Two interesting local items of note:
(1) Sunday, June 1, 2014 Illinois began recognizing the fiction of so-called "same-sex marriage". As you can see from the linked article, reporters are caught up in detailing the usual nonsense associated with this mess: calling the kid adopted by two lesbians the "daughter" (who calls the two lesbians her "moms"); highlighting a church that performs "same-sex wedding ceremonies", but ignoring traditional churches that would condemn so-called "same-sex marriage" as false Christian teaching; etc. Just another sad day in our once glorious republic.
(2) This next item is more personal. My wife has the time and inclination to get involved in lots of focus groups (for money). Occasionally, she also gets me and/or the girls involved. Last weekend was once such occasion -- I had to take my daughter downtown to participate in a national, large-scale youth survey on pre-teen drug use and peer pressure. The survey was done very professionally by an excellent team of survey researchers and my daughter had a fine experience. What was strange, or rather sad and bizarre about the experience, was the short form I had to fill out as the parent to give the research team consent for my daughter to participate in the survey. There were a couple of questions on the form about basic demographics concerning my wife and I and then I kid you not the following choices concerning the children that lived with us:
- Son
- Daughter
- Transgender
- Other
How the heck does a pre-teen (the target age group they were surveying was 9-13) "know" they are "Transgender"?! And what the heck could "Other" possibly mean -- that I might have an alien living with me?!
Now you know why I called the post "local madness".
Comments (13)
Unfortunately, more and more now, these young kids are being taught to consider themselves "transgender." It's a horrible tragedy, but postmodernity has come to the upbringing of children in a big way. Teach your kid he's really a girl and give him hormones to prevent normal puberty? You're a hero. Refuse to acknowledge that your child is either gender? You're an innovator. Leave your child in a locked car for five minutes while you run into a store for a gallon of milk? You're a criminal.
Posted by Lydia | June 4, 2014 9:42 AM
Lydia,
As if right on cue, here is a great Matt Walsh post on the problem with parents:
http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/06/03/this-poor-child-is-confused-not-transgendered/2/
Posted by Jeffrey S. | June 4, 2014 10:44 AM
This story seems to fit quite well here. I may or may not have time to post more on it in a separate entry. The short version is: If your doctor in Michigan tells you that they "have to" speak alone with your teenager by law, tell them that this _isn't_ required by law and that you do not consent to their speaking alone with your minor child. However, it unfortunately (and crazily) is true that teenagers are allowed by law to set up secret on-line health care accounts to which they deny their parents access. The convo. they want to have with your teenager is apparently to tell him how to set up such an account and deny you access. Also to tell him that he can get all sorts of info. about sex, birth control (and can actually get birth control supplies), and HIV treatment secretly without your knowledge and presumably explain to him how to do that.
http://oneduffy.blogspot.com/2014/06/i-am-mom.html?m=1
http://www.oneduffy.blogspot.com/2014/06/whos-in-charge.html
Posted by Lydia | June 4, 2014 2:10 PM
Great story. I hope this gets more attention. I've contributed a few comments. There are some real doozy defenses of the policy. One guy said anyone against it must have something to hide.
Posted by Scott W. | June 5, 2014 8:07 AM
Update on the 5-minutes-alone-with-children conversation: during the back-and-forth it occurred to me that there is another one of your "choice devours itself" moments. That is, sometimes I show that all the arguments for homosexual activity are exactly the same as those that pedo/epho/hebe/whateveryoucallitphiles make. This usually sends defenders of the indefensible into fits of indignant "How DARE you!?" commentary, but they also tell me that the significant difference is consent. Well, these are the same people defending this lousy doctor's office policy and you will notice that there is no age limit mentioned on when this happens. The nurse gets five minutes alone with your child whether you or the child wants it or not.
Posted by Scott W. | June 6, 2014 10:27 AM
Actually, I think the photo of the sign shows that they were applying it to teens between 13 and 17. But you have an excellent point about "whether the child wants it or not." I know plenty of thirteen-year-olds who have a close relationship with their parents and would feel uneasy about being _forced_ to have a conversation alone with a nurse. In fact, if the idea is that now we are treating them as adults, that is not how a medical office treats an adult. For example, if I, as an adult, want my husband to come into the room and be with me the whole time for a medical appointment, nobody can tell me I _must_ meet with the nurse alone. So the set-up was really more like a hostile CPS encounter: "We must interview your children in private." Which isn't even respecting the fiction that this is about the kid's own choice.
Posted by Lydia | June 6, 2014 10:58 AM
Ah, I see that now. It's actually 12-17, but hey, what's a year to people sexualizing children over their parent's heads?
Posted by Scott W. | June 6, 2014 12:48 PM
And starting in kindergarten, at that?
Posted by Tony | June 6, 2014 7:39 PM
There are something like 52 gender choices that Facebook added/considered. While science fiction sometimes gets provocative with the idea of a third gender, the left has gone outright insane. Look ma, it takes an entire village of hunter-gathers to conceive and birth a single infant!
Posted by Mike T | June 10, 2014 10:15 AM
Once you get up to 52, it should be obvious EVEN TO THE NUTCASES that gender ceases to mean anything worthwhile. (Of course, we know that it is nutty even when you try to expand beyond 2, I don't expect that to be obvious to the nutcases). So, if they are still trying to vamp such nonsense, they are doing for reasons completely apart from thinking it is based on anything real... like for political reasons.
Someone help me out here. My organization is, one of these days, going to have a mind-bender meeting trying to get us all to accept such genders. I want to invent a brand new "gender" to make them all kow-tow to, that shoves the garbage right back down their throats. Something along the lines of, maybe, "cis-trans-traditional male to male hypernormal". Except not that obvious.
Posted by Tony | June 11, 2014 6:39 PM
Tony, I doubt that you can get these guys to admit any reductio. You may have to find another way to heckle. But I strongly support your desire to heckle! In fact, it may be the only way to keep one's integrity when forced to go to such indoctrination meetings.
Posted by Lydia | June 11, 2014 6:50 PM
The "transgender" movement has really come rocketing out of nowhere, from 0-100 in no time flat. This shows pretty clearly that, among other things, it's being planned and coordinated.
Posted by Samson J. | June 14, 2014 10:56 PM
Yes, Samson, I often think about that when people try to apply the "distinction between act and orientation" to the T in the alphabet soup. Even among Christians I don't think there's much thought there. For example, "I think they should have a right to jobs." Really? So some guy who insists on wearing a dress and being called "Diane" has a _right_ to a job? There is zero distinction between act and orientation when it comes to "trangender persons" because the whole _point_ of considering oneself "transgender" is that one presents oneself socially to others *as the opposite gender* (or in some cases as no gender, or as whatever "gender" one made up) and that one demands to be treated and spoken of accordingly. The "transgender movement" cannot be fitted into the categories some conservatives have developed for homosexuals of a person quietly struggling with and sometimes succumbing to an urge or an orientation, because the transgender movement is intrinsically social. It isn't an orientation but a self-presentation. It is intrinsically about being "in your face" and making other people play along. Yet people continue to use the same phrases they have used before, trying to apply them to this aspect of the agenda.
Posted by Lydia | June 15, 2014 9:33 AM