Posted on 06/23/2016 11:14:29 AM PDT by massmike
Father's Day propaganda. Boston Globe photo of "transgender dad" at work.
The incoherent war on truth continues.
On Father’s Day the Boston Globe, the major newspaper in New England, featured a lavish front-page article about a father who had “transitioned to a female”. There was an accompanying article by his son – a Boston Globe videographer – who describes that he is now accepting his father’s new “gender” after years of horrible anguish that even caused the son to change his last name.
The articles are laden with sentiments of “tolerance” and “acceptance.” But they can’t avoid mentioning the years of emotional pain that this “transition” caused the man’s wife and three sons. Like so many LGBT stories, this exposes the father’s actions as ultimately self-centered and narcissistic.
The linguistic gymnastics in the article are quite frightening. As the son relates:
-"I got a call, and it was my dad. She was full-on screaming in a man’s voice. My dad initially took on an extreme falsetto voice, but when she gets excited, or laughs, she goes back to a guy’s voice."-
Is this the new frontier of the LGBT movement’s deconstruction of the natural family? Will kids in school soon be taught that their father (and mother) can either be male or female?
By the time the thought police are through, your kids will probably be used to it.
We’ve all seen the flood of “transgender” themes in recent television shows and movies. And of course there’s been the Bruce Jenner media circus. But that only barely touched upon the “fatherhood” aspect.
Parents of schoolchildren are barely catching their breath over the concepts of schoolchildren using “genderless” locker rooms and bathrooms, playing on opposite-sex sports teams, wearing opposite-sex clothes, and having their names changed by the school to comply with their “gender identity” (even without their parents’ knowledge). Unfortunately, it doesn’t end there.
Unfortunately, most pro-family groups across the country, both national and statewide, have taken an approach to “fight” this in a way that we consider almost completely ineffective.
They don’t tell the uncomfortable truth: That “transgender” people are delusional and have serious mental health issues that should be addressed, and that the behavior constitutes a perversion. Instead, they talk about “bathroom predators” and “privacy rights”, which are only peripheral issues at best. And they accept the premise that there should be "acceptance" and "accommodations" for "transgender" students or adults.
Why? It’s because they don’t want to appear intolerant or bigoted. And they’re fearful of incurring incur the wrath of the LGBT movement by directly opposing their ideology. As a result, as we’ve all witnessed, most pro-family groups actually concede that “transgenderism” is a legitimate concept, but then say that “we want our religious freedom rights, too.” (However, they only talk in general terms. They’re afraid to say exactly what the specific religious issue is.) It makes their argument seem weak or even empty.
We saw this pattern before in the 1990s. Parents had barely caught their breath over the“gay and lesbian” concept being pushed in the high schools (along with newly “out” homosexual teachers, “AIDS education” and condom handouts), when the LGBT movement without warning pushed the idea of “diverse families” with “two mommies” or “two daddies” (especially in the early grades). Of course, it followed the political push for homosexual “civil unions” which featured article after article in the mainstream media about homosexual parenting.
The “gay couple” parent concept quickly was brought into the high schools, through intensive day-long “gay and lesbian awareness” programs. Then elementary school teachers began using so-called “teachable moments” and LGBT story books to introduce it to kids as young as kindergarten age.
How did the mainstream pro-family groups react to this? They never described homosexual behavior as something detestable, but rather “something we disagree with on religious grounds” and because “every child needs a mother and a father.” These groups opposed legalizing civil unions but caved on the more informal homosexual “domestic partnerships.” Later, they opposed “gay marriage” but supported civil unions and adoption by homosexuals. It’s proven to be the road to hell.
Now, they are capitulating on the "gender identity" issue, accepting this fraudulent concept and acquiescing on the word "gender" (instead of the accurate word "sex").
Father putting on women's makeup. [Boston Globe photo.]
The child in the show J()zz has been taking hormone treatments since 5 years old, and her parents should have long ago had the child taken away from them. The country has gone mad. That is what happens after we kick God out of the public sphere, and sacrifice millions of infants on the altar to ancient “gods”.
HIS parents appear to have Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy, as do so many of the parents of young transformers.
IMO, that show exemplifies what end-stage Munchausen's by Proxy looks like.
That the parents have chosen a politically correct way to express it, doesn't make it any less abusive.
LOL, see post 24. GMTA.
There’s been a huge payoff for these parents, and every “success” spawns copycats. The cause of our current plague of “transgenderism” isn’t in the water: it’s on the airwaves (as it were).
Because at the ripe old age of 5, he knew he was a girl, was attracted to boys, wanted to have a vagina and have sex with a man and wanted to live out the next 80 years of his life as a female... At 5, kids want to be a dinosaur one day and a fireman the next.
Not just him, but all their kids should have been taken away and they should have been locked up until the last one reaches 45 years old so they can’t do them further harm.
For a weekly series show titled, “I am Jazz” about a boy who has been brainwashed by mom and dad that he’s a girl. I think this is the second season. Hey, gotta get ‘em indoctrinated young.
What surprises me is how common the problem is.
And, how little value so many parents put on their kids' well-being.
Sad, really. 100-odd years ago (and even into the 50s with a lot of families....), families had a lot of children. It was common, even expected, to lose some along the way due to accidents, illness, and so on. Children were valued, to be sure, but there was always expectation of loss.
My generation (I'm *early* Gen-X) was the first not to deal with things like polio and measles. Vaccines elimated most all childhood disease for us. Cars were safer. Kids weren't *all* working on a farm starting at an early age(though, I was :-) ), with all of the attendant dangers. I can count on one hand the number of kids I went to school with who died before graduation.
Fast forward to the current crop, the kids of Millenials.
Between "Black Lives Don't Matter", drugs, and an incessant Look At ME culture, we're quickly going back to the standards of 100 years ago.... Moms are cranking out kids, though not to work a farm, but for welfare benefits. Children have less value, and in many places, a general expectation of loss pervades.
WBill Jr. doesn't know how good he has it.
A few years ago, WBill Jr. wanted to wear a dress to school, for some sort of costume day. He wasn't crossdressing, or anything nefarious...he just thought it would be a hoot.
"No.", I said. And that was that. And that particular phase of his (if it ever was a phase) ... was over.
Kids need both a Mom and a Dad who love them enough to say "No".
This is why I gave up my Globe about 2 years ago——after reading it for about 60 years.
It is NOT missed.
.
I think the only change is in the interpretation of normal human variability. Very few people perfectly align with every "gender" stereotype. There have always been boys who were studious and nurturing, for example, and girls who were rambunctious, aggressive, or mechanically-gifted.
How parents reacted to these differences varied, but nobody ever said, "Son, the fact that you like to take care of baby animals shows that you're 'really' a girl," or "Susie, since you like to race cars and shoot guns, you're 'really' a boy."
Additionally, it is the norm for very young children not to understand clearly either the differences between the sexes and the associated socially determined "gender" markers. They have to learn by observation and instruction. One of my sons, when he was about 3 years old, would talk about, "When I was a girl ...," by which he meant before he had his hair cut. He would see a picture of himself with long hair and say, "Look, I played with that toy when I was a girl."
Not being insane, like the parents of "Jazz," we did NOT go on television announcing that we had an amazing sex-changing child. (Frog genes?) Instead, we explained that he had always been a boy, and that both boys and girls could have hair of any length. It sank in over time.
Adults are just crazier now, that's what's new.
I sit in astounded befuddlement at what has changed in just 2 years. We went from gays suing a bakery to now a full frontal attack by the dressed trannies. Now, the highest laws in the land are established to promote and support these delusions. 2 years is all it took to destroy the nuclear family.
It would be funny if it werent so serious
In Houston a few years back there was an HPD officer who left his wife of 27 years, the week after his youngest son graduated from high school. Then he pirouetted out of the closet and announced publicly that he was having a sex change and forced HPD to pay for it.
His four sons were devastated. His daughter quit college and left the state.
He had the sex change and is a lesbian. Messed up a lot of people’s lives with his narcissism.
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.