You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Culture’ category.
Why do adult male entertainers want to ‘perform’ in front of children? Short answer: Recruitment.
See the paper and analysis here –
“Before the last year or so, two terms you wouldn’t have expected to encounter together are “drag queen” and “early childhood education,” but we’re now about three years into a full-fledged Communist revolution in the Western world, which has made it not only commonplace but shoved all in our faces. Here we are in the midst of June, “Pride Month,” 2022, and the Leftist collision of drag queens and young children has been center-stage all month long, including in schools. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the idea of using drag queens, or specifically a program called Drag Queen Story Hour, as an intentional educational methodology in schools isn’t just some fringe activist project but also appears in the scholarly education literature. In this unbelievable episode of the New Discourses Podcast, host James Lindsay reads through an academic paper, “Drag pedagogy: The playful practice of queer imagination in early childhood,” in the journal Curriculum Inquiry. In light of this paper, it is virtually undeniable: what we’re dealing with in schools is Marxism, specifically Queer Marxism here, and it has turned our schools into Groomer Schools.”
Transactivism and transgender ideology in general have little respect for truth, morality, and established scientific/medical procedures and processes. It is imperative to realize that this ideology at its very core is activist inspired and activist driven. Their goal is to violently change how society works and there is never a bridge too far. There is no institution or individual that is not worth the sacrifice if the overarching goal (destabilizing society enough for social revolution, so the margins can be moved to the centre) can be met.
So, yes its okay to push the demonstrably false narrative of affirm-or-suicide on parents. If the familial bond can be severed, any damage inflicted is worth it because creating another destabilized transgender activist helps the cause along. The gender-mill always requires more useful idiots to do its bidding.
“Sapir believes that the fear-mongering with inflated statistics about trans suicide rates has been essential to activists in achieving their goals in the political arena. “The affirm-or-suicide mantra has become the central strategy of contemporary transgender activism, and at times it would seem that activists have little else in their rhetorical arsenal,” said Sapir.
Sapir cites recent examples of the hyperbolic language used by purveyors of the affirm-or-suicide myth. Khiara Bridges told Senator Josh Hawley during a recent senate hearing that his “transphobic” line of questioning is why “one in five” transgender people attempt suicide.
Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg agreed with his husband Chasten, who said that the Florida Parental Rights in Education Act would “kill kids.” Maia Kobabe, author of the pornographic children’s book Gender Queer, said her book’s presence in libraries was “life-saving.” The term “life-saving” was also used by Assistant Secretary for Health and Human Services Rachel Levine regarding “gender affirming” interventions (i.e. sex changes) for kids. Levine is a trans-identified biological male.
“Despite the unwaveringly confident manner in which these claims are often asserted, there is no good evidence that failing to ‘affirm’ minors in their ‘gender identity’ will increase the likelihood of them committing suicide,” said Sapir. “Gender activists commonly argue that roughly four in ten transgender-identified youth (TIY) attempt suicide when not socially and medically ‘affirmed.’ Does the research bear this out? The simple answer is: no,” he adds.
Sapir found that surveys of suicidality in “trans” youth rely on self-report and do little to vet whether suicide was actually attempted. Studies that claim “trans” youth are at elevated risk of suicide are commonly compared with average mentally healthy teenagers, which is deeply misleading. When researchers compared “trans” youth with teens suffering from similar mental health problems, there was virtually no difference in suicide rates between the groups. “Trans” youth are not any more suicidal than teens with garden variety mental illness, which means that failing to “affirm” a child’s transgender identity does not drive suicidal behavior.
Teens with rapid onset gender dysphoria are “known to have very high rates of anxiety, depression, history of sexual trauma, anorexia, and eating disorders, all of which typically precede their gender-related distress,” said Sapir, who believes that gender distress may be a symptom of a troubled teenage girl, but it is incorrectly being treated as an underlying cause.
Sapir dives into the studies purporting to find that puberty blockers given to minors lead to reduced suicidality. The author of the studies, Jack Turban, a trans activist and psychiatry fellow at UCSF, has a long history of designing poor experiments and using bad methodology and biased samples to draw erroneous conclusions from data. “Turban sold his work to an eager media environment as having found strong evidence that puberty blockers are life-saving and medically necessary. And they gobbled it up uncritically,” said Sapir.
A Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) is the gold standard for finding a causal relationship in science. No RCT has ever studied the effects of puberty blockers to treat gender dysphoria, which is why the FDA has never approved the use of Lupron and other puberty blockers for that purpose.
The claims activists make about puberty blockers being completely safe, effective, and a “pause button on puberty” rely entirely on referencing their approved on-label use which is to treat precocious puberty, not how they are increasingly being used off-label to treat gender dysphoria.
Sapir breaks down a thoroughly debunked 2018 article by Jason Rafferty published in Pediatrics that claimed to find conclusive evidence that alternatives to gender-affirming care are “futile and harmful.”
“The article contains a shocking number of errors, omissions, and blatant mischaracterizations of the available research on pediatric gender transition, some of them so fundamental and egregious as to suggest bad faith in the authors,” said Sapir. He added that the article’s central conclusion is negated by its citations and flawed logic.
“The hyperbole surrounding the suicide threat is designed to get us to overlook the fundamentally experimental nature of pediatric gender medicine,” said Sapir. The point of suicide alarmism, he adds, is to get us to not weigh the pros and cons, benefits and risks.”
Clearly, transgender ideology has always been on the wrong side of science. Hopefully soon it will be on the wrong side of history.
Being able to freely discuss and share one’s thoughts in the public sphere is one of the hallmarks of a society that embraces freedom and freedom of speech. We, as responsible concerned citizens, should not be afraid to examine, discuss, and delve deeply into any topic that is important or relevant to our society and our social experience.
Authoritarians on the both the Right and the Left are opposed to citizenry in free societies discussing their pet issues in the public square and will use many tactics to shut down debate or at least increase the social cost of doing so, as to discourage most people from engaging.
Personally, I get this most when trying defend the notion that gender identity movement in its current form is actively harmful toward female rights, boundaries, and safety in our society. Trying to discuss the notion that men (regardless of how they identify) should not be in female prisons is a prime example of the rhetorical cartwheels seemingly engaged automatically when this topic is broached. “You hate trans people!” or “You’re transphobic!”…. Erm… No, it is just that there is a real safety problem with putting men into female single sex spaces that SHOULD have been discussed and debated before we actual did it here in Canadian society – So now we have to do it post hoc, ,and deal with the consequences of this foolish decision – that is females are being abused and sexually assaulted in female prisons by men who (falsely) claim they are women.
Men’s feelings about their gender should not outweigh the safety and security of women in institutional settings. This discussion needs to be had and should have been had in our public political landscape.
I digress a bit, but one of the many ways in which authoritarians attempt to discourage discussion – see the name calling example above – is the deployment of the motte-and-bailey fallacy. W.Alexander Bell tackles the fallacy in his essay quoted below:
“One way that happens is by using the motte-and-bailey fallacy. One modest and easy-to-defend position (the motte) is replaced by a much more controversial position (the bailey). A person will argue the bailey, but then replace it with the motte when questioned.
For example, a key concept of critical race theory and the broader social justice movement is the notion of lived experience, which means that marginalized people have better access to knowledge about their own experiences of oppression than privileged people do. On the surface, that seems quite reasonable. A white person can never know how it feels to be called the n-word, and a man might be oblivious to how it feels to be a woman in a male-dominated profession. Sexism and racism do exist, so it seems reasonable to assume that members of the majority are less likely to recognize such prejudices.
However, the proponents of critical race theory and intersectionality do not stop there. Smuggled into their notion of lived experience is an adherence to the more controversial “standpoint epistemology,” a postmodern theory of knowledge that rejects reaching for objectivity and argues that marginalized people have authoritative knowledge about complex systems of oppression and society itself.
For example, a colleague of mine at a Swedish university cited his lived experience when he argued that critics of Sweden’s immigration policies are all racists and should be banned from speaking at universities.
When I told him that his lived experience was just anecdotal—that there is no way he could generalize about millions of people based on a few bad encounters—he doubled down and replied, “that’s a very white male thing to say.” Initially, I worried that I wasn’t sympathetic enough to his experiences as an immigrant, despite being one myself. However, I now realize that I was being emotionally manipulated and shamed into silence through a very clever bait-and-switch. These tactics are not part of a good-faith debate, but rather a rhetorical strategy to claim epistemic authority and gain power.
Retreating to the motte of lived experience is a manipulative tactic that the disciples of the social justice movement use to exploit compassionate peoples’ desire not to offend others. The motte-and-bailey allows pseudo-academics and activists to shut down important discussions without making an argument or citing any credible scholarship or data. It also allows them to drown out well-reasoned arguments with selective anecdotes, emotional appeals, shaming tactics, and religious zealotry.
The idea that suffering brings enlightenment—that a class of “woke” individuals will lead us to the promised land with their “revealed knowledge”—has much more in common with religious mysticism than academic inquiry. In an age when we are dealing with increasingly urgent and complex issues such as climate change and a global pandemic, well-reasoned arguments have even greater importance. Personal experience doesn’t need to be ignored, but a personal anecdote cannot be a substitute for data and honest debate.”
Watch for it while you engage with (faux) progressives. Actually progressives want to make society better through thoughtful discussion and authentic inclusion of many different viewpoints. Faux-progressives will attempt to curate discussion and shutdown debate/discussion that is unpalatable to them.
For more on the Motte-and-Bailey fallacy see James Lindsey’s podcast on the topic.
Did you want to know the state of things? Here it is. Get out there and demand that we respect female rights, boundaries, and safety in society.
It is the holiday season again folks. One of the best ways to get into the feeling of the season is to share with others. It’s also a very nice end around the whole capitalism thing, if that’s your bag.
To make it extra easy, while in Canada, I would suggest going to the Canada Helps Website. Straightforward, secure, and reliable.
It is my holiday tradition to donate Turkey’s in the name of my family and friends. Also a great time of year to donate to the Vancouver Women’s Rape Relief Shelter, they are on the front lines of keeping women (adult human females) safe in our society and deserve our support.
This book is on my Xmas list.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…