Posted on 05/22/2016 2:15:52 PM PDT by Morgana
Reality has seemingly escaped us all.
On Tuesday, The New York Times published a bizarre piece intent on mainstreaming transgenderism. A 16-year-old “boy,” AJ Jackson, informs us all about “his” period, “his” plight with tampons and bathrooms.
“There were practical issues, When he had his period, he wondered if he should revert to the girls’ bathroom, because there was no place to throw away his used tampons,” writes Anemona Hatocollis of the Times, describing Jackson’s period struggles. “But he had started feeling like an intruder in the girls’ bathroom, and the single bathrooms were so far out of the way it was hard to get to class on time.”
Hatocollis adds, “So he stuck with the boys’ bathroom.”
Of course, this is impossible. Boys do not have uteruses, and thus do not menstruate. But the Times, hell-bent on pushing their transgender agenda, fully complies with the delusion.
Many people have committed to using pronouns which do not match the biology of a person who is under the mis-impression that he/she belongs to the opposite biological sex. This is a clear indication of reality beginning to escape us. And when we become so invested in this fallacy that we speak of “boys” menstruating and using tampons, the delusion becomes almost laughable.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailywire.com ...
[ Homeschool your kids, if nothing more than to keep them from these mentally ill ones. ]
But if you dare suggest that one of these Parents of these “Transgendered Teens” home-school THEIR special snowflake, they will call YOU a hater.
Case in point:
If I ever have a child who is genuinely gender confused (assuming it was some sorta genetic issue with like XXY or XX-XY mosaic genetic issue or a SRY mutation causing them gender issues, which is really really really rare and not just a purely mental condition).
I sure as hell would HOMESCHOOL them instead of sending them off to Public School and try to force everyone else in the school to submit to the “Deviation the Norm” to steal some terms from Statistics. This is why:
1. I wouldn’t trust the Liberals at the school to not try to shoe-horn my child into one of the various LGBTQXYZ groups and make them feel like a victim or a special snowflake that would ruin their natural sense of merit.
2. It would minimize all the restroom issues, because at home there is only ONE BATHROOM, especially if my child had a physical abnormality in their “parts” caused by the genetic condition.
3. I would be able to closer monitor my child and work to council then through whatever choice they decided to make without the peer-pressure that could incorrectly influence their decision, one which they would regret deeply later.
But why do liberals and progressives want to make the schools bend to the will of all this craziness, instead of taking personal responsibility for their “gender confused kids”?
Well, the liberal mindset is such that since government is supposed to be a parent, that they think government schools must be the sorta of parent that they themselves WANTED, and never the sort of parent that they NEEDED! Because they are spoiled rotten morons with only a basic kindergarten frame of mind to how they think the world is “Supposed” to work, while ignoring nature and reality. This makes them want to justify their iron fisted control of other people “for their own good”...
What do I mean by this? On the pivotal Fascist use of these seemingly trivial "pronoun games", check out sociologist Peter Berger, who said:
"My mother was from Italy and my father was Austrian. As a child I spent a lot of time in Italy. This was in the 1930s, when Italy was of course under Mussolini. Sometime during that period, I forget which year it was, Mussolini made a speech in which he called for a reform of the Italian language.
In modern Italian - - as in most Western languages, with the interesting exception of English -- there are two forms of address, depending on whether you are talking to an intimate or to a stranger. For example, "tu" and "usted" are used in Spanish. In modern Italian "tu" is the intimate form of address, "lei" is the formal address. "Lei" happens to be the third person [feminine singular].
I do not know the history of this, but it has been a pattern of modern Italian for, I would imagine, some two hundred years. No one paid any attention to this. Even as a child, I knew what one said in Italian. It meant nothing.
"But Mussolini made a speech in which he said that the use of "lei" is a sign of effeminacy, a degenerate way of speaking Italian. Since the purpose of the Fascist Revolution was to restore Roman virility to the Italian people, the good Fascist did not say "lei"; the good Fascist said "voi" -- from the Latin "vos" -- which is the second person plural. From that point on, everyone who used "lei" or "voi" was conscious of being engaged in a political act.
"Now, in terms of the empirical facts of the Italian language, what Mussolini said was nonsense. But the effect of that speech meant an awful lot, and it was intended to mean an awful lot. Because from that moment on, every time you said "lei" in Italy you were making an anti-Fascist gesture, consciously or uncon sciously -- and people made you conscious of it if you weren't --- and every time you said "voi" you were making the linguistic equivalent of the Fascist salute.
"The "funny feeling" which we associate with generic "man" and with other instances of inclusive language is the same twinge of uneasiness that second- person "lei" would have prompted in Fascist Italy. The feeling is not a natural response but a conditioned response to the stimulus. We feel it because we have been coached to feel it. We feel it because, like rats repeatedly given a jolt of electric current when they move in a particular way, we have become aware of potential unpleasantness accompanying certain behavior. That is how a taboo works.
The Italian who used stigmatized risked Fascist anger; the English speaker who uses stigmatized "man" risks feminist wrath, but the phenomenon is identical. The converse is also applicable. As Berger says, the accommodationist Italian who said voi was giving the equivalent of a fascist salute. The accommodationist in our time who uses "inclusive language" is making a little genuflection, a curtsy, in the direction of feminism.
An insight on PC language. Every time you open your mouth, it makes you bow, or face the consquences.
Quoted from a longer, and excellent article by Paul Mancuso on so-called "inclusive language".
And who else writes blogs? In the whole world, who else uses blog technology for the publication of thoughts and opinions?
C'mon, tell us.
GROAN
Fags
Self-Important wankers
Perverts
Attention Whores
Pajama Boy
Anthony Wiener
Why, are you putting together a list to follow?
I know a trans, female-to-sorta-male. She had a breast reduction, a hysterectomy, takes male hormones. No lez wants anything to do with her, because she is too close to being a man. No fags want anything to do with her because she still has female plumbing.
It didn't get better after the butchery, and she can't figure it out.
This AJ sad sack is going to find some "doctor" to slice her up, and the money she should be spending on therapy will go for testosterone that will make her bald.
It would be funny, if it was not equivalent to giving an 60 lb., 14 year old anorexic a gastric bypass, because she says she "looks fat".
It’s not a mental illness, it’s selfishness and self deluded choice.
They resist truth and instead embrace lies to themselves and of those who encourage them in these behaviors. (enablers)
It’s not illness mental or physical, it’s choice for selfish reasons. (maybe even idolatry - idolizing to be what they can never truly be? - it’s got a spiritual root against God, as does all wrong or sin)
We can’t water it down and label as mental illness - that allows them to keep at it clinging to a reason to not face truth. Just as all other habitual sins people do and make excuses or diagnosis for.
Since becoming a christian some years back, I sees loads of people in church clinging to lies. Early Christians and even our early Founders did not stand for this enabling as we do today.
And then when this stupidity is over with the tampax dispensers can be refilled with cigarillos.
Why would any girl want to be a boy? That’s just nasty!
It's much easier (if you're nonjudgmental) to believe there's a gene that causes a person to have a female body but "be" a boy.
If the fact that "he" is menstruating doesn't demonstrate the extent of "his" delusion, then "he" is clearly detached from reality to the point that "he" is a danger to "him"-self and certainly to others.
Maybe it’s because girls can be molested by their mother’s sex partner. (So can boys, but it’s less likely.)
Maybe it’s because society wants girls to be “sexy,” that is, to stimulate male lust, even before they reach puberty. It might be easier in the school environment to live as a “trans boy” than as a girl who doesn’t want to participate in the sexual marketplace.
I know for a fact that there are middle school, high school, and college girls/women who put on a “butch” persona because they don’t want to invest in becoming “hot, sexy things”. In other words, they don’t want the “role” of being sexual teases to the boys — which is what this so-called “culture” relentlessly pressures girls to be.
Mrs. Garrison: Hello doctor, looks like I need an abortion. [sits on the chair and puts his feet on the stirrups]
Doctor: ...an abortion?
Mrs. Garrison: Yeah, I’ve got one growing inside me. Now, are you gonna scramble its brains or just vacuum it out? [a nurse arrives and her jaw drops] ...If you want you can just scramble it and I’ll queef it out myself.
Doctor: Mmister Garrison-
Mrs. Garrison: [correcting him] Mrs. Garrison.
Doctor: Mmrs. Garrison, you can’t have an abortion.
Mrs. Garrison: Don’t you tell me what I can and can’t do with my body! [gets up, goes to the nurse, and hugs her] A woman has a right to choose!
Doctor: No, I mean you’re physically unable to have an abortion, because you can’t get pregnant.
Mrs. Garrison: But I missed my period.
Doctor: You can’t have periods either. [Mrs. Garrison looks surprised] You had a sex change, Mr. Garrison, but you don’t have ovaries or a womb. You don’t produce eggs.
Mrs. Garrison: [sits down] You mean, I’ll never know what it feels like to have a baby growing inside me and then scramble its brains and vacuum it out?
Doctor: N-that’s right.
Mrs. Garrison: But I paid five thousand dollars to be a woman. This would mean I I’m not really a woman. Ih, I’m just a... a I’m just a guy with a mutilated penis!
Doctor: Basically, yes.
Mrs. Garrison: ...Oh boy, do I feel like a jackass.
Egregious silliness bordering on dementia.
It’s a logical extension of the PC nuts insisting we believe in their rampant fantasy life.
Yes, and they can put on a hyper-modest, extremely religious persona for the same purpose. It only works to an extent, because males want the “challenge.”
There are many people who are co-dependent with this poor soul. You don’t get this delusional without people aiding and abetting it.
Whenever some transgender anything comes across my screen, I have to call my wife over to help me read it.
And “journalists” these days aren’t that good with their grammar to begin with.
So the way I see it is that this is a girl, who is pretending to be a boy who is having a biologically-correct menstrual cycle.
In the boys room, she can’t find a trash. I don’t know why, because boys rooms have trash cans.
But she feels as though as she is intruding on the girls room. BUT the idea is that people no longer “intrude” on any restroom. That’s what is enabling this girl to use the boy’s room in the first place.
Whenever anyone says anything about trannies I have to tune out. None of it makes sense. like, literally does not make sense.
Even very poor home schooling is miles better than the abuse children are subjected to in the government indoctrination centers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.