It makes me furious, too. The number of kids hurt will be in the thousands. And I go to Target yesterday and see t-shirts with pronouns all over. I feel sorry for the slim number of kids who have this naturally who won’t get the right help because the treatments are to just shove kids through while those participating take a cut with each treatment. I feel so sorry for all these adolescent girls who will have basically medical experiments done on them.
I personally feel that the pronoun thing is annoying but not a big deal. Another example of kids annoying the old folks. John McWhorter wrote about them in the Times [he's a linguist and not super liberal], and he rightly pointed out that in English pronouns shift over time. We no longer say thee or thou…
McWhorter is annoyingly liberal from my perspective, and I am by no means a conservative. He exhibits naivete and confusion about many of the issues discussed on Glenn Loury's show. McWhorter is uninformed about the gender ideology, and has a lot of difficulty hearing anyone say that the trans activists are mentally ill. He and Loury both expressed admiration on one of Loury's shows for the fluency of Gen Z in their use of nontradiitonal pronouns. I watched McWhorter on some other YouTube video in which he aggressively and angrily chided people who refuse to use plural pronouns as non-gendered singulars.
Humm.... but I think we drifted from thee and thou naturally - as opposed to having "non-binary" activists and educators demand we use "they/them" to describe an individual and list "our pronouns" in our bios & name tags and such. It's big at universities where "gender" was invented as something different from sex, from people like Judith Butler. I see things more as Kathleen Stock does than Buter. I do like McWhorter though.
LM-- That (link) was interesting. And from a mom of a trans child. I agree. I also feel like WHY? Why do we have to identify our gender /sexual preferences?
There was only one reason to begin with, which was that Gen Z people decided that there was a third sex, then they decided that there were more than that, and so everyone who speaks English had to change the way we use the traditional English gendered pronouns. After a short while, Gen Z people decided that they wanted to qualify for cool, unique, self-created pronouns themselves, even if they weren't really anything but adolescent boys and girls (mostly girls). Now, young millennial and Gen Z school teachers drill their students in how to perform pronoun rituals, by having the students sharing theirs in circles of kids. These young teachers also train their students to confront and criticize "older" teachers who resist teaching or agreeing with the necessity of performing pronoun rituals. Pronouns are core to their religious practices and enable them to identify themselves and others as members of their cult (or not).
Do you follow the PITT substack? We've pretty much agreed as a parent community that language really matters and must be taken back. There sure are a lot of trans identified (or trans-id) kids but there are no trans children.
There are adults who make some very serious decisions - usually without any gate keeping from a real mental health professional, and there are fetished folks who push this but don't necessarily "do" anything themselves beyond don a dress & a string of pearls or a scraf, and their are a great number of young people confused by what amounts to NXIVM 2.0 promoted at school. See:
"Let’s Go All the Way to Protect Our Kids
and getting rid of the term "trans kids" is a good way to start"
"we should simply stop pretending there are “trans kids” and tell the truth. Nobody is born “trans”, because nobody is born with an intrinsic need to chemically and surgically alter their body and live as if they were the opposite sex."
I like McWhorter but it's not the same thing - even if you were going to accept the very painful to the ear "they". Please do not "share your pronouns".
I see your point. I would never ask for anyone's pronouns or offer mine. So far, no one has asked me my pronouns, but if it ever happens, they will know exactly what I think. I guess that is why I don't see it as a big deal-I have not been confronted with it. I am totally against the idea, but at this point I can only refuse to participate and call out idiocy where I see it.
Three years ago my friend took her son to a visit at a Big 10 university. There in front of 800 students/parents the woman (dressed in a skirt) and the man (dressed in pants) introduced themselves with their pronouns. That was it---never considered the university. Why? Because those two buffoons on the stage don't know a single person in the audience, won't engage with them unless it's where is the bookstore for swag, and would have zero need to know their pronouns. That's the insanity. No one cares cuz we don't know you and if we talk about you in your presence, well that's just rude. My Gram, God rest her soul, would say "she's the cat's mother." She and my Grandpa wrote a newspaper so her grammar was impeccable. I presumed that phrase meant you don't speak about the person using their pronouns in front of them. Oh, to be able to dial back 40 years!
I am asked for my pronouns by every company with which I contract, and by the state everytime I renew my professional license. I have learned that if I refuse to answer I will be identified by their company as a "they/them" and this will be printed on any advertising that includes me as one of their contracted professionals. I am asked a lot more than that about every possible woke identifier I qualify for. It completely amazes me that these people think they are entitled to know who I have sex with, let alone all the disabilities I might have. The state asks me about disabilities that have nothing to do with my work. That used to be illegal. It was called civil rights.
It is certainly annoying. One of the issues is the notion of a third person singular gender neutral pronoun. We have two, one and it, but those are not terribly appealing. But they are intended to describe something other than a person. The invention of fake words is, more than annoying, it is the epitome of arrogance and simply another reward from the participation trophy culture.
I said elsewhere that if person X gets to pick their own pronoun then I should get to as well, that is, pick a pronoun for person X. After all, equal dignity would demand it.
I like John McWhorter, but that is hardly the same thing. That said, it is not a big deal as long as we all are not forced to participate in the lie that a boy is a girl, or multiple people, or a turnip, or some made up pronoun that has no meaning. I just refuse.
I wonder where it will be in 20 years, it boggles the mind. I may have disconnected myself from the internet entirely and be surrounded by books and strange taxidermy in my log cabin… lol
You have to understand - at the deepest level - that progressives simply do not care about children. From late term abortions, to pledges to remain childless, to championing sex with children, to this gender transformation lunacy, everything the progressives do shouts out how children mean nothing to them. Always watch what they do, not what they say. Progressives hate families and children.
Bruce, That's a bit hyperbolic. Progressives hate children? And who is "championing sex with children"? It doesn't lend itself to a healthy debate when using over the top rhetoric.
I have to agree with Bruce about progressives (as opposed to liberals or conservatives) being anti-child and anti-family. In addition to MAPS and the whole thing about how the State/the School should have more authority over directing a child's upbringing than the parents - there is also the Drag Queen Story Hour craze. How can we be OK with such a sexualized performance - and by men in "woman face" for children? This is adult stuff.
A few of them:
"Judge who headed 'Drag Queen Story Hour' sponsor arrested on child porn charges
Judge Brett Blomme, 38, was arrested and charged with seven counts of child pornography possession"
"Smith was initially arrested in December of 2019 on multiple charges, including committing a sex crime on a person aged 12 to 16, deputies say. Now, Smith is asking for help from the public in fleeing from the country."
And WTF is wrong with California to allow underage kids to transition WITHOUT parental consent? I can’t believe how this fever has captured so many people.
My home state provides free healthcare, tuition assistance, and government ID for illegal immigrants; requires all students to take ethnic studies courses that could be best described as “Critical Hate Whitey Theory”; and giggles while major employers like Northrop, Toyota, and Tesla flee to Texas and other business-friendly locales. That California has gone all-in on the current fashionable gender lunacy should surprise no one.
This is the logical end result of allowing insane progressive leftists to capture our institutions, including our legal and medical professional organizations. Instead of being lionized, doctors who warn against this madness are stigmatized and sanctioned. These lunatics make Salem circa 1690 seem like a garden party.
Sadly, the statement "the logical end result of allowing insane progressive leftists to ... " can also be applied to "rightists" and the phobias many of them cultivate.
What America needs in a Center with guts, a willingness to withstand brutal personal attack and attempts to cancel, and a desire to oppose the insanity that is often afoot in the land, be it "gender affirming care" for kids, blaming gay men for AIDS, asserting that America is fundamentally, structurally, and irredeemably racist, asserting that America is "exceptional without limit"..
I sometimes get optimistic, and think the time will come in the next few years. Would guess five or ten, and good possibility I won't live to see it. Ah well...
Totally agree. I'm constantly disappointed by Americans who have to choose a side like our country is the god damn NFL. I choose logic, goal-setting and real world pragmatism over feelings. I believe the Founders tried to do the same, which is why our country has been capable of so many great things.
Paragraph two - 100%. Full stop. I am with you. I am with you.
Paragraph one - " can also be applied to "rightists" and the phobias many of them cultivate." I cannot agree. Are there some nut jobs? Yes. Are they even 10% of what is happening on the far left. No. They are not. Not even close.
Given the left's tactic of accusing their foes of exactly what they do, seeking out any extreme right voice and trumpeting it as if it were the dominant view, literally funding ad campaigns for extreme right candidates, and tarring much conservative thought as "fascist, racist, homophobic, colonial..." I can see how one may claim paragraph one is accurate.
My opinion is the claim is distorted to the point of being a false equivalence.
The Left hasn't merely sought out extremes on the right, those extremes are then promoted by the Left, voted for, fairly successfully, by Republicans in Primaries. Wishing away the idiocy on the Right - by playing a bit of whataboutism (even though that is sometimes spot on) - is not going to hide the idiocy.
For every Bobert or Greene on our side there are tens or hundreds on theirs. When the entire D side of the House votes for radical abortion bills, or Trillions of Spending or opening our borders etc. that's almost the entire lot of them. Did you listen to the Dem presidential debate? Almost every one of them was nuts. Not so on the R side. Runs the gamut from Biz Roundtable, to country club to tea party to the religious right to far right. On the Dem side, everyone's a progressive far leftist.
Appreciate the reply. Not wishing away just attempting to putting in proper proportion, based on my knowledge. It's hard, ya know? I'm tired and will disengage for the day. Happy travels.
I disagree the left has had decades of spreading this garbage. Now that a full 20% of young people are infected they shoulder the full blame. The left can never be I charge period end of story.
Yes, the latest insanity drscribed in this article is coming from the left. But the religious right continues to push « conversion therapy, » religious instruction that purports to change someone’s sexual orientation, which is at least as dangerous and far more common. While finaly clamping down on dangerous therapies to change the sex of a child, some EU countries are also moving to stop religious conversion programs operated by religious quacks. Let kids be who thet think they are and let them grow up to be who they really are. That would be the sane approach, but I am sad to say that sanity is in short supply these days.
I am not aware of conversion therapy happening anywhere. No gay person has told me any stories about it for decades. It definitely was done during the Fifties and Sixties but that was a long time ago.
People generally transition because they want to, and get very agitated when they don't get what they want. Maybe some of them have threatened to commit suicide if they did not get what they wanted, even if none of them followed through. Gay people who were put through conversion therapy were commonly forced into it by parents or submitted to it themselves because of shame and guilt they felt about being gay. The shame and guilt was usually attributable at least in part to their religious beliefs about homosexuality being a sin.
Geoff - you might benefit from reading any or all of the following books: 1) Irreversible Damage, 2) When Harry Became Sally, 3) Gender Paradox
Discrimination and Disparities in the Post Modern era.
These document, not opinion, but matters of law, Democrat public policy (federal and state level), policies of American pediatrics, gender ideology being taught to k-12, and queer theory taught in university. Trust me, NONE of this is being hidden. These are examples of institutional take over.
These sources, all very credible, make it clear that "religious instruction that purports to change someone’s sexual orientation, which is at least as dangerous and far more common" is an utterly wrong understanding of the current landscape. One might even wish it were true actually, because the law is enables gay marriage, public opinion is supportive and so such behavior is unlikely to have any meaningful effect. I support gay marriage, by the way.
On the religious front what is vastly more common than the "conversion therapy" you decry are churches buying into LGBTQ+ and wokeness in general. That is a real and dangerous thing.
I don't see that they are pushing this "conversion " anymore but they are saying it is a sin. However, that's mostly within the older population. Most young people don't care about who's gay or not. And more people are open to gay marriage.
Gee, you just said what came out of this 'rightist's' mouth. There is a far Left right now that is in charge of our institutions; I don't see 'far right' anything right now unless it comes out of the alphabet network narratives including Fox.
Communicate with words and not labels as we are going to have to fix all of this madness together.
No abortion, ever. Not from the moment of "conception". No exceptions for incest, rape, health of mother. See, e.g., the clown running for Gov of PA on the Republican ticket. He is merely the most shamelessly vocal, but plenty of states are going in that direction..
You can argue that the exception is too limited, and I'd be in agreement, but you lose me when you argue that an exception is not an exception because there are not other exceptions. That just does not make sense.
Good point, DemonHunter--a single exception does mean that, technically, no state totally bans abortions. My argument is that "life of the mother" being the sole exception makes an abortion law so close to a total ban as to be a meaningless distinction.
Those who insist "no state bans abortions totally" are technically correct. But they're still playing fast and loose with the truth. States that force girls and women to carry to term despite being ten, raped by Daddy or strangers, kidnapped and sex trafficked, or not knowing they're pregnant before the ban begins, means "no exceptions" in the real world.
These states also don't honor the exception for the life of the mother. They force the mother to try to get permission, then they refuse to grant her petition.
And you note the other exceptions I would also support. I'm equally opposed to the other extreme. I am hopeful we can get to the big fat consensus in the center of this issue (in most states).
Me, too, DH, on both extremes. What most Americans prefer is that abortion remains legal for any reason up to X weeks (I prefer 24, but am open to compromise) and illegal after except for medical emergencies to woman and/or child.
That avoids all the "rape/incest/trafficking/age ten/don't know I'm pregnant" issues just handed to us by moment-of-conception bans. Ironically, that's what Roe provided, because under Roe, 91 percent of abortions were in the first 12 weeks, 1 percent were in the last 12 weeks, and of the latter, almost all were for medical emergencies. In Canada, which has zero abortion laws and leaves it between women and their doctors, the same percentages emerge. Given free rein, women don't abuse abortion rights.
So if we can get back to that reasonableness, I'd be happy to pretend it's a "hard abortion ban" and that the banners "won." Let 'em have their victory as long as we have our reasonableness.
"Right". "Left". "Abortion". I think labels and euphemisms are used for political means rather than real-world problem solving. In my experience we all agree on 90% of issues and the remaining 10% steer us away from each other in meaningful ways. An example that is not my top cause but there is actual polling data: Abortion(baby killing). 90% of people agree that late term abortions should not happen and the remaining 10% usurp our consensus for political means and not reality.
90+% of us think transgenderism is radically phycological and deeply flawed and we let the political people just use these poor people for their gain.
I guess what I am trying to say is let's not be distracted by others' political aims and keep it real and practical.
Agree but that is because they’ve been ascendant. Should the poles reverse, power will go to their head. Any wedge gives the opportunity- just look at the ProLife extremism in the aftermath to Dobbs (and the counter by the Pro abortion extremism). The Center is CNN the only hope.
You are absolutely correct---in our clickbait politics, whichever side grabs up the votes becomes as despotic as the other one.
Your "wedge" is so correct: the extremists insist on "abortions any time for any reason" and "no abortion for ten-year-old rape victims, have the kid, girly." Actual Americans want "abortion for any reason up to X weeks"--I prefer 24, but we can quibble the time element--"and only for medical emergency to woman or child after that."
The Center is the only hope, with or without CNN :-)
Pro-life extremism sounds such a very odd thing to say. "Hey you there, stop caring about life so much!" No, we can't have that no can we, all these crazy people thinking that life matters and is something to be treasured and protected. Bunch a loonies!
To be fair to the one whom I responded to I read the term free of context (which I do recognize) because floating on it's own it just struck me as comically bizarre. So, I was mostly just goofing on that notion.
CNN is the center? Are you crazy? The new president of CNN recognizes that CNN is a leftwing mouthpiece and has ordered that reporting is to move to the center and those who do not comply will be fired. Even the spineless Don Lemon has changed his tune and is beginning to sound almost like a conservative.
Running Burning Man--CNN is NOT center. If you look at Media Bias Factcheck (a non partisan organization that tracks all media), CNN and Fox show a clear bias but, obviously, on opposite sides of the spectrum. If you want something more center, it would be PBS or NPR. But definitely not CNN or MSNBC.
It would be interesting to know why they rated NPR as Center Left. I suspect it is because the left goal post has gone even farther off the deep end, so by comparison even rags like the NYT start to look moderate.
“ProLife Extremism”. that would be total abolishing abortion. It’s not happening and it never will. So some states set the cut off date earlier than others. That’s federalism.
And all the hysteria about birth control and gay marriage is just more gas lighting.
Meanwhile, the far left take over of our institutions, government, media, medicine, law, academia, K-12….all very real. And we are astounded and suffering from it all.
South Dakota bans abortions from conception, with no exception for rape, incest, child trafficking, or age of child; the only exception is the imminent death of the mother. Oklahoma, ditto. Ohio's ban is so strict it forced a 10-year-old rape victim to flee to Indiana for treatment ... but Indiana wants to join the ban states.
So how can you say it's not happening and never will when it already is?
Ohio's law at the time had exceptions for that case. That was used for political gain which is pathetic; using a 10 year old for political aims. I don't know how anybody supports democrats anymore. They just use people for selfish gain.
Ohio law had no exception for age or for rape. So "they" didn't have to use a 10-year-old for political aims; the state made that possible by not writing reasonable exemptions into its law.
Until Dobbs, 10-year-old rape victims like her could get abortions because the right was protected by Roe. Now, in too many states including Ohio, they can't.
"She wasn't the only minor in that condition." No shit, thousands of kids a year are ripped into by funny uncles, dear daddies, and strangers. You would sentence them to forced birth. Why? Are you evil, or just a dick?
Sorry, but it is the goal of lots of folks on the "Pro Life" hard right. Check the fool running for Gov as a Republican in PA. An asshole and he is not alone.
Running Burning Man--True--Mastriano is extreme right and yet he is now backing away from his hardline stance on abortion to gain voters-- it's frightening if he becomes Governor.
I was looking at polls yesterday regarding what demographics are most in favor of capital punishment, right to use deadly force in self defense, right of law enforcement to use deadly force, in favor of the U.S. military, and most likely to express support for the Second Amendment. It was white, "Evangelical Protestants."
I too am in favor of most of the rights included on the above list, but I also believe that there are situations in which ending the life of an embryo or a fetus is justified. I don't go around shrieking that it is murder and a sin because "all human live is sacred from the moment of conception." People who are anti-abortion extremists are usually members of conservative Christian churches, the same people who are the most aggressive demographic in the U.S. when it comes to justifying the killing of adult human beings.
The only violence I am aware of is the current Leftists burning down pregnancy centers. Like usual. Their ideas cannot be argued so they use force. I will be gladly be called a 'pro-life extremist' when using force of any kind to protect you as a volunteer firefighter! You just made my day.
That was murder, regardless of the cause. If someone is coming at you in my presence and we fear for our lives we have a right to use any force to defend ourselves. I will never condone murder. Kermit Gosnell murdered women and children, went to trial, was judged by a jury of his peers, and then sent to jail.
We agree, it was murder, and it's just as wrong as burning down anti-abortion centers.
While I would help women going to clinics to have an abortion, and you would help women going to abortion avoidance clinics, it's the same idea: people exercising a lawful freedom deserve to do it without harassment, and those of us who can help them do that, should.
CNN? Now you’ve lost me. CNN is the network that propounded some lunatic who claimed that Trump killed more people than Hitler Stalin and Mao combined. As the fat little fool who moderated nodded approvingly
Although, again I agree that power corrupts, and the extremes tend to be most susceptible to it
I am a physician. This I am aghast at the way so many in society and medicine are destroying the lives of young people. Rather than let people be themselves and accept it, they endorse and hurry forth with hormones and even surgery. It is evil and will be seen for what it is. I am thrilled to see backtracking in Europe and hopefully here.
My same sensitivities apply to Trump. He had or has many followers. He took something that is a gift to society - an effective vaccine that saves lives, and sowed fear, doubt and ignorance. Never before have people avoided a vaccine like this. The results are clear. Millions world wide died preventable deaths. Places like Brazil with a similar leader took his lead. I don’t need to invoke Hitler, Stalin or Mao in discussing Trumps banality. My thinking is lucid and clear thank you.
Ps. This is in response to Bruce Miller. Somehow it appeared above his response to me.
I respect physicians. A lot. I know what you went through to get there. But you are not gods and when you politicize medicine you do it a great disservice. Sorry but Trump did not attack the vaccines. As you concede, he made them possible a lot sooner than they otherwise would have been. But he, as do I, opposed the mandates. You do not have the right to impose a treatment on people. Especially one that has problems, has proven ineffective against later strains and is highly questionable for healthy young people and children. I have never seen medicine so politicized as it was in the pandemic and now you're reaping that whirlwind as more and more people question your "conventional wisdom" and your overdependence on chemicals that treat symptoms not causes. If you think Dr. Allen Frances wasn't out of his mind when he compared Trump to the three greatest mass murderers in history, you might be a reason why respect for the medical profession is waning.
Thank you for your kind words Bruce. I think over a beer you and I might find many shared values. Had Trump simply stayed in his lane and found political issues to debate rather than the Vaccine, we would have had a much different outcome. Had he immediately said, "I am thrilled with the vaccine, I am getting it (and televise it with enthusiasm), and everyone else should too," or something along those lines, we would not have had so much denial and avoidance and this long drawn-out fight over mandates might never have occurred. I am 69, participated in the Novavax trial, have been boosted and to my knowledge have not been infected, despite continuing to see patients in person the whole while. I am an N of one which means little. I well remember the fear of polio and the relief and stampede for parents to get their kids vaccinated. I was one of them as a toddler.
I agree with you that medicine and physicians need much more humility. The deficit of humility is why we have this trans debate and physicians rushing to treat a non-disease with very dangerous and permanent interventions and mutilations. Medicine has a history of being misguided. Consider the recovered memory tragedy of the 80's. And the more recent opioid epidemic, aided and abetted by overprescription of opiates for chronic pain complaints.
As a physician it would be against my oath to deny care to sick people when it has been self-inflicted. As a citizen, the irony is not lost in considering the expense and cost to caregivers and other patients who could not access care, due to costly treatment given and paid for by the rest of us to those who show up dying from Covid but for vaccination. I am and remain angry that this took place and may occur again.
As to Trump, history will show him as a pox and a dangerous threat to Democracy and the United States, notwithstanding some accomplishments on his watch. Character, ethics and respect for the law matter a lot to me, more so than party or politics. I have generally voted Democratic. I am aghast at the current wokeness and crazy progressive agendas being embraced. I could see myself voting for a traditional Republican. But not the party of Trump. Both parties are engaging in self-defeat. For the GOP, I will look closely at whether they can extrude Trump from the presidential race and advance candidates like Liz Cheney, Romney, perhaps even that strange former VP Pence who won't let his eyes linger on other women etc.
We disagree on much politically (Cheney, Romney - the worst) but I have many friends who hold views similar to yours. Mostly we just don't discuss politics. And like you, and me, we're both put off by the extremes. I would ask you to think a bit about some of the fevered rhetoric about Trump. As bad as you think he is, he never so much as arrested one of his critics. Imagine if an actress had mused about burning down the Reich Chancellery in 1935. And the Russian collusion stuff was all nonsense, while the Hunter laptop is real. I don't care if you think Trump's an asshole and would never vote for him. He actually kinda is. I liked his policies and found him amusing - and harmless. So, thanks for the kind reply and I'll see you around. Bari's got a very fine thing going here.
Sorry, Sir Bruce. But this is why these here comments are an echo chamber, Sir.
Only one side is allowed in these comments. It's a form of DTS syndrome. (Deranged Trump Supporter.) There's a set of issues that everyone has to see the R (right) way, or You're a lunatic. Is that it?
Right down the line, almost everybody has the same basic beliefs about a standard set of issues. It doesn't bother me, because I've gotten used to it. But that's why there's no Center in this country.
Respectfully disagree jt. Trump has a number of less than ideal traits. He may even be sort of an asshole. If you dislike Trump, I won't hold that against you. But "a monster?" A "dictator?" Killed more people than Hitler, Stalin and Mao combined? That's nuts. I call Biden senile because he's patently in cognitive decline. I call him a crook and a traitor because Hunter's laptop shows he's taken Chinese money. People can disagree but I have evidence on my side I don't care if nobody agrees with me or hundreds do. I say what I think and I think I can back it up. But if I'm called on something and proven wrong, I'll concede. That's why I love this place.
So what do I think is "lunacy?" A few things. Open borders, because without them no country can survive. Gender transformation of children. Making our energy grid dependent upon generation that cannot and will not work and will kill millions. Letting violent criminals off with a slap on the wrist or no charges. Suppressing free speech. And separating us by race and ethnicity, because the US is uniquely a nation where, without race blindness, the country will devolve into warring tribes.
I dunno You saw my comment why I didn't write yesterday, Sir Bruce. I'm glad I waited. The "conversation" between You and M. Park Place ended up quite a bit different than it started.
I was glad to see that.
As far as Your reply to me, I'd forgotten that M. Park had called Trump a "monster." But, like I thought, nobody brought up anything about Mao and them or "dictator." So I'm calling You on Your first paragraph.
As far as what is "lunacy," I think there's pretty common agreement amongst most people that what You say is accurate. (I dunno about "millions" being killed, but that's a small detail. You could be right.)
As You might expect, I agree more with M. Park than You when it comes to Trump. You're a DTS, right? (Deranged Trump Supporter. ;-) = wink.
I leave that aside for the time being. Only to say that because-a that, You're gonna view any R that opposes Trump's insanity as a RINO not worthy of respect.
IMO, it's just better, as a general rule. to lean towards giving more respect to people, as a default, rather than less. In politics and in life. That's just me. But the evidence is before You. The conversation took a 180 turn once respect for others improved, right?
Thanks to both-a Youse for an enjoyable read. TYTY.
This topic makes me so furious I can hardly formulate a coherent comment.
Jail time, shame, retribution, financial ruin for the monsters who did this.
It makes me furious, too. The number of kids hurt will be in the thousands. And I go to Target yesterday and see t-shirts with pronouns all over. I feel sorry for the slim number of kids who have this naturally who won’t get the right help because the treatments are to just shove kids through while those participating take a cut with each treatment. I feel so sorry for all these adolescent girls who will have basically medical experiments done on them.
I personally feel that the pronoun thing is annoying but not a big deal. Another example of kids annoying the old folks. John McWhorter wrote about them in the Times [he's a linguist and not super liberal], and he rightly pointed out that in English pronouns shift over time. We no longer say thee or thou…
McWhorter is annoyingly liberal from my perspective, and I am by no means a conservative. He exhibits naivete and confusion about many of the issues discussed on Glenn Loury's show. McWhorter is uninformed about the gender ideology, and has a lot of difficulty hearing anyone say that the trans activists are mentally ill. He and Loury both expressed admiration on one of Loury's shows for the fluency of Gen Z in their use of nontradiitonal pronouns. I watched McWhorter on some other YouTube video in which he aggressively and angrily chided people who refuse to use plural pronouns as non-gendered singulars.
Humm.... but I think we drifted from thee and thou naturally - as opposed to having "non-binary" activists and educators demand we use "they/them" to describe an individual and list "our pronouns" in our bios & name tags and such. It's big at universities where "gender" was invented as something different from sex, from people like Judith Butler. I see things more as Kathleen Stock does than Buter. I do like McWhorter though.
"Is it harmless to advertise your "preferred pronouns"? Or does it reinforce a toxic ideology?" https://mercatornet.com/pronouns-game/77649/
LM-- That (link) was interesting. And from a mom of a trans child. I agree. I also feel like WHY? Why do we have to identify our gender /sexual preferences?
There was only one reason to begin with, which was that Gen Z people decided that there was a third sex, then they decided that there were more than that, and so everyone who speaks English had to change the way we use the traditional English gendered pronouns. After a short while, Gen Z people decided that they wanted to qualify for cool, unique, self-created pronouns themselves, even if they weren't really anything but adolescent boys and girls (mostly girls). Now, young millennial and Gen Z school teachers drill their students in how to perform pronoun rituals, by having the students sharing theirs in circles of kids. These young teachers also train their students to confront and criticize "older" teachers who resist teaching or agreeing with the necessity of performing pronoun rituals. Pronouns are core to their religious practices and enable them to identify themselves and others as members of their cult (or not).
Right, why should we have to do that?
Do you follow the PITT substack? We've pretty much agreed as a parent community that language really matters and must be taken back. There sure are a lot of trans identified (or trans-id) kids but there are no trans children.
There are adults who make some very serious decisions - usually without any gate keeping from a real mental health professional, and there are fetished folks who push this but don't necessarily "do" anything themselves beyond don a dress & a string of pearls or a scraf, and their are a great number of young people confused by what amounts to NXIVM 2.0 promoted at school. See:
"Let’s Go All the Way to Protect Our Kids
and getting rid of the term "trans kids" is a good way to start"
https://pitt.substack.com/p/lets-go-all-the-way-to-protect-our
"we should simply stop pretending there are “trans kids” and tell the truth. Nobody is born “trans”, because nobody is born with an intrinsic need to chemically and surgically alter their body and live as if they were the opposite sex."
It is a big deal. It is cult gaslighting of the kids. They take these tiny step by step actions and wind up in a very bad place. See:
"It’s wrong to play the transgender pronoun game
Is it harmless to advertise your "preferred pronouns"? Or does it reinforce a toxic ideology?" https://mercatornet.com/pronouns-game/77649/
I like McWhorter but it's not the same thing - even if you were going to accept the very painful to the ear "they". Please do not "share your pronouns".
I see your point. I would never ask for anyone's pronouns or offer mine. So far, no one has asked me my pronouns, but if it ever happens, they will know exactly what I think. I guess that is why I don't see it as a big deal-I have not been confronted with it. I am totally against the idea, but at this point I can only refuse to participate and call out idiocy where I see it.
Three years ago my friend took her son to a visit at a Big 10 university. There in front of 800 students/parents the woman (dressed in a skirt) and the man (dressed in pants) introduced themselves with their pronouns. That was it---never considered the university. Why? Because those two buffoons on the stage don't know a single person in the audience, won't engage with them unless it's where is the bookstore for swag, and would have zero need to know their pronouns. That's the insanity. No one cares cuz we don't know you and if we talk about you in your presence, well that's just rude. My Gram, God rest her soul, would say "she's the cat's mother." She and my Grandpa wrote a newspaper so her grammar was impeccable. I presumed that phrase meant you don't speak about the person using their pronouns in front of them. Oh, to be able to dial back 40 years!
Your Gram sounds like a wise woman.
Oh gosh! Such a gem! Honestly, I was so blessed. Miss her dearly.
And so is the granddaughter.
You are so kind.....and right back at you!
It happens all the time here in CA: Doctors' offices, schools, work places...
I am asked for my pronouns by every company with which I contract, and by the state everytime I renew my professional license. I have learned that if I refuse to answer I will be identified by their company as a "they/them" and this will be printed on any advertising that includes me as one of their contracted professionals. I am asked a lot more than that about every possible woke identifier I qualify for. It completely amazes me that these people think they are entitled to know who I have sex with, let alone all the disabilities I might have. The state asks me about disabilities that have nothing to do with my work. That used to be illegal. It was called civil rights.
It is really common place in academic settings, like when people begin college.
Yes-- I read that, too. It put it in perspective.
It is certainly annoying. One of the issues is the notion of a third person singular gender neutral pronoun. We have two, one and it, but those are not terribly appealing. But they are intended to describe something other than a person. The invention of fake words is, more than annoying, it is the epitome of arrogance and simply another reward from the participation trophy culture.
I said elsewhere that if person X gets to pick their own pronoun then I should get to as well, that is, pick a pronoun for person X. After all, equal dignity would demand it.
Does it have to be a pronoun? I can think of many nouns and adjectives.
One can hope.
Oops, a third person singular gender neutral pronoun!
I like John McWhorter, but that is hardly the same thing. That said, it is not a big deal as long as we all are not forced to participate in the lie that a boy is a girl, or multiple people, or a turnip, or some made up pronoun that has no meaning. I just refuse.
I wonder where it will be in 20 years, it boggles the mind. I may have disconnected myself from the internet entirely and be surrounded by books and strange taxidermy in my log cabin… lol
Sounds like a good idea! Well, at least the "surrounded by books" part.
Who am I fooling, I'll be on here complaining about the same things LOL.
You have to understand - at the deepest level - that progressives simply do not care about children. From late term abortions, to pledges to remain childless, to championing sex with children, to this gender transformation lunacy, everything the progressives do shouts out how children mean nothing to them. Always watch what they do, not what they say. Progressives hate families and children.
Bruce, That's a bit hyperbolic. Progressives hate children? And who is "championing sex with children"? It doesn't lend itself to a healthy debate when using over the top rhetoric.
I have to agree with Bruce about progressives (as opposed to liberals or conservatives) being anti-child and anti-family. In addition to MAPS and the whole thing about how the State/the School should have more authority over directing a child's upbringing than the parents - there is also the Drag Queen Story Hour craze. How can we be OK with such a sexualized performance - and by men in "woman face" for children? This is adult stuff.
A few of them:
"Judge who headed 'Drag Queen Story Hour' sponsor arrested on child porn charges
Judge Brett Blomme, 38, was arrested and charged with seven counts of child pornography possession"
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/milwaukee-brett-blomme-arrested-drag-queen-story-hour-sponsor
"Second Child Sex Offender Unmasked at Drag Queen Story Time, Houston Activists Say"
"https://pjmedia.com/parenting/tyler-o-neil/2019/04/05/houston-activists-unmask-another-child-sex-offender-at-drag-queen-story-time-n114116
"On the personal Facebook account, Williams’ description reads: a “genderqueer social worker and drag queen.
https://dailycaller.com/2022/06/24/pennsylvania-drag-queen-charges-arrest-child-pornography-brice-patric-ryschon-williams/
"Smith was initially arrested in December of 2019 on multiple charges, including committing a sex crime on a person aged 12 to 16, deputies say. Now, Smith is asking for help from the public in fleeing from the country."
https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2021/01/29/florida-man-friday-the-inspiring-drag-queen-who-saved-the-neighborhood-n1418526
etc.
He might be thinking of the term "MAPS" (Minor Attracted People).
"Child sex abuse center hires professor who faced backlash over pedophile comments"
https://nypost.com/2022/05/13/johns-hopkins-center-hires-professor-who-faced-pedophile-comment-backlash/
Exactly. Strong families equal no cannon fodder for the revolution.
Separating kids from their families. See: cultural revolution.
Although Trump was more forceful at separating kids at the boarder. This was done before he took office. I am no fan of Trump, just a fan of facts.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/kids-in-cages-debate-trump-obama/2020/10/23/8ff96f3c-1532-11eb-82af-864652063d61_story.html
And how many unaccompanied minors have crossed the southern border and are now displaced all over the US? It's despicable!
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/leaked-data-show-us-bracing-for-161-000-unaccompanied-children-at-border-this-year
And WTF is wrong with California to allow underage kids to transition WITHOUT parental consent? I can’t believe how this fever has captured so many people.
That is why people are running away from California. It’s like living on another planet. It’s almost like America is going to implode!
My home state provides free healthcare, tuition assistance, and government ID for illegal immigrants; requires all students to take ethnic studies courses that could be best described as “Critical Hate Whitey Theory”; and giggles while major employers like Northrop, Toyota, and Tesla flee to Texas and other business-friendly locales. That California has gone all-in on the current fashionable gender lunacy should surprise no one.
This is the logical end result of allowing insane progressive leftists to capture our institutions, including our legal and medical professional organizations. Instead of being lionized, doctors who warn against this madness are stigmatized and sanctioned. These lunatics make Salem circa 1690 seem like a garden party.
not much has changed has it ?
Sadly, the statement "the logical end result of allowing insane progressive leftists to ... " can also be applied to "rightists" and the phobias many of them cultivate.
What America needs in a Center with guts, a willingness to withstand brutal personal attack and attempts to cancel, and a desire to oppose the insanity that is often afoot in the land, be it "gender affirming care" for kids, blaming gay men for AIDS, asserting that America is fundamentally, structurally, and irredeemably racist, asserting that America is "exceptional without limit"..
etc.
Let's start a Radical Moderate Party!
John-- Good idea. I'm in!
I sometimes get optimistic, and think the time will come in the next few years. Would guess five or ten, and good possibility I won't live to see it. Ah well...
You will be there with us, jt. Pessimism is good in lower amounts.
Haha. I aim for "neutralistic" best I can. Miss the mark often. And TY for saying that. Appreciate it.
Totally agree. I'm constantly disappointed by Americans who have to choose a side like our country is the god damn NFL. I choose logic, goal-setting and real world pragmatism over feelings. I believe the Founders tried to do the same, which is why our country has been capable of so many great things.
I couldn't agree more.
Paragraph two - 100%. Full stop. I am with you. I am with you.
Paragraph one - " can also be applied to "rightists" and the phobias many of them cultivate." I cannot agree. Are there some nut jobs? Yes. Are they even 10% of what is happening on the far left. No. They are not. Not even close.
Given the left's tactic of accusing their foes of exactly what they do, seeking out any extreme right voice and trumpeting it as if it were the dominant view, literally funding ad campaigns for extreme right candidates, and tarring much conservative thought as "fascist, racist, homophobic, colonial..." I can see how one may claim paragraph one is accurate.
My opinion is the claim is distorted to the point of being a false equivalence.
The Left hasn't merely sought out extremes on the right, those extremes are then promoted by the Left, voted for, fairly successfully, by Republicans in Primaries. Wishing away the idiocy on the Right - by playing a bit of whataboutism (even though that is sometimes spot on) - is not going to hide the idiocy.
For every Bobert or Greene on our side there are tens or hundreds on theirs. When the entire D side of the House votes for radical abortion bills, or Trillions of Spending or opening our borders etc. that's almost the entire lot of them. Did you listen to the Dem presidential debate? Almost every one of them was nuts. Not so on the R side. Runs the gamut from Biz Roundtable, to country club to tea party to the religious right to far right. On the Dem side, everyone's a progressive far leftist.
Appreciate the reply. Not wishing away just attempting to putting in proper proportion, based on my knowledge. It's hard, ya know? I'm tired and will disengage for the day. Happy travels.
I disagree the left has had decades of spreading this garbage. Now that a full 20% of young people are infected they shoulder the full blame. The left can never be I charge period end of story.
Yes, the latest insanity drscribed in this article is coming from the left. But the religious right continues to push « conversion therapy, » religious instruction that purports to change someone’s sexual orientation, which is at least as dangerous and far more common. While finaly clamping down on dangerous therapies to change the sex of a child, some EU countries are also moving to stop religious conversion programs operated by religious quacks. Let kids be who thet think they are and let them grow up to be who they really are. That would be the sane approach, but I am sad to say that sanity is in short supply these days.
I am not aware of conversion therapy happening anywhere. No gay person has told me any stories about it for decades. It definitely was done during the Fifties and Sixties but that was a long time ago.
Transitioning IS conversion therapy. One that is not only sanctioned, but mandated by the government.
People generally transition because they want to, and get very agitated when they don't get what they want. Maybe some of them have threatened to commit suicide if they did not get what they wanted, even if none of them followed through. Gay people who were put through conversion therapy were commonly forced into it by parents or submitted to it themselves because of shame and guilt they felt about being gay. The shame and guilt was usually attributable at least in part to their religious beliefs about homosexuality being a sin.
Geoff - you might benefit from reading any or all of the following books: 1) Irreversible Damage, 2) When Harry Became Sally, 3) Gender Paradox
Discrimination and Disparities in the Post Modern era.
These document, not opinion, but matters of law, Democrat public policy (federal and state level), policies of American pediatrics, gender ideology being taught to k-12, and queer theory taught in university. Trust me, NONE of this is being hidden. These are examples of institutional take over.
These sources, all very credible, make it clear that "religious instruction that purports to change someone’s sexual orientation, which is at least as dangerous and far more common" is an utterly wrong understanding of the current landscape. One might even wish it were true actually, because the law is enables gay marriage, public opinion is supportive and so such behavior is unlikely to have any meaningful effect. I support gay marriage, by the way.
On the religious front what is vastly more common than the "conversion therapy" you decry are churches buying into LGBTQ+ and wokeness in general. That is a real and dangerous thing.
I don't see that they are pushing this "conversion " anymore but they are saying it is a sin. However, that's mostly within the older population. Most young people don't care about who's gay or not. And more people are open to gay marriage.
I concur, I'm on the religious right and know even more religious right-ers and can confirm conversion therapy is passé.
Gee, you just said what came out of this 'rightist's' mouth. There is a far Left right now that is in charge of our institutions; I don't see 'far right' anything right now unless it comes out of the alphabet network narratives including Fox.
Communicate with words and not labels as we are going to have to fix all of this madness together.
"I don't see 'far right' anything right now ".
No abortion, ever. Not from the moment of "conception". No exceptions for incest, rape, health of mother. See, e.g., the clown running for Gov of PA on the Republican ticket. He is merely the most shamelessly vocal, but plenty of states are going in that direction..
In no state is abortion "no exception." You can verify that at Guttmacher
Arizona it seems. Probably Mississippi.
If the only exception for abortion after conception is the imminent death of the woman, then sorry, that state IS banning with no exceptions.
You can argue that the exception is too limited, and I'd be in agreement, but you lose me when you argue that an exception is not an exception because there are not other exceptions. That just does not make sense.
Good point, DemonHunter--a single exception does mean that, technically, no state totally bans abortions. My argument is that "life of the mother" being the sole exception makes an abortion law so close to a total ban as to be a meaningless distinction.
Those who insist "no state bans abortions totally" are technically correct. But they're still playing fast and loose with the truth. States that force girls and women to carry to term despite being ten, raped by Daddy or strangers, kidnapped and sex trafficked, or not knowing they're pregnant before the ban begins, means "no exceptions" in the real world.
These states also don't honor the exception for the life of the mother. They force the mother to try to get permission, then they refuse to grant her petition.
And you note the other exceptions I would also support. I'm equally opposed to the other extreme. I am hopeful we can get to the big fat consensus in the center of this issue (in most states).
Me, too, DH, on both extremes. What most Americans prefer is that abortion remains legal for any reason up to X weeks (I prefer 24, but am open to compromise) and illegal after except for medical emergencies to woman and/or child.
That avoids all the "rape/incest/trafficking/age ten/don't know I'm pregnant" issues just handed to us by moment-of-conception bans. Ironically, that's what Roe provided, because under Roe, 91 percent of abortions were in the first 12 weeks, 1 percent were in the last 12 weeks, and of the latter, almost all were for medical emergencies. In Canada, which has zero abortion laws and leaves it between women and their doctors, the same percentages emerge. Given free rein, women don't abuse abortion rights.
So if we can get back to that reasonableness, I'd be happy to pretend it's a "hard abortion ban" and that the banners "won." Let 'em have their victory as long as we have our reasonableness.
Dan28...go "words not labels", too much vagueness these days...specifics. thanks
"Right". "Left". "Abortion". I think labels and euphemisms are used for political means rather than real-world problem solving. In my experience we all agree on 90% of issues and the remaining 10% steer us away from each other in meaningful ways. An example that is not my top cause but there is actual polling data: Abortion(baby killing). 90% of people agree that late term abortions should not happen and the remaining 10% usurp our consensus for political means and not reality.
90+% of us think transgenderism is radically phycological and deeply flawed and we let the political people just use these poor people for their gain.
I guess what I am trying to say is let's not be distracted by others' political aims and keep it real and practical.
A bit of a false equivalence but I do agree that the extremes are killing us. I just find the left so much more destructive
Agree but that is because they’ve been ascendant. Should the poles reverse, power will go to their head. Any wedge gives the opportunity- just look at the ProLife extremism in the aftermath to Dobbs (and the counter by the Pro abortion extremism). The Center is CNN the only hope.
You are absolutely correct---in our clickbait politics, whichever side grabs up the votes becomes as despotic as the other one.
Your "wedge" is so correct: the extremists insist on "abortions any time for any reason" and "no abortion for ten-year-old rape victims, have the kid, girly." Actual Americans want "abortion for any reason up to X weeks"--I prefer 24, but we can quibble the time element--"and only for medical emergency to woman or child after that."
The Center is the only hope, with or without CNN :-)
Pro-life extremism sounds such a very odd thing to say. "Hey you there, stop caring about life so much!" No, we can't have that no can we, all these crazy people thinking that life matters and is something to be treasured and protected. Bunch a loonies!
Chuckles. Great point about "pro-life extremism". Yes, I will use a firearm to protect innocent life and have never been prouder to be an 'extremist'.
To be fair to the one whom I responded to I read the term free of context (which I do recognize) because floating on it's own it just struck me as comically bizarre. So, I was mostly just goofing on that notion.
God forbid we should rely on CNN as the center.
CNN is the center? Are you crazy? The new president of CNN recognizes that CNN is a leftwing mouthpiece and has ordered that reporting is to move to the center and those who do not comply will be fired. Even the spineless Don Lemon has changed his tune and is beginning to sound almost like a conservative.
Not crazy, at least I do not think so. A glitch in my iPhone! See abve..
[Damn, I got to read comments before posting. You'd think I might learn ....]
I'd burn that iPhone if I were you.
Running Burning Man--CNN is NOT center. If you look at Media Bias Factcheck (a non partisan organization that tracks all media), CNN and Fox show a clear bias but, obviously, on opposite sides of the spectrum. If you want something more center, it would be PBS or NPR. But definitely not CNN or MSNBC.
PBS/NPR is non-biased and centrist?
CNN is left. Fox is right. (which we already know) PBS and NPR are Center Left. According to the mediaBias factcheck
It would be interesting to know why they rated NPR as Center Left. I suspect it is because the left goal post has gone even farther off the deep end, so by comparison even rags like the NYT start to look moderate.
True.
Please see my correction, above e. A glitch in my iPhone . . . .
Got it. It did seem a bit strange.
“ProLife Extremism”. that would be total abolishing abortion. It’s not happening and it never will. So some states set the cut off date earlier than others. That’s federalism.
And all the hysteria about birth control and gay marriage is just more gas lighting.
Meanwhile, the far left take over of our institutions, government, media, medicine, law, academia, K-12….all very real. And we are astounded and suffering from it all.
"It’s not happening and it never will."
South Dakota bans abortions from conception, with no exception for rape, incest, child trafficking, or age of child; the only exception is the imminent death of the mother. Oklahoma, ditto. Ohio's ban is so strict it forced a 10-year-old rape victim to flee to Indiana for treatment ... but Indiana wants to join the ban states.
So how can you say it's not happening and never will when it already is?
Ohio's law at the time had exceptions for that case. That was used for political gain which is pathetic; using a 10 year old for political aims. I don't know how anybody supports democrats anymore. They just use people for selfish gain.
Ohio law had no exception for age or for rape. So "they" didn't have to use a 10-year-old for political aims; the state made that possible by not writing reasonable exemptions into its law.
They did until Dobbs. Too convenient, buddy. She wasnt the only minor in that condition. All political.
Until Dobbs, 10-year-old rape victims like her could get abortions because the right was protected by Roe. Now, in too many states including Ohio, they can't.
"She wasn't the only minor in that condition." No shit, thousands of kids a year are ripped into by funny uncles, dear daddies, and strangers. You would sentence them to forced birth. Why? Are you evil, or just a dick?
Sorry, but it is the goal of lots of folks on the "Pro Life" hard right. Check the fool running for Gov as a Republican in PA. An asshole and he is not alone.
Running Burning Man--True--Mastriano is extreme right and yet he is now backing away from his hardline stance on abortion to gain voters-- it's frightening if he becomes Governor.
Have we ever had a time when the Right has been ascendant when the mutilation of children was promoted as an active good?
burnt.
You mean the 'pro-life extremism' of Leftists burning down pregnancy help centers?
As opposed to the "pro-life extremism" of assassinating abortion doctors and threatening clinic staffs?
I was looking at polls yesterday regarding what demographics are most in favor of capital punishment, right to use deadly force in self defense, right of law enforcement to use deadly force, in favor of the U.S. military, and most likely to express support for the Second Amendment. It was white, "Evangelical Protestants."
I too am in favor of most of the rights included on the above list, but I also believe that there are situations in which ending the life of an embryo or a fetus is justified. I don't go around shrieking that it is murder and a sin because "all human live is sacred from the moment of conception." People who are anti-abortion extremists are usually members of conservative Christian churches, the same people who are the most aggressive demographic in the U.S. when it comes to justifying the killing of adult human beings.
The only violence I am aware of is the current Leftists burning down pregnancy centers. Like usual. Their ideas cannot be argued so they use force. I will be gladly be called a 'pro-life extremist' when using force of any kind to protect you as a volunteer firefighter! You just made my day.
When you say you would use force of any kind, I hope you don't mean this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_George_Tiller
That was murder, regardless of the cause. If someone is coming at you in my presence and we fear for our lives we have a right to use any force to defend ourselves. I will never condone murder. Kermit Gosnell murdered women and children, went to trial, was judged by a jury of his peers, and then sent to jail.
We agree, it was murder, and it's just as wrong as burning down anti-abortion centers.
While I would help women going to clinics to have an abortion, and you would help women going to abortion avoidance clinics, it's the same idea: people exercising a lawful freedom deserve to do it without harassment, and those of us who can help them do that, should.
CNN? Now you’ve lost me. CNN is the network that propounded some lunatic who claimed that Trump killed more people than Hitler Stalin and Mao combined. As the fat little fool who moderated nodded approvingly
Although, again I agree that power corrupts, and the extremes tend to be most susceptible to it
Oh, God! My iPhone has this habit of inserting "CNN" randomly. I do not know why. "Ghosts in the Machine"? didn't ever reread my comment.
NOT CNN. NOT CNN! NOT CNN!!!!!
Running-- Uh-oh, they've infiltrated your phone! :-).
That said, I wouldn't be surprised.
LOL! The pain of iPhone-ism is very real!
He has blood on his hands. Every non vaxxed person who died as a result. After he weaponized and politicized a safe and effective vaccine.
Just as a sober view of the trans issue is bringing clarity. So will history show Trump to be a monster.
I am a physician. This I am aghast at the way so many in society and medicine are destroying the lives of young people. Rather than let people be themselves and accept it, they endorse and hurry forth with hormones and even surgery. It is evil and will be seen for what it is. I am thrilled to see backtracking in Europe and hopefully here.
My same sensitivities apply to Trump. He had or has many followers. He took something that is a gift to society - an effective vaccine that saves lives, and sowed fear, doubt and ignorance. Never before have people avoided a vaccine like this. The results are clear. Millions world wide died preventable deaths. Places like Brazil with a similar leader took his lead. I don’t need to invoke Hitler, Stalin or Mao in discussing Trumps banality. My thinking is lucid and clear thank you.
Ps. This is in response to Bruce Miller. Somehow it appeared above his response to me.
I respect physicians. A lot. I know what you went through to get there. But you are not gods and when you politicize medicine you do it a great disservice. Sorry but Trump did not attack the vaccines. As you concede, he made them possible a lot sooner than they otherwise would have been. But he, as do I, opposed the mandates. You do not have the right to impose a treatment on people. Especially one that has problems, has proven ineffective against later strains and is highly questionable for healthy young people and children. I have never seen medicine so politicized as it was in the pandemic and now you're reaping that whirlwind as more and more people question your "conventional wisdom" and your overdependence on chemicals that treat symptoms not causes. If you think Dr. Allen Frances wasn't out of his mind when he compared Trump to the three greatest mass murderers in history, you might be a reason why respect for the medical profession is waning.
Thank you for your kind words Bruce. I think over a beer you and I might find many shared values. Had Trump simply stayed in his lane and found political issues to debate rather than the Vaccine, we would have had a much different outcome. Had he immediately said, "I am thrilled with the vaccine, I am getting it (and televise it with enthusiasm), and everyone else should too," or something along those lines, we would not have had so much denial and avoidance and this long drawn-out fight over mandates might never have occurred. I am 69, participated in the Novavax trial, have been boosted and to my knowledge have not been infected, despite continuing to see patients in person the whole while. I am an N of one which means little. I well remember the fear of polio and the relief and stampede for parents to get their kids vaccinated. I was one of them as a toddler.
I agree with you that medicine and physicians need much more humility. The deficit of humility is why we have this trans debate and physicians rushing to treat a non-disease with very dangerous and permanent interventions and mutilations. Medicine has a history of being misguided. Consider the recovered memory tragedy of the 80's. And the more recent opioid epidemic, aided and abetted by overprescription of opiates for chronic pain complaints.
As a physician it would be against my oath to deny care to sick people when it has been self-inflicted. As a citizen, the irony is not lost in considering the expense and cost to caregivers and other patients who could not access care, due to costly treatment given and paid for by the rest of us to those who show up dying from Covid but for vaccination. I am and remain angry that this took place and may occur again.
As to Trump, history will show him as a pox and a dangerous threat to Democracy and the United States, notwithstanding some accomplishments on his watch. Character, ethics and respect for the law matter a lot to me, more so than party or politics. I have generally voted Democratic. I am aghast at the current wokeness and crazy progressive agendas being embraced. I could see myself voting for a traditional Republican. But not the party of Trump. Both parties are engaging in self-defeat. For the GOP, I will look closely at whether they can extrude Trump from the presidential race and advance candidates like Liz Cheney, Romney, perhaps even that strange former VP Pence who won't let his eyes linger on other women etc.
We disagree on much politically (Cheney, Romney - the worst) but I have many friends who hold views similar to yours. Mostly we just don't discuss politics. And like you, and me, we're both put off by the extremes. I would ask you to think a bit about some of the fevered rhetoric about Trump. As bad as you think he is, he never so much as arrested one of his critics. Imagine if an actress had mused about burning down the Reich Chancellery in 1935. And the Russian collusion stuff was all nonsense, while the Hunter laptop is real. I don't care if you think Trump's an asshole and would never vote for him. He actually kinda is. I liked his policies and found him amusing - and harmless. So, thanks for the kind reply and I'll see you around. Bari's got a very fine thing going here.
I hope you're being sarcastic or ironic. Otherwise you're in dire need of mental health treatment.
Sorry, Sir Bruce. But this is why these here comments are an echo chamber, Sir.
Only one side is allowed in these comments. It's a form of DTS syndrome. (Deranged Trump Supporter.) There's a set of issues that everyone has to see the R (right) way, or You're a lunatic. Is that it?
Right down the line, almost everybody has the same basic beliefs about a standard set of issues. It doesn't bother me, because I've gotten used to it. But that's why there's no Center in this country.
Respectfully disagree jt. Trump has a number of less than ideal traits. He may even be sort of an asshole. If you dislike Trump, I won't hold that against you. But "a monster?" A "dictator?" Killed more people than Hitler, Stalin and Mao combined? That's nuts. I call Biden senile because he's patently in cognitive decline. I call him a crook and a traitor because Hunter's laptop shows he's taken Chinese money. People can disagree but I have evidence on my side I don't care if nobody agrees with me or hundreds do. I say what I think and I think I can back it up. But if I'm called on something and proven wrong, I'll concede. That's why I love this place.
So what do I think is "lunacy?" A few things. Open borders, because without them no country can survive. Gender transformation of children. Making our energy grid dependent upon generation that cannot and will not work and will kill millions. Letting violent criminals off with a slap on the wrist or no charges. Suppressing free speech. And separating us by race and ethnicity, because the US is uniquely a nation where, without race blindness, the country will devolve into warring tribes.
I dunno You saw my comment why I didn't write yesterday, Sir Bruce. I'm glad I waited. The "conversation" between You and M. Park Place ended up quite a bit different than it started.
I was glad to see that.
As far as Your reply to me, I'd forgotten that M. Park had called Trump a "monster." But, like I thought, nobody brought up anything about Mao and them or "dictator." So I'm calling You on Your first paragraph.
As far as what is "lunacy," I think there's pretty common agreement amongst most people that what You say is accurate. (I dunno about "millions" being killed, but that's a small detail. You could be right.)
As You might expect, I agree more with M. Park than You when it comes to Trump. You're a DTS, right? (Deranged Trump Supporter. ;-) = wink.
I leave that aside for the time being. Only to say that because-a that, You're gonna view any R that opposes Trump's insanity as a RINO not worthy of respect.
IMO, it's just better, as a general rule. to lean towards giving more respect to people, as a default, rather than less. In politics and in life. That's just me. But the evidence is before You. The conversation took a 180 turn once respect for others improved, right?
Thanks to both-a Youse for an enjoyable read. TYTY.
Wait a minute. I gotta go back and read the original post.
You've got the right of, Burning Man.
We all must STRONGLY push back where we are planted. Speak the truth clearly(and kindly). Stand up for your principles
Doug Murray stated this strongly and concisely. Have the courage to speak and tell the truth. And do not be cowed by lunatics and freaks.