Disproportionate

Posted on by

I never quite understood the hatred for Tim Tebow.

And while I don’t much care one way or the other about gender reassignment surgery – I’m going to plead the classic libertarian “it’s their business, not mine” – I’m not really sure I understand the enraptured love of Caitlin “Chris” Jenner, either.

And I still don’t.

Although if that’s what it took to get away from the Kardashians, I’m certainly not going to second-guess him.

79 thoughts on “Disproportionate”

  1. You’re right tweety, DG is starved for attention!

    DG the only way anyone can be on the wrong side of history (i.e. Marxist theory) is if all history has already been written. In other words predestination. If all of history has already been written then you can relax, what was destined to be, will most assuredly be.
    If history does not have sides (liberum arbitrium) then you have a problem because the only way you will bring about the totalitarian paradise of perfected mankind you espouse is by significantly culling the herd of anti-social(conservative in your words) elements. I recognize that your goal as a member of Lenin’s polezniye duraki is to at least be the useful apparatchik (the faithful propagandist as it were) but the history you love accurately records that instead of a dacha and a post in the Narkom you would likely be among the first against the wall.

    DG, other than your risible assertion about changing DNA I notice you are careful to avoid citing the literature that studies the extraordinary rates of suicides and suicide attempts among transsexuals (as much as 41% as indicated by reports cited in LATimes). It would be difficult, but I’m sure you’ll give it a whack, to assert that this suicidal ideation is psychologically normal and not the result of a pervasive mental illness that stalks the LGBT community and the life choices they’ve made.

  2. “Both GID and gender dysphoria describe a condition in which someone is intensely uncomfortable with their biological gender and strongly identifies with, and wants to be, the opposite gender. Some of these people may live as their desired gender, and may even seek gender reassignment surgery that can allow them to trade, for example, a penis for a clitoris and a scrotum for a vagina.”
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/04/gender-dysphoria-dsm-5_n_3385287.html
    This is ridiculous. You cannot trade “a penis for a clitoris and a scrotum for a vagina” any more than you can swap your big tie for an eyeball. I suppose a lot of ignorant huffpo readers fall for it, though, especially if the article calls people who believe that you can do this wise and open-minded and says that those who do not believe that the magic of science can turn a scrotum into vagina are ignorant bigots.

  3. You’re right Blue. I was going to mention that, when I want to learn how to build a shortwave radio out of the contents of my junk drawer, Popular Science is my go-to source. Human biology? Don’t think so.

    But even given that, the article she linked to concludes it’s all a bunch of crap.Poor doofus’ comprehension is as bad as her syntax and grammar.

    BTW, am I the only one that detects a raging penis envy in her screeds? Do you think she marches around the house with a strap on and flannel shirt, like a female Jame Gumb?

  5. DG-that was me who said if Jenner left DNA evidence it would show a male. And you’ve done nothing to disprove that. As far as your link to extinction rates, did you really read it? Very conflicting evidence, as one UN figure cites just 784 species lost since 1500, whole another says 50,000 lost at 150 a day. Your article also stated: “The hugely varying figures might both be correct.” And, from the gloom and doom camp, “our estimate are empirical-those species we know were there but can’t find.” How very scientific- we know they’re there….It also gave one reason for species loss as “the development of farmlands”. As in, the growing of corn for ethanol, which does nothing for the environment but does hurt combustion engines. But the best is this from Dr. Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace. “I asked environmental activist Tim Keating of the Rainforest Relief Fund (one of the major proponents of huge species loss) if he could name any of the alleged 50,000 that have gone extinct. “No, we can’t”, he said. “We can’t name them because we don’t know what those species are.” Add that to the fact that even if all those were lost, it proves nothing as to why they were (but really were not) lost. You lose, DG.

  6. Gender and sexual orientation are NOT choices, they are innate, and frequently the result of in utero endocrine influences and/or genetic components.

    I thought Gender was a social construct and sexual orientation was a choice. Now it’s a birth defect? All homosexuals have a birth defect? Is that better than a mental illness?

  8. from the link provided by IE above (DG take note this means you):

    “In fact, gender dysphoria—the official psychiatric term for feeling oneself to be of the opposite sex—belongs in the family of similarly disordered assumptions about the body, such as anorexia nervosa and body dysmorphic disorder. Its treatment should not be directed at the body as with surgery and hormones any more than one treats obesity-fearing anorexic patients with liposuction. The treatment should strive to correct the false, problematic nature of the assumption and to resolve the psychosocial conflicts provoking it. With youngsters, this is best done in family therapy.

    The larger issue is the meme itself. The idea that one’s sex is fluid and a matter open to choice runs unquestioned through our culture and is reflected everywhere in the media, the theater, the classroom, and in many medical clinics. It has taken on cult-like features: its own special lingo, internet chat rooms providing slick answers to new recruits, and clubs for easy access to dresses and styles supporting the sex change. It is doing much damage to families, adolescents, and children and should be confronted as an opinion without biological foundation wherever it emerges.

    But gird your loins if you would confront this matter. Hell hath no fury like a vested interest masquerading as a moral principle.” – Paul McHugh, MD, is University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Medical School and the former psychiatrist in chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital.

  9. There is a tendency for many on the American Left to believe that people are nothing more than what society does to them. These days it can take the form of believing that people are sexless paper dolls, and society imposes the features of gender upon them arbitrarily, or to enforce traditional power structures that have no place in the modern world.
    There are no sexless human beings. It is not possible to be a sexless human being without suffering grave physiological problems. Even if there were a good reason to do so, it is not possible to make a man into a women by slicing them up and rearranging their parts. Attempts to do so are grotesque. The people who have operations to remove their penis and replace it with a pseudo-vagina have problems with it growing shut. It is a wound, not a sex organ.

  10. The APA official statement on “sexual orientation”:
    There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.

  12. Being transgender, being in a major and traumatic conflict with yourself, is profoundly painful to the person who finds themself in that position, a situation that is no fault of their own. In contrast, I find conservatives dismissing these people and their experience to be without compassion and to trivialize that experience as simply fake and willful contrariness, without any factual evidence that is true.

    From what I’m seeing here, from what I’ve seen of comments in other right wing media, and from my own personal anecdotal experience with conservatives on the issues of the transgender, but also other issues and topics of gender, sexual orientation, and sexuality, most conservatives are NOT as a group well informed on the science of the LGBT, but especially not on the transgender.

    I have been following the research on this for a while now. The direction of the research findings is steadily and strongly that there are physical differences that explain and appear to be the foundation for the experiences of the transgender (and for that matter, for those with same sex orientation).

    What I have not been able to find is examples of people faking this condition. What I have not been able to find is any pattern of failures by the medical and mental health community to be generally pretty successful in correctly identifying who should have hormone and surgical intervention. Sometimes that correction is more successful than others, and there are limits to what it can alter, but it is consistently an improvement over not making that correction for the afflicted person.

    Looking at the role of endocrine disrupters in utero on the transgender, and in particular in view of Jenner’s age, her experience seems to parallel pretty closely those of DES sons. I haven’t looked at Jenner’s story specifically to see if she mentions a link to her mom taking DES; she may or may not know or choose to say. But it was a medication sufficiently widely distributed that it is a highly possible contributing factor, and therefore makes Jenner’s claims of being transgender highly credible. In contrast I see nothing of substance here that shows it to be fake, but rather those comments disputing Jenner’s claim seem to be more anti-science in substance, distrustful that the applicable science is effective, but with little to back that up.

    http://diethylstilbestrol.co.uk/gender-identity/
    “Several published studies in the medical literature on psycho-neuro-endocrinology have examined the hypothesis that prenatal exposure to estrogens (including Diethylstilbestrol) may cause significant developmental impact on sexual differentiation of the brain, and on subsequent behavioural and gender identity development in exposed males and females. There is significant evidence linking prenatal hormonal influences on gender identity and transsexual development.

    In 1999, Dr. Scott Kerlin (founder of the DES Sons International Network) began researching the effects of Di-Ethyl Stilbestrol® on the health of genetic males who had been exposed prenatally. A substantial amount of research had been done on women who had been exposed but relatively little had been done on men and DES sons. When it became apparent that a significant portion of his research group were either transsexual, transgendered or intersexed, he began to explore the possibility of a connection between prenatal DES exposure and gender variance. Dr. Kerlin is not the first researcher to note a correlation between DES exposure and feminized behaviour in genetic males; studies go back as far as 1973. However, Dr. Kerlin has delved much deeper than those who came before.”

    Clearly, there is much more to gender and to the concepts of masculine and feminine than is encompassed by the traditional definitions usually espoused by conservatives. Clearly the role of the endocrine system is key. Clearly the sciences of genetics and epigenetics demonstrate there is much more to gender assignment than just whether or not you have two x chromosomes or an x and a y, including what additional sex chromosomes you have, or what genes are on them and when and how and how long they activate.

    While a few comments in rebuttal have been at least minimally more substantive on gender dysphoria, I would bet, although it would be difficult to actually prove, that few if any of you here, commenting or just reading, had informed your opinions BEFORE I challenged them with links to the science.

    So while you may dislike my opposition, I argue that I have raised the level of the discussion significantly by being substantive. I doubt some of the more rabid among you will have the metaphorical balls to admit that, but fortunately I don’t care if you do or not.

  13. DG,

    Congrats for engaging in more than the “drop and run” round of debate.

    But I did ask you a question, a few rounds back.

    You seemed to imply that gender reassignment surgery affected the subject’s DNA.

    Since you’re discussing what you’re pleased to call “science,” please clarify and elaborate.

    Thanks.

  14. DG
    First, being verbose is NOT being substantive, merely cutting and pasting from a google search doesn’t automatically qualify as substantive.
    Second, please address the opinion of Paul McHugh, MD who is far more of an expert on the LGBT community and their mental health problems than you – read his article: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/06/15145/
    Third, why won’t you address the suicide rate among transsexuals documented in the LATimes among others?
    Because you do lack both metaphorical and literal balls (a deficit that has haunted you since age 5) I doubt you will provide substantive answers to either.

  15. “Being transgender, being in a major and traumatic conflict with yourself, is profoundly painful to the person who finds themself in that position, a situation that is no fault of their own.”
    Without a doubt this is true for some people who call themselves transgendered.
    After all the acrimony in the comments to Mitch’s post I need to emphasize that I, at least, am not picking on transgendered or gay people. I like the term “mental disorder” rather than insane because it is a more appropriate description. Everyone has mental disorders. Acting on sexual attraction to people of the same sex is no worse, IMHO, than being addicted to pornography or sex outside of marriage (how many people who condemn homosexuality have enjoyed that sin? I know that I have).
    But we acknowledge that these things are bad, or at least not as they should be. If a person is addicted to gambling, we hope that person does not gamble, however he or she is tempted to gamble. We certainly don’t celebrate the fact that he or she is a gambling addict, even if he or she has been on a long winning streak.
    I look at homosexuality very much as I look at adultery. It happens, it has been a part of humanity since the beginning, but there is a big difference between accepting it as inevitable and saying that there is nothing wrong with it.
    This a republic and a democracy. What is the percentage of citizens who believe that SSM must be celebrated even by those who are morally opposed to it? ten percent? twenty percent? With this JD and this president — who was morally opposed to SSM until 2012 — this is what you will get.

  16. DG,

    Ahem.

    My post was NOT about biology. Never. I have no questions about the biology, chemistry or psychology involved. My question was about the hatred of Tim Tebow (for being a B-list QB who’s an “out” Christian) juxtaposed with the enraptured idolization of Jenner for being, we’re told, normal.

    Now – I have asked you a question. Did you mean to say gender reassignment surgery changes DNA?

    Yes or no?

    Thanks.

  17. I wonder how successful Kardashian/Jenner LLC will be in monetizing this media event.

  18. Emery wrote:
    “I wonder how successful Kardashian/Jenner LLC will be in monetizing this media event.”
    One wonders where the next rush will come from after this publicity buzz wears off.
    I watched the clip of Jenner receiving his Arthur Ashe award. He won, at the last minute, over a female basketball player who died of cancer and a vet double-amputee triathlete. I had hoped Jenner would decline the award. I am beginning to think that he lobbied for it — or had his people lobby for it.
    In the clip of Jenner receiving the award, the crowd reacts like the crowds at the old CP conferences in the Soviet Union. You had to be seen to be applauding. Ugh.

  19. Frankly, I am enjoying this whole circus immensely. In my opinion, Jenner is not the entertainment here; the guffaws are provided for the rest of us by those who prattle about “bigotry” and sex as “a social construct.”

    It is too bad that Mel Brooks is so old. It needs his touch to give this whole business its final touch — like he did with Hitler in “The Producers.” Jenner’s story is simply perfect as the subject of a satirical Broadway musical. Remember “Victor/Victoria?”

  23. Kel-
    This ground, if it’s varieties of human sexuality, is thick with landmines. Nature, nurture, free will, and what an individual wants and what society needs are all bound up like a knot.
    The idea that there is right side to history and a wrong side has a terrifying legacy. The problem with history is that there seems to be a narrative to it, cyclical or apocalyptical, patterns emerge. Hegel tried to replace the idea of God as the driver of human history with the abstract idea that history itself represented a narrative force. Hegel didn’t think that people could consciously be on the right or wrong side of history, though, any more than a character in a novel could choose to be a good guy or a bad guy. Marx explicitly modified Hegel to allow individuals to consciously choose to join on the “right side” of history. Millions dies because of that idea. You can’t get away from God. If History replaces God, and you can choose to be on the right side of history, it is the same as being on the right side of God.

  24. So, now we have learned that the DNA of men who wear dresses, with or without having had their Johnsons wacked off, is different. And it’s different because Mother Did It with her Damned Hormone Treatments!

    I expect we’ll be seeing commercials from ambulance chasers on late night TV, that will go something like this:

    “Did you wack off your Johnson? Get a boob job? Just like to wear dresses?”

    “You may be eligible for significant financial compensation. Millions have been set aside to settle claims from persons whose Mothers took DES while pregnant. Call the law offices of Saul Goodman, and do it soon. Mom isn’t getting any younger and we can’t sue a corpse.”

    Forget your X – Y chromosomes, you conservative troglodytes; DG is on the right side of history, and she has the pop culture and blogs (but, sadly, not the balls) to prove it!

  25. There are a few conditions that are truly genetic and do truly result in someone who appears superficially as one sex, but is truly another, or whose X & Y chromosomes actually are more complicated than the usual XX or XY, but let’s be honest here; the average “Transgender” person is not in these categories. They are, like Chastity Bono or Bruce Jenner, fully functioning male or female humans who, as research from Johns Hopkins and elsewhere demonstrates, have some very clear markers indicating a strong propensity to mental illness.

    And who will, if they commit a crime, be readily identified by the DNA God gave them, not the parts hacked and slashed by some surgeon.

  26. DG

    I asked you last week; is it really your assertion that gender-reassignment surgery changes DNA?

    Just want to make sure we’re clear on this.

  27. Congenital rather than genetic, bikebubba.
    People are free to do whatever they like, and live with the consequences. Actual surgery or hormone treatments can permanently alter the body and cause terrible health issues.
    If a man wants to “pass” as a woman, that’s his business. It always has been, unless they are trying to defraud someone else. But the organization of grifters and layabouts we call the government has no moral or intellectual authority to define what is and what is not a woman or a man.
    Perhaps the government will learn its lesson when a large number of male prisoners declare themselves to be women so they can transfer to womens’ prisons. But maybe not. The damage bureaucrats are willing to inflict on others is almost limitless.

  28. So true transgenderism is both a birth defect AND a mental illness, which we should not only help alleviate, not only tolerate, but actually celebrate?

    Talk about defining deviancy downward . . . .

  29. Pingback: Democrat Party Exploits Vote Fraud To Pay For Planned Parenthood | Shot in the Dark

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.