This long article is about transgenderism. Not to be confused with hermaphroditism, intersexuality or (gender) dysphoria. And it is about what is in the title. I explain difficult words separately, except for the word I made up myself, transgenderism: that agenda. That’s what the whole article is about.
Handicapped or challenged?
Contrary to what the title, the image above and the one at the bottom might suggest, this text itself is not only thought-provoking but also ruthlessly analytical ánd empathetic.
To delineate the terrain a bit, let’s start with two anecdotal stories about ‘disabled people’.
Over 40 years ago, I saw the film Johnny Got His Gun (you can watch it in full on YouTube). It was really made as a ‘never-war-again’ film, but it didn’t strike me as such then and much less so now. An impressive film though! Johnny is wounded on the battlefield. Significantly: in the First World War. However, the film is from 1971. To make a pure anti-war film based on fiction about the First World War, 16 years after the Second World War, is actually rather strange, to say the least. Johnny is badly wounded. Really badly: all four of his limbs have been amputated. He is deaf and blind and he cannot speak anymore. But his brain is still working well. At the end, it becomes pure horror. In a last look back on his life, his father admonishes him: “Use your head“. And Johnny rejoices internally. His father has indirectly shown him a way out: his neck muscles still work, he can still communicate via Morse code!
The angelic nurse, who is the only one who still really cares about his fate, sees it. His message is: “Kill me, please, kill me“. Of course it is: when your body is so broken, you want to die. However, the evil doctors prevent her from switching off the equipment in order to fulfil Johnny’s last wish.
At the very other end of the spectrum of ‘handicaps’ there are the great achievements of (for example) deaf or blind people. A few years ago the 1500 metres at the Paralympic Games seemed to provide a sensational illustration of this: no fewer than four of the blind runners ran faster than the Olympic champion.
Table of contents
- Handicapped or challenged
- A misplaced overreaction
- Victory: just dysphoria
- No euphoria
- What about procreation
- The most fanatical TRA-activists
A misplaced, overreaction
I heard a logical-sounding explanation for this remarkable outcome: the blind runners do not know how far they are running ahead of or behind their opponents and so they really give it their all. However, their limitations turned out to be rather limited. I assumed that these athletes were running on a straight track, with ‘bumps’ between the lanes so that they could feel when they went out. Not so. The Canadian participant in the video of this, just before the start, looks straight into the camera and waves. Many runners just wear strong glasses. I am much more impressed by people who have very poor vision and become programmers. I once had such a person in my class. In another class of the same school there was even someone who was completely blind, and yet managed to prepare himself for a good job in ICT. Wow!
But it is madness to pretend that those people have no limitations, are not disabled; to pretend that all those achievements are of the type of that student, Ray Charles or Stevie Wonder. Many of these achievements are due, not only to their own impressive perseverance, but also to fantastic achievements such as Braille, sign language, speaking options in computer software and special schools. Not to mention glasses, hearing aids and wheelchairs.
The origin of the tendency to deny disability is, as it were, actually noble.
In the past and in less developed societies or downright backward cultures, people with ‘disabilities’ were and are still treated inhumanely.
I put ‘disabilities’ in inverted commas because this also makes me think of the story of the Inuits, who would have put economically unviable elderly people on an ice floe. And of albinos. In Africa, they are sometimes the victims of the most atrocious forms of backwardness. And I am thinking of the abortion of baby girls to avoid having to pay dowry later! Millions of girls are affected. Lepers were chased out of the city – understandably, in a way – because of the danger of infection. People with bad motor skills were and are laughed at or rejected.
But the tendency to deny disabilities is a crazy, overreacting to this, and especially in countries where the horrible practices of the previous paragraph do not or hardly occur.
But this article would not be about blindness, deafness or missing limbs, but about hermaphroditism, intersexuality, (gender) dysphoria and, last but not least, transgenderism.
When it comes to people, using the term hermaphrodite is always wrong.
It occurs in various animal species, but never in mammals. The term refers to species in which individual animals are both (healthy) males and (healthy) females. Garden snails, for example. ‘Hermaphrodite’ used for humans is a mythological term at best, although penis carriers sometimes do take hormones to develop breasts.
Human children are born with abnormalities of the sexual organs. The (on the face of it!) calm, reliable website of Intersex Society of North America (further: ISNA) gives some figures on this.
Here’s what we do know: If you ask experts at medical centres how often a child is born so noticeably atypical in terms of genitalia that a specialist in sex differentiation is called in, the number comes out to about 1 in 1500 to 1 in 2000 births. But a lot more people than that are born with subtler forms of sex anatomy variations, some of which won’t show up until later in life.
These are physical abnormalities that exist in various degrees and forms; they are grouped under the name intersexuality. I am quoting the above mainly because it refers to the key word: anatomy, and because in thís context ISNA also has the decency to mention that some of these abnormalities are of such a nature that in highly developed countries immediate surgical intervention is undertaken because failure to intervene would lead to the rapid death of the baby.
Besides the mythical and anatomical aspect, there is the psychological aspect. Only thís aspect is controversial.
Some transgenderists (practitioners of transgenderism) are wildly enthusiastic about a change, a few years ago, of the DSM, the American Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.
A clear example comes from the far-left web site ThinkProgress.
The site is steeped in political hysteria, but one thing they do provide in this article is correct: ‘The new manual will diagnose transgender people with “Gender Dysphoria” ‘.
Dysphoria a word to remember!
The British NHS describes it thus:
There are no physical symptoms of gender dysphoria, but people with the condition may experience and display a range of feelings and behaviours.
So: no physical symptoms, but feelings and behaviours.
The WHO (World Health Organization) writes:
A desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex, usually accompanied by a sense of discomfort with, or inappropriateness of, one’s anatomic sex, and a wish to have surgery and hormonal treatment to make one’s body as congruent as possible with one’s preferred sex.
A wish, an inconvenience and a desire for (!) surgery and hormone injections…
So psychiatry has given transgenderism the label dysphoria. But what is that really? Merriam Webster says: “a state of feeling unwell or unhappy – compare with euphoria“
And that’s actually the explanatory part across the board: dysphoria is about the opposite of euphoria, going out of your mind.
To put it bluntly – too bluntly, in fact, but that is unfortunately necessary in this day and age – psychiatrists find it a bit of an affectation. I have a similar kind of discomfort myself: I am trapped in a body that is decades older and decimetres shorter than I feel. To show that this is not just mockery, I will express myself a little more plastically: if you are a man, and your body length is 5% less than that of the average man, then this has a much greater impact on your (sex) life than if the length of your sex organ differs in the same proportion.
But this aside. So I wrote that at first sight, that ISNA seemed calm and reliable. At second and third glance it did not. I had found the explanation for the incorrect use of the term ‘hermaphroditism’ through them, but at second glance I came across this:
One more thing: While some intersex people seek to reclaim (!) the word “hermaphrodite” with pride (much like the words “dyke” and “queer” have been reclaimed by LBGT people), we’ve learned over the years it is best generally avoided, since the political subtlety is lost on a lot of people.
It wasn’t really about physical well-being – after all, there were no physical symptoms in transgenderism – but apparently it’s not really about people’s psychological well-being either.
No, it is about political struggle. Do you see the link with women’s WCs and women’s sport yet?
But am I so intolerant that I don’t allow the politicians, the journalists and the social scientists-hood to have their perversities?
Pfioe, perversity. Perhaps I have skipped a step here?
When people ‘identify themselves’ as one-legged or ‘war veterans’ and therefore go looking for a surgeon to amputate one of their healthy legs, this can be ‘defended’ with ‘otherwise they might do it themselves, and that would be dangerous‘. It is the same type of reasoning that you come across when it comes to the genital mutilation of girls. Perverse yes. Helping people with their tendency to cut themselves by offering them sterile instruments? Plastic surgery for people who want to look as much like a film star, a cat or a snake as possible? Maybe a bit far-fetched: after all, there are not that many people who want to do that/who have that disorder. Moreover, people with this surgery and tattoo fetish don’t harm anyone but themselves, and you can’t exclude the possibility that their quality of life would be even worse without this bizarre hobby. I have also never heard of a case where a parent sought out a surgeon to have his or her child’s healthy leg amputated. And yes: I am familiar with the phenomenon of ‘Munchausen by proxy‘.
On the subject of ‘perversity’, see also this text by internet celebrity Milo. The article closed with “Philip Tromovitch, a professor at Doshisha University in Japan, took this idea a step further and outright claimed that the “prevalence of pedophilia” proved that the “majority of men are probably pedophiles and hebephiles.“
Anorexia and liposuction
Also rather pointed but even more opportune is the comparison of sex operations on physically healthy people with offering liposuction to sufferers of anorexia. This is opportune for two reasons. Anorexia – especially when compared to transgenderism – is a horrifically common mental illness with serious physical consequences. Four times as often as with ‘severe depression’ the outcome is fatal. In very many patients, the condition is permanent; many become infertile. That is why I used the term ‘priorities’ in the title. The road to recovery is often long. Approximately 45% of patients recover completely, 30% improve partially and 25% do not recover at all. Between 5 and 10% of the patients die from the consequences of this disease (due to poor physical condition or suicide). Fortunately, no one is openly advocating liposuction as a solution.
There is politicisation and a perverse focus on this subject. I don’t begrudge politicians, journalists and social scientists their perversions, but it does distract attention from actual psychological suffering. And I mean both the suffering of people, especially young people, who struggle with their gender identity and that of people with more dangerous mental disorders.
I also searched (admittedly not for very long) for scientific articles on transgenderism. (I did not search on transgenderism of course, but on intersexuality and similar terms). I was shocked. I suppose by now you understand what I mean by transgenderism: the pathological tendency to go along with the story of ‘people who long for surgery and hormone injections‘. Or even encourage them to do so. I would call the latter criminal, especially when it concerns children; also when it concerns parents who encourage confusion in their own child.
I am not going to elaborate here on what frightened me. I will only give a few words of explanation with links to some of the texts I found. See for yourself whether you agree with me that the scientific level is questionable. I would like to speak of hobbyism of perverted doctors, and with these words I am restraining myself using others.
The ‘studious person‘ behind this study describes how he came up with the idea for his research:
A letter from a set of identical twin sisters alerted me (!) that one, but not the other, would be transitioning to live as a man and asking if they might be useful in a study of transsexuality. (…) I accepted the twin’s offer and initiated this study.
He gives his own definition of the term ‘transition’: “For those, not yet fully adult, a clinical confirmation of the desire and expectation that such a transition would occur was accepted as a transition”.
Let that sink in for a moment: a ‘clinical confirmation of the desire‘.
A bit further on, he mentions the handful of twins he studied and how he came in contact with them: “His brother had committed suicide subsequent to transition and prior to having received a survey. He reproduces the text of the pamphlet with which some of his examined twins came. It began like this: “Please help if you can! Are you a twin? Are you transsexual? It is now understood that among twins, there are sets in which both have transitioned gender and other sets in which only one has switched. Will you please help us try and find out why the differences?
This text from another researcher made my toes curl even more:
Money documented the case study of an identical twin boy whose surgery went wrong and was thus brought up as a girl. Then the “girl” when an adult explained that ‘she’ had never felt comfortable as a girl and as a result became David a male. His story suggests that biological sex is very important to how someone feels, so (!!!) if someone feels they are the wrong gender there is some evidence at least that it would be unethical to prevent them from becoming what felt they should be.
What about procreation?
This politicisation and perversion has (partly unintended) side effects. I wrote a Dutch version of this article six years ago. Back then, some people were already thinking things through and pointing out a possible spectacular side effect of the toilet drama: the end of (Olympic) women’s sports.
By now, many female champions have been humiliated by men, surgically adapted or not. I still don’t think there is much chance that the American Democrats (or comparable political groups in Europe) will officially formulate the end of womens sports as a policy goal in the short term. They will look for an irrational way to avoid taking the logical next steps, but it will not be easy for them. Laws are also being passed nowadays to prescribe a minimum percentage of women in the civil service and in business, self evidently only for those in higher positions. How to deal with men who decide to be women for themselves: do they count for the women-quota? The American president has already appointed a transperson as minister… Now, the latter, or even the possible loss of womens sports, with the inevitable result of a decline in sports practice by women and girls, is abhorrent but still not what worries me most in this hysteria.
It was only on ‘third glance’ that I found the answer to this supposedly ‘frequently asked question’ on ISNA‘s web site: Why Doesn’t ISNA Want to Eradicate Gender?
Read it and weep. Read the question first and then the answer.
And when you have finished weeping, let it dawn on you that ISNA thus labels this as a ‘frequently asked question’…
After noting that the entire ISNA website contains nothing about the ability to ‘reproduce’, the conclusion is inevitable that, for these people, sex has nothing at all to do with reproduction. In fact, the whole concept of human reproduction is alien to them. Because anti-conception exists (and, according to these people, should be universally available free of charge through taxation), having children is a hobby, like collecting stamps.
You think I am exaggerating? I do not blame you, but I will come back to the above-mentioned Milo Yiannopoulos. This most famous homosexual on all of Twitter worldwide wrote, before he was permanently banned from that platform for being a Trump supporter, in September 2015:
Yet, incredibly, Salon is by no means alone. In the aftermath of the Jimmy Savile scandal in the UK, the Guardian published a feature carrying the disturbing claim that there is “not even a full academic consensus on whether consensual paedophilic relations necessarily cause harm.” Even left-wing comedy websites are complaining about society’s “misunderstanding” of paedophiles, and their writers in “support” when the self-confessed perverts are outed. (…)
What’s happening here? Why are defences of pedophilia so rampant on the Left? And why are pedophiles so attracted to the progressive movement, as opposed to conservatism, libertarianism, or even anarcho-capitalism?
The most likely answer may be difficult for left-leaning readers to accept. For decades, moral relativism has underpinned radical left-wing thought. This is particularly clear when we look at how abuses in Muslim communities are treated. When the Conservative government in Canada labeled female genital mutilation and forced marriages as “barbaric cultural practices,” they were criticised by leading Canadian leftists. (…)
In the U.S., where a left-wing administration is in charge, relativism has even seeped into the military. As was recently reported, American soldiers in Afghanistan are now being instructed to ignore the sexual abuse of boys by Afghan allies. Campaigners against religious barbarism like the UK’s National Secular Society have condemned the relativism at the heart of radical left-wing identity politics, but to no avail.
The most fanatical tra – activists
My fear is that few realise who the most fanatical activists are behind transgenderism as agenda.
They are not the people who make money from those ‘treatments’: ‘therapy’, puberty blockers, hormones or surgery. No, they are male prostitutes. And not male prostitutes who offer themselves to homosexual men, but to heterosexual men. To heterosexual males who are not blamed for looking for payed ‘sexual services’ but blamed for having a preference to women performing it instead of dressed up/hormonally/surgery treated men.
How anti-feminine transgenderism is, is illustrated even more clearly by the fact that the activists even use specific swear words for women, indeed for explicitly feminist women, who do not embrace their agenda. Search for the term ‘TERF’.
No one who actually struggles with their own sexuality, let alone those who actually have a deviant anatomy, seeks to abolish gender differences.
The transgender agenda is a mixture of utter nihilism and wanting to provoke conservatives, provoking any pursuit of civilisation actually.
P.S.: Most of this article was already published in Dutch in September 2016.