this was obvious from the start.
The other element is the notion of a bespoke individuality, both as a social phenomenon (presentation, etc.) and as a kind of ontological hope.
Both of these phenomena are outcomes of our fundamentally atheist/technocratic order ("The Modern Project" which defines the terms of our civilization) and internal reactions against it/attempts to "spiritualize (finally, moralize) the interior" of that order (the faux religion of ideology).
One definition of Bougeois Radicalism is the appropriation of ideology by The Project itself, put forth as "dissent" - which is evident in the obvious Neoliberalism of our radical cadres.
One simply cannot transcend the terms of the Project "from within" - on its own terms.
The vile Pritzkers who are largely responsible for this mess are, of course…. Oh you know.
I looked it up just to confirm but needn't have bothered.
Pretty sure I have that superpower now
Another person who doesn’t “care about gender” is my 16 y-o niece, who is so embarrassed of her changing body that she “identifies” as a boy. She slouches to hide her breasts, tries to talk in a low voice, wears clothes that hide her figure, yet nearly all of her friends are girls, and she is completely, Beatlemania-level boy crazy. But when we discuss gender, she completely disagrees with the politics of it, and makes fun of other “transgender” peers. I hope that this change in zeitgeist will trickle down to the victims such as my niece, and that she has time, before she turns eighteen, to learn to appreciate herself as a beautiful young woman.
This is actually a big part of the anti-trans movement. It’s ok for her to be this way, and adults do not need to tell her she is in the wrong body simply because she is uncomfy. Being a female is a broad spectrum of likes, dislikes, expressions of self or femininity, and none of us has the right to say what correct female expression is. Adolescence is the time to find your software without assuming your hardware is wrong. We can live and let live.
It’s all good until they chop her tits off.
Great piece. I am going to take issue with this observation: "Every lib I know reviles the Biden administration and blames it for Trump II - Biden alums must be really feeling the heat.)"
It is possible that they are feeling some heat, but based on this Yuri Bezemov piece, it appears that Liberal Inc. has made generous provision for the continued well being of the likes of Antony Blinken, et al. https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/biden-sinecure-fauci-nuland
I am always bewildered at the book deals handed to ex pols. I honestly don't know what the market is for some ghost written claptrap touting the amazing accomplishments of Antony Blinken. I realize, having acquired a book or two this way, that they are bought in bulk by various groups as part of a speaking gig deal. I recall being at one where the book in question was placed on the table at the luncheon for every attendee and at the end, most were either left there or tossed in the garbage can (I took mine home as a potential regift possibility for someone I didn't especially like but had to provide a present for.) Overly cynical me is a little suspicious that these deals are sort of ex post facto bribe laundered through some publishing house.
Anyway, my guess is that the Biden crowd is mostly unscathed (as opposed to the "Team Kamala" losers), "Admiral" Rachel "Dick" Levine might be one exception -- I can't find any verification online that the Admiral has found steady work since the Biden administration ended and her unemployment benefits are going to run out at some point. The other is Our Karine, who lent her name to some hastily ghost written thing essentially conceding that her whole schtick was a scam all along and that the Dems are a bunch of lying losers. As the meme goes, "That's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it pays off for her."
"I do think that the epidemiological phenomenon of transgenderism is explained primarily by technology (for both the pre-adolescent/ adolescent female population that frequently has comorbid psychiatric diagnoses and for the middle-aged high-IQ heterosexual male demographic)"
Do you have any data whatsoever to back this up? Or is having actual data to back a sweeping assertion such as this a standard that applies only to others?