More Than You Need To Know About Sex and Gender

Don't Take Pride In Promoting Pseudoscience 

As we all really know, but in these times, sometimes are afraid to admit, there are two sexes, male and female, and the old joke of: Question, "How do you know the difference between a boy and a girl?" Obvious answer, "You pull down there "jeans"", which has a deeper scientific meaning. You look at their genes, especially their chromosomes, in each of their cells. XX=boy, XY=girl. 

For the practical person, that is it. 

For the impractical, confused, mentally ill, ideologically vs reality based, etc, a new useless term "gender" has been manufactured. Specifically by John Money in 1955. 

Once you get into fiction, it is a bit like the Marvel, Star Trek, or Star Wars "universes". Since they are fictional, time, space, laws of physics, biology, morality, etc are totally arbitrary. One may have some sort of "rules" in a specific imaginary universe, but those are certainly meant to be broken. Consider the semi sacred "Prime Directive" in Star Trek. From time to time it may have created slight dramatic tension, but no actual fealty. 

Unfortunately, when fiction starts to damage reality, esspectially children, it is time for the shrinking set of reality based people to firm up their knowledge of the reality of two sexes and imaginary gender.

Over the last decade, we have observed a striking shift in the politics of LGBT issues. There has been a move away from broadly supported principles based on equality toward the imposition of radical, pseudoscientific ideologies concerning biological sex. A growing genre of articles in high-profile news outlets, magazines, and scientific journals is signaling the end of a binary and immutable perspective on biological sex. The appeal of these pieces lies in the belief that rejecting the binary concept of sex provides society with a liberating opportunity for self-definition, unfettered by material constraints.

One might consider these debates too arcane to have any real significance. However, the pseudoscientific notion that biological sex is mutable and exists on a non-binary continuum serves as a key justification for allowing males who identify as women to compete in female sports and access female prisons, and for administering treatments such as puberty blockers and “gender-affirming” (i.e., body modifying) hormones and surgeries to adolescents and adults alike to fix a perceived misalignment between their sex and “gender identity.” The implications are serious, as these recommendations make women’s sex-based rights unenforceable and directly impact the healthy bodies and minds of children. It is of utmost importance that such actions are grounded in reliable science, not in fashionable political ideologies.

The article is quite easy to read, and thorough in debunking specious claims about "intersex". "hormonal sex", to attack the binary nature of sex. 

Most of what we are burned by today is the confusion of  biological sex, and fictional "gender". 

Now you don't need to be confused, and you have something to explain to those who are so "intelligent" that they just can't accept that much of what they "know" is manifestly wrong. 

The Road To Celebrating Pedophillia

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/04/democrats-for-pedophilia.php

I dropped my subscription to Time Magazine in the early '90s as they had and editorial defending a teacher that had been fired because they were a member of NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association). 

Now we have "Downstate" a play about a set of pederasts living in a shelter because they can't live anywhere else. The Washington Post and the NY Times have reviewed the play mostly sympathetically 

The NY Times review closes with: 

That, more than the menace of the housemates, is the reason the tension of “Downstate” trails us so tenaciously out of the theater. The thought of all the damage these men have wrought, and the severity of their exile, gets knotted up with questions of mercy.

How much retribution is enough? And what quantity of compassion — bestowed on whom — is too much? Let the wrestling with your conscience begin.

I've been wrong about the "progress" of "progressivism".  After the Stonewall Riots and Roe, it was pretty clear that the SCOTUS could and would legislate any "morality" it imagined. The acceptance of gays into general society was hastened by AIDs. as the terrible deaths that many gays suffered caused natural sympathy for it's victims. Magic Johnson's announcement that he had AIDs in 1991 blurred and destigmatized AIDs and with it gays as immoral, and the gut felt (but rarely admitted) sense that AIDs was a punishment from God for the sin of Sodomy, as in Sodom and Gomorrah was suppressed.

Gays, and "GLBT" was increasingly celebrated with obscene marches, rainbow flags, etc. It was clear that "progress" would demand that same-sex activity would be "protected by the Constitution", as it was in "Lawrence vs Texas" in 2003. 

"Progressivism" (regressivism to a Hobbesian existence) demanded that a direct attack on a critical foundation of civilization, marriage between a man and a woman, be attacked. 

As late as 2008, the idea that marriage was a sacred institution held sway, with all presidential hopefuls in either party making clear statements in opposition to gay "marriage". 

By 2012, the Democrats had changed their minds ( they often equate "morality" with "survey says"). In 2015, the SCOTUS conjured another "right" out of the penumbra of the Constitution in "Obergefell vs Hodges", and gay "marriage" was a reality.

My belief was that sex with children would proceed genital mutilation of prepubescent children. At this point it appears I had the ordering wrong ... but perhaps it will be a tie. 

As is well covered in "The Rise And Triumph of the Modern Self", "progressivism" is not a "live and let live" ideology. While it may lie to you saying it is all about "diversity", that claim is strictly ordered by the  specific, rigid hierarchy of "identities".  What trumps what? While it is clear that heterosextual white males are the bottom, is the next rung hetero white females? Certainly political and religious affiliations affect the discrimination hierarchy. What is the top? Possibly a black, trans woman who is non-binary and has a criminal record? My imagination fails me, but I'm confident that "progressives" will work it out. 

As we see with gay and trans, it is not enough to "accept", you must openly CELEBRATE whatever identity is manufactured. As is now also clear, if you "love" children they must be "groomed" (indoctrinated) to fit into some acceptable category, and stigmatized if they are unfortunate enough to come from a white, two parent, Christian family! Thus we must have "Sanctuary Cities" where genital mutilation is protected without the consent of parents. After all, if some poor child is trapped in a white two parent Christian family, isn't it society's duty to free them from that oppression, which will disadvantage them for life? 

Without appropriate grooming in the public schools through pornographic books, classes, Drag Queen Story Hours, etc, how are these vulnerable children even to be aware of the horror of their situation? Indeed, these vulnerable children are being indoctrinated to think that a two parent Christian home with restrictions on access to social media, internet, etc and possibly even chores and respect for elders being foisted on them! 

Since men having sex with boys was a staple of Greek and Roman civilization, and men having sex with MUCH younger women. (Muhammad's favorite wife Aisha was married to him at 6 or seven, and the marriage was consummated sometime between then and when she reached age 10), it is surprising to me that a Constitutional right to sex with children has yet to be discovered in the Constitution. It certainly seems to be clear evidence of Islamophobia that this right has been overlooked to date. 

The "progressive" road is plain. First you "understand", then you "empathize", then you accept, then you celebrate, then you force all others to celebrate or be discriminated against, up to and including taking their children away if they fail to comply. 

 How can you stand in the way of"progress"??

Gender Dysphoria, Riley Gains

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/04/more-trans-violence.php

The video in the post is something that needs to be seen by all. A male coming into a woman's locker room, unannounced needs to be removed and criminally prosecuted. In a decent society he would be beaten to at least near death by boyfriends, brothers, fathers, etc in protection of the women dishonored. 

There is no "Trans",  there is only a serious mental health issue of Gender Dysphoria, that needs to treated as such, and gender impersonation, which is simple perversion. There is nothing new in reality under the sun, only "new" in the sense of the fantasies of people following the leadership of Satan. 

There is no "issue" here, there are male and female, XY and XX chromosomes in every cell of all our bodies. For anyone that believes "the science", or the plain order of God's creation, this is as real as death. While many go to great length to deny death, at least we all will get the chance to understand that truth eventually, with eternal jpy as believers, and with eternal horror for the unbelieving. 

Now we have mentally ill gender dysphoric 'beings" shooting up a Christian School, and the problem is stated by our Democrat/Administrative State/Media "rulers" to be guns. 

People living in an imaginary world are more prone than the rest of us to do terrible things. Mental illness is not a reasonable basis for society, yet the psychiatric pathology of Gender Dysphoria  is justified and celebrated by our media, treated as a positive thing by some in our medical community (affirming a psychological disorder is akin to providing more drugs to a drug addict). 

We have an insane situation where an obvious illness is celebrated as a another new "basic human right" on the same level as "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". 

"Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" are special because they are Natural Law rights ... "endowed by our Creator (God) and unalienable. 

There was a lot of discussion of having a bill of rights at all because it gives the impression that the ONLY rights "given" to the people are enumerated there.  In fact all the rights come from God, through the people. As the tenth amendment makes clear. 

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The creation of "rights" out of thin air is dangerous in a number of ways but to name just two:

1. A human created "right" comes with responsibility, it is not given, from the creator like Grace and Salvation. Up to Roe, the right to life was correctly understood to be a natural right, requiring no enumeration. The people of some states restricted that right, but in the correctly understood framework of our Constitutional Republic, they had that right to be wrong. Roe manufactured a "right" to kill the unborn out of thin air, and prohibited the states from protecting life. Dobbs returned that right to the states and the people. 
   
   
2. The right to self defence is a natural right. A moment of reflection makes us all aware that when our lives, or those of our children and loved ones are in peril, our natural creaturely nature will cause us to use any means at hand to protect ourselves and loved ones. A strongly held religious belief MAY cause us to "turn the other cheek", but none of us really knows how we will react unless faced with that peril. Since this right, (like religious freedom) was so dear to the newly independent colonists who had freed themselves from religious and economic tyranny by bearing arms, they were very aware that the federal power may be used against them, thus, they (incorrectly I believe) thought it needed to be enumerated. 

Satan is the father of lies. There are a number of turning points on our way to being somewhat worse than Sodom and Gomorrah, a key one is Engel vs Vitale in 1962, prohibiting prayer in schools., since children are the foundation of our nation, and we were once a nation under God, our schools changed to indoctrination children with the religion of Secular Humanism, and God gave America over to Satan.