A Conversation on “Gender Identity”

This is a set of comments on an article on Alternet: “White House to Public Schools: Let Students Use Whatever Bathroom They Want” (http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/obama-administration-directs-public-schools-let-students-use-whatever-bathroom-they) between myself and “FreethinkingWorldGuy,” inspired by one of his several comments below the article:

You characterize a call for sensible treatment of school kids “liberal self-righteousness”? So what should Obama do in your opinion? Send the schools a note urging them to continue creating similar “bathroom laws” around the country? Or just keep quiet, allowing disruptions and problems that these anti-transgender laws are causing to spread?
My first response, to comment above: @FreethinkingWorldGuy – Hey, kewl screenname, dood. Creates just the right impression to earn you a pass from the politically correct sheeple.

What should Obama do? Well, how about remaining within the bounds of the Constitution which clearly does not grant the authority to legislate to the “Unitary Presidency?” Not even the Congress has the power to dictate such policy to the 50 sovereign states. Are you down with creating One Big Brother Over All to dictate to us everything we can do to the End Of Time, amen?

Glad you like my screename! Weird stuff about what my it can do for me, but you’re certainly free to have your own opinion about that.

But to the matter at hand…

So is your beef with Obama is that he’s legislating unlawfully by sending the memo to schools? Not seeing it. Where do you stand re: the notorious “bathroom laws”?

Re: Big Brother, no, I’m a big privacy fan, which is EXACTLY why I am glad to see Obama taking a position and step to protect the privacy of school children.

I’m getting the sense that it is YOU who likes the idea of Big Brother–in the form of public school teachers and staff–policing children’s choice of bathroom.

Me: You seriously think that children have a problem with their choice of bathroom, do you? Like they thought it up on their own, just like they independently started worrying about what their “choice of gender” should be? So, then there’s no agenda going on to influence children’s identities, to keep them confused, to keep them on the Common Core bandwagon so they grow up confused about who they are or even how to think? So then the Fed administration has every right to dictate what people in all the 50 states have to do about their bathroom habits to protect the masses of poor suffering cross-gender kids and protect them from the mean local populations, school boards, teachers and staff?

Right, got you.

In general, no, I don’t think children have a problem with their choice of bathroom. For transgender people (including children), they didn’t have a problem either–until we started seeing “bathroom bill” laws pop up.

It is true that most of us self-identify with gender to match our anatomy. But it doesn’t line up that way for everyone. I discard black-and-white thinking about necessity that gender match anatomy for 100% of the population, or that gender identity is a choice.

There is a growing body of science to explain why alignment doesn’t always line up, and I have seen a number of compelling cases where children–even at a very young age (e.g. 4), self-identify with the opposite sex, regardless of efforts by some to “correct” them. Transgender people are clear about their own gender identity, regardless of some who might believe and/or claim to the contrary.

“So then the Fed administration has every right to dictate what people in all the 50 states have to do about their bathroom habits to protect the masses of poor suffering cross-gender kids and protect them from the mean local populations, school boards, teachers and staff?”

The concepts of equal treatment, including freedom from discrimination, goes to the very core identity of the United States, in particular as is laid out in the US Constitution. The 50 states you refer to should NOT be allowed to write laws that burden any group of people based on religion, race, sex, or gender. Moreover, the 50 states do, to varying degrees, accept federal funds–to the tune of many billions of dollars. Federal Title IX funds specifically forbids gender-based discrimination.

You write like there would be no fallout from “bathroom bill” laws. There already has been, and it will get worse if it isn’t nipped in the bud. Again, they cause problems were the weren’t any before.

@FreethinkingWorldGuy -You write like there would be no fallout from the increasingly arrogant actions of the clearly illegitimate Federal Administrative System which is increasingly normalizing its violations of the Constitution, of the American revolutionaries’ clear intention that the newly minted States were each nations in their own rights, and of due process.

“Transgender people are clear about their own gender identity, regardless of some who might believe and/or claim to the contrary.” While this may be true for adults, your assertion that 4 year olds are clear on this is, I’m quite sure, not backed up by anything but the writings of some psychiatrists and psychologists who are enrolled in the social engineering matrix of globalism and social engineering. Their “studies” and the “growing body of science” you tout are highly subjective and far from scientific.

In my personal experience, my next door neighbor was seduced by gay men on our block as a young teenager and “decided” that he was gay. My observation at the time was that this led to extreme difficulties, suffering, and confusion for him, and to the destruction of his family of origin. He was far from clear about how to manage the direction of his life.

“The concepts of equal treatment, including freedom from discrimination, goes to the very core identity of the United States, in particular as is laid out in the US Constitution.” Really? You, of course, are referring to where slaves are legitimized and deemed to count as 3/5 of a human being for the purpose of representation in Congress. Or perhaps you’re talking about the Native Americans, who were largely exterminated? The idea of “not burdening” people on the basis of “gender” is, I think, extremely strained, and has become weaponized against the stability of our cultures and of the family unit upon which the strength of human culture depends. The “government” cannot succeed in building strong human families, and, I think, has no intention to do so.

Your observation that the states are now dependent on Federal funding is very true and particularly insidious. This is, I think, by design. The Fed Admin. has access to essentially limitless hot money from the bankers at the Federal Reserve, borrowed against the will of the people, who will have no choice but to be saddled with this debt, to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars owed by American babies at birth. This hot money is also a weapon against honest Americans, and the working and middle classes are being driven by it to the wall. To force “gender equality,” a concept which is amorphous and ambiguous at best upon us as a consequence of a criminally distorted financial system is both tragic and wicked. If this is what you espouse as being a matter of course and something that is “good for us,” then I think you are complicit in this criminality.

“To force ‘gender equality,’ a concept which is amorphous and ambiguous at best upon us as a consequence of a criminally distorted financial system is both tragic and wicked.”

You are muddying up a lot of things here. So let’s sort things out, shall we? First of all, the primary issue that we disagree on is gender identity. Apparently, you believe that that is black-and-white, cut and dry. And you know what? For some people it is. But for others it is not. And here’s a kicker for you on that: Variation on this is NATURAL. It’s not, as you believe, linked to a “criminally distorted financial system”.

I stated earlier that transgender people are not confused about their gender identity, which is counter to what you believe. To be fair, I’ll admit that I oversimplified that a bit; there are some people who actually do go through a process of development and discovery, regarding gender their own identity and sexuality. And some people actually identify partly with BOTH genders. The main difference between you and I on this matter is that while you see this as confusion, I accept it as within normality of the human condition. People get confused when their instinct re: gender identity leads them (naturally) to have certain feelings and inclinations, but outside influences are telling them that such feelings are wrong. I could point you to science and/or case studies backing up early gender identity, but when you say things like:

“While this may be true for adults, your assertion that 4 year olds are clear on this is, I’m quite sure, not backed up by anything but the writings of some psychiatrists and psychologists who are enrolled in the social engineering matrix of globalism and social engineering”,

It is clear to me that you see everything through the prism of conspiracy. So I won’t bother.

“ ‘The concepts of equal treatment, including freedom from discrimination, goes to the very core identity of the United States, in particular as is laid out in the US Constitution.’ Really? You, of course, are referring to where slaves are legitimized and deemed to count as 3/5 of a human being for the purpose of representation in Congress. Or perhaps you’re talking about the Native Americans, who were largely exterminated?”

SERIOUSLY?

You’re going to bring up the 3/5 slave compromise and horrendous treatment of American Indians in the context of a contemporary discussion on gender identity? Okay, let me spell it out for you: The 3/5 compromise was bad (though not as bad as NO representation) and the treatment of Indians was horrible. At least we agree on this, right? We also seem to agree on perils of national debt, and likely on some areas of mismanagement by the federal government. But those topics can be discussed separately from a discussion about gender identity.

Me: “You are muddying up a lot of things here. So let’s sort things out, shall we? First of all, the primary issue that we disagree on is gender identity. Apparently, you believe that that is black-and-white, cut and dry. And you know what? For some people it is. But for others it is not. And here’s a kicker for you on that: Variation on this is NATURAL. It’s not, as you believe, linked to a “crim inally distorted financial system”.”

How is it apparent that I think gender identity is cut-and-dried? I know that it is a very difficult issue and experience for many. However, I also think that it has become a wedge issue for cultural Marxists who deliberately want to damage, particularly children, in order to destabilize and engineer society.

I do think that we humans are stronger if we cultivate our health, and that we are stronger when we accept our true gender at birth. When we accept our bodies as they are, we have access to biological guidance of our feelings and impulses. When children are actively encouraged, or even forced, to question their “inner gender preference” at the expense of actually experiencing who they are, that tragic outcomes potentially eventuate. It seems obvious that such outcomes actually may threaten the survival of humanity, and certainly threaten the well-being of society and culture.

I also think it should be obvious that “gender identity” is not an appropriate matter for government to arrogate powers over. Creating the synthetic idea that psychological gender identity rises to the levels of race or real gender as far as the need for protections of equality is, I think, a weaponized concept being fed to the population with powerful propaganda which constitutes real violence.

“Government” did push and protect slavery and genocidal violence against Native Americans when it served the interests of power. I don’t think it’s a stretch to question whether what is now being done with psychological gender identity is not the promotion of real damage against Americans in the interests of elite power. And the primary tool these interests are using to dispossess and cripple their “subjects” is the criminally distorted financial system. Keeping the sheeple confused, at odds with themselves, unable to think critically, and identified with cultural Marxist themes serves the interests of our owners in maintaining their abilities to harvest our wealth (and if you think this isn’t what’s happening, I welcome your alternative analysis and the evidence to back that up). I think it is of a piece.

You seem to imply that anyone looking through “the prism of conspiracy” is unworthy of being engaged in your laser-targeted debate on gender identity. But how do you think that “the national debt” came to be? How do you think 6 (or 5) corporate conglomerates have come to control 95% of the information that people in the West consume? (and what is the monumental effect of that?) If you think this has arisen by accident, then there is clearly little ground to continue a conversation.

Advertisements

Post a Comment

Required fields are marked *

*
*

%d bloggers like this: