I don't think its a matter of 'promoting' anything. Its more a matter of allowing individuals to find and 'be' who they are. Isn't that what a 'free' society is about? One groups existence shouldn't scare another group about their existence. Evil happens however when one group seeks to impose their 'existence' on all other groups. This principle, that should guide our behaviours/laws, should apply no matter whether its religion, sex, etc etc. At the end of the day our civility as humans and as societies boils down to a core measure, the extent to which we tolerate, permit and welcome individual choice.
And as an aside on gayness, with global population of 8 billion, I hardly think the human race is threatened with being wiped out because of the existence of gays!
Can we support the mainstream hopes and aspirations of the majority for the good of society without overly promoting one lifetsytle at the expense of the other? We all - gay, straight, old, young, fertile or infertile - benefit from having the majority of the pooulation in stable relationships bringing up well adjusted children.
You cannot "promote" homosexuality (or if you can, I've seen no reliable evidence of it). It is inherent. No one can be persuaded that they are homosexual. As Helen remarks, there is a clear evolutionary advantage to homosexuality - it occurs at roughly the same rate across time and location, and would have died out generations ago if it did not have some advantage. It is unlikely to be a random effect, because the percentage of the population is so high. It bears no relationship with trans ideology - something which is entirely maladaptive behaviour being pushed by others.
With all respect, you aren't addressing my points. Homosexuality is, as far as studies from many fields show, something both natural to our species, and fixed in the individual at (at least) a very early age. It is not amenable to external influence.
Trans, on the other hand, needs social approval, and actively evangelises - hence the ever-extending Pride and Days of Visibility. It is backed by serious money (see Jennifer Bilek's excellent work}, and is being very effectively marketed. Other groups have latched for their own reasons. What we have is an actively marketed social contagion with multiple aims, from commoditising the body to adultifying children and infantilising adults. There is nothing natural about it, and I share your concerns with regard to the impact on population.
I don't see that recognising the reality of homosexuality is in any way "celebrating" it. It is what it is, and Pride in it's original form as was simply a way of showing that homosexual people are normal members of society.
I struggle with the primacy/paramount of breeding and family. I certainly don't think there is a free-floating duty to breed and form groupings (families) within which to raise children, but I'm open to the idea that it is to be encouraged.
The Shakers were a self-abnegating religious group, to the extent that they did not procreate. Is it any wonder they no longer exist? Unless you are part of the Human Extinction Movement, you are committed to perpetuating the species in general, and your own culture in particular.
The Shakers failed only because they didn't continue to win converts. Now, imagine if they had. The transition from support of non-reproducing folk, to destruction of reproductive capability (i.e. trans being superior to homosexuality) is the analogous point.
I think 'life' is far too complicated, diverse and confusing to be able to claim what the 'purpose of life is!'. But there is a simple truism namely 'the more we know the more we know we don't know.'
There is a role for people at the edge of the bell curve. The irony is that a society that is geared towards the mainstream can tolerate/indulge/utilise its non-mainstream people. At the monent we run things back to front where the margins want to push further into the middle.
By the way, I think you meant wise aunts, but maybe wine aunts could also be fun.
The book sounds good. Good review, thanks for sharing. I'm glad at least some trans-critical books are making it through the publishers' pulpers.
Parents who "trans" their kids seem to fall into a few types:
A. Vicious homophobes dressed up as activists. Would secretly like to live in Iran. Prefers a mutilated child wearing an ill-fitting costume forever to a healthy, happy homo.
B. Too-polite prosecco liberal that yes, really thinks kids know better than adults (a common parenting style now IME.) Hates their own parents.
C. Narcissistic social credit seeker who would probably wouldn't mind the kid being gay, but it would be second place to the glory of trans. Usually mums with at least 7 different social media accounts. Says "kiddo" a lot.
Then you've got the ones who see that it's awful and try to fight it, with varying degrees of success. Poor kids these days. I'm glad my sister and I got to be tomboys in the 90s. It was normal.
Meanwhile, watching Islamist Greens swipe council wards off Labour up and down the country served to remind me that (A) has now got an electoral foothold it never really had before. Labour and the SNP were mainly (B) and (C) on gender woo, which is bad enough but can be walked back in a way (A) can't be.
I'll be honest, I wasn't even picturing Muslims in scenario 1, just whites who like to bang on about how great Iran's trans stance is and who have a barely-hidden streak of old fashioned homophobia. But yes, interesting/horrifying bedfellows. I saw the "Allahu akbar" councillor win in Leeds. Apparently it's a victory for Gaza. I usually associate local councils with bins and planning complaints, but I must be behind the times.
My thesis, at least in Australia, is that the Greens are in fact a political wing of Marxism. It’s probably stating the obvious on one level but is a ‘revelation’ on another level.
This thesis is based on a 2 year study of modern day Marxism in Australia. The connection between Islam and the Greens is a mutual hatred of capitalism and the lifestyle choices based around individuality that goes with capitalism!
This understanding, I think, gives a sharper focus on how to push back. ‘We’ are better positioned to push back when we’ve isolated what we’re pushing back against instead of being diverted into ‘sideline’ issues. I’ve written part of this up in ‘unmasking Marxist marketing’ but more ‘thought’ analysis to follow.
The ugly root of all this (at least on the ideological end), that is far too entrenched to be dug out, is the great faith of our academic Marxist class, fundamentalist social constructionism.
Our self-appointed priesthood of the Equalitarian future, after the abject failure of their grand utopian project, the global Communist Revolution, came to a fork in the road: one path was called Reality and the other was called Social Constructionism, meaning in this case that if people still believed in oppressive retrograde binaries such as Good/Bad True/False Smart/Stupid My country/Your country and of course Man/Woman, it meant they simply hadn't had enough "revolutionary consciousness" ingested with their mother's milk, and thus needed some Freudian "Sex is at the root of all psyches" snake oil mixed in with their Marxist-Protestant egalitarianism.
This led to the class struggle being moved into our underwear drawers and into the genitals of children. If "sex is a social construct" (something so stupid only a Western academic could speak it) and it's possible to socially construct a revolution against the mammalian sex binary, then every child led away from the "norm" (even the norm of homosexuality) is another weapon in the war for "socialist liberation."
This is how a generation of children were taught that sex is oppression and they can "identify" out of it, because it served the personal, professional and emotional needs of our Social Justice priesthood, who these days teach even kindergarten, and who still imagine themselves as existing at the apex of morality, because of how deeply they care about "the marginalized" and how devoted they are to utopian egalitarianism—and the sad truth is that, even as the bodies of mutilated and sterilized children keep piling higher, at least here in America the social constructionists of Gender still control all the high ground of culture and have not had a bit of shine rubbed off their halos.
It seems that every reigning belief system has a body count, and in our time Leftist social constructionism is the foundational sacred belief of almost every educated person (whether they know it or not), and the "Trans child" is the child sacrifice this faith demands.
Yep! We've gotta see through the fog of bitching and screaming, to become fully alert to the subterranean agenda thats having huge success in engendering (at least the appearance of) chaos.
People keep guffawing about "Trans kids for Palestine" etc, making the obvious comment about how Hamas would behead them all, while keeping their eyes closed to the underlying commonality: since nothing matters but advancing the (mostly imaginary) Revolution, as long as you have the same goals as the Revolution (the destruction of liberal-capitalist democracy and as many Europeans as they can get their hands on), then you are instant allies and those other doctrinal contradictions are just footnotes to be ignored.
The Soviets, supposed secular universalists, allied with all sorts of theocratic regimes.
But since just about every cultural/intellectual leader in the West is some type of liberal, and liberals are programmed to never see or have any enemies to the left, it is verboten to say "what these people want is the destruction of our civil liberties and ultimately our societies"—that just codes as too conservative. It is better to let a few Jews get attacked then it is to speak up and lose your career, status, friends etc.
spot on. We are involved in 'war' against people in our own 'freedom' societies who seek to destroy our societies. They follow the principles of Sun Tzu 'The Art of War'.... 'get the enemy to defeat itself.' That's whats in play. We are defeating ourselves. The first part of push back is to realise what is at play and refuse to be self-defeating. The second essential part is to call out loudly what is actually going on. Expose those who seek to have us destroy ourselves!
The goal is always the same: total rule by the Leftist philosopher-king caste.
The state of nature they most desire is the state of the Soviet Union upon its birth: a captive populace of supposed "blank slates" to be molded and etched by "critical consciousness", a society where at last their genius is recognized and where the wicked capitalists are sentenced for all their crimes, most especially their crime of being richer and more powerful than the professoriate.
All of Leftism is the Will to Power of secular disaffected intellectuals, who hate capitalism because of how deeply it wounds their amour-propre. They are a priesthood forever in search of their very own theocratic dictatorship.
a fascinating article on Marxist product placement - illustrated with the footers (such as "socialist.alliance .org") on professionaly produced placards - eg re Gaza.
I haven't decided how to respond (if at all) to the direct messaging feature on Substack. So apologies for the delay, but I'm not sure it's a facility I want to use. Please bear with me.
No apology needed....I only used the DM because the email seemed to get lost in cyberspace (I realise that some Substackers only rarely check their inbox).
Huh? The response to the AIDS crisis consisted off:
1) Insist it's not happening.
2) Insist it can't possibly have anything to do with homosexuality.
3) Even if it does, insist that the bathhouse shouldn't be closed to avoid further stigmatizing gay men.
4) Finally admit the scope of the problem and close the bathhouses once the situation got bad enough that their fear of death overcame their fear of stigma.
5) Blame all the problems caused by steps 1) to 3) on Reagan.
6) As a damage control measure, start a BS "anyone can get AIDS" campaign to try to minimize the stigma.
You're talking about the US, and the behaviour of activists there. The book is about Britain (and yes, I get that a British charity shouldn't have called itself after an American event/location when we have plenty of our own to choose from).
Do remember, however, that there are other countries in the world that adopted different (and far more effective) policies in response to AIDS, and that by the standards of developed liberal democracies, the US is poorly governed, and has been for decades.
That’s what social workers are trying to do to my same sex attracted daughter. They keep calling her another name and male pronouns and referred her to Tavistock behind our back. I refuse to affirm so she doesn’t talk to me. Groomers and nonces the lot of them.
Dear lord this is grim. It is literally transing the gay away. All I can suggest is that there are now organisations that will have your back on this issue: Sex Matters, LGB Alliance, Free Speech Union etc.
Sadly my daughter is deep in the cult. She also reported me to police for deadnaming her. I think this also came from the social worker. My daughter is very easily manipulated.
"This absence of theory of mind—common but not universal when dealing with people unlike oneself—has implications. " And it seems that empathy not only does not counter the eg male female gap but rather adds to it. Without evolutionay psychology how can one understand one's own mind, let alone anyone else's?
To whom you are attracted sexually is purely subjective and therefore cannot reasonably be contested by an outside observer. Where you decide to live your life on a spectrum of superficial, stereotypical male to female attributes (and we all do) is also purely subjective and similarly cannot be questioned. However, your biological sex reflects an objective reality which cannot be changed by your subjective personal view and futile attempts to do so can result in serious health impacts to you as well as actual harms to members of the sex you are impersonating (especially women). Finally, others who are grounded in objective reality should never be forced to accept your subjective version of your actual biological sex.
It became apparent to me some time ago that the transgenderism movement would eliminate homosexuality and thus homosexuals. If a boy seems to be attracted to boys, it is not because he is gay, it is because he is really a girl and we must change his body to conform to this fantasy. Likewise for girls.
I read Barnes’ book last year. What may have started as a genuine and honest program to help these children seemed to morph into a fast track to get the kids “fixed” and satisfy the parents and the overseers at Tavistock GID. It seemed many of the practitioners were very sincere and dedicated to their patients but the model of care, number of referrals, parents , etc overrode the actual care of these kids. I don’t practice in mental health but after reading this, it’s glaringly obvious a giant cookie cutter approach was used.
I wanted to but didn't really understand this review ... guess I'm still something of a hick raised on the rim of western civ in Snohomish County. I do recall that Gavin McInnis used to remark on the wilder, frequency modules of gay sex compared to straight ...
There can be a biological basis for homosexuality that is just an option, it would combine with socialisation. Homosexuality could also be a by-product of our hyper-sexuality (men!). It’s likely to have more than one cause, because we’ve not found “it” yet, and people are trying hard!
Oh yes, that's why I used it. All the woo-woo crowd, together in one place.
I don't think its a matter of 'promoting' anything. Its more a matter of allowing individuals to find and 'be' who they are. Isn't that what a 'free' society is about? One groups existence shouldn't scare another group about their existence. Evil happens however when one group seeks to impose their 'existence' on all other groups. This principle, that should guide our behaviours/laws, should apply no matter whether its religion, sex, etc etc. At the end of the day our civility as humans and as societies boils down to a core measure, the extent to which we tolerate, permit and welcome individual choice.
And as an aside on gayness, with global population of 8 billion, I hardly think the human race is threatened with being wiped out because of the existence of gays!
A demographic catastrophe awaits us.
In some countries yes, Japan, China etc. But not India for example.
Can we support the mainstream hopes and aspirations of the majority for the good of society without overly promoting one lifetsytle at the expense of the other? We all - gay, straight, old, young, fertile or infertile - benefit from having the majority of the pooulation in stable relationships bringing up well adjusted children.
Totally. Stable relationships being the core of raising well adjusted kids.
I completely agree with his.
You cannot "promote" homosexuality (or if you can, I've seen no reliable evidence of it). It is inherent. No one can be persuaded that they are homosexual. As Helen remarks, there is a clear evolutionary advantage to homosexuality - it occurs at roughly the same rate across time and location, and would have died out generations ago if it did not have some advantage. It is unlikely to be a random effect, because the percentage of the population is so high. It bears no relationship with trans ideology - something which is entirely maladaptive behaviour being pushed by others.
With all respect, you aren't addressing my points. Homosexuality is, as far as studies from many fields show, something both natural to our species, and fixed in the individual at (at least) a very early age. It is not amenable to external influence.
Trans, on the other hand, needs social approval, and actively evangelises - hence the ever-extending Pride and Days of Visibility. It is backed by serious money (see Jennifer Bilek's excellent work}, and is being very effectively marketed. Other groups have latched for their own reasons. What we have is an actively marketed social contagion with multiple aims, from commoditising the body to adultifying children and infantilising adults. There is nothing natural about it, and I share your concerns with regard to the impact on population.
I don't see that recognising the reality of homosexuality is in any way "celebrating" it. It is what it is, and Pride in it's original form as was simply a way of showing that homosexual people are normal members of society.
I struggle with the primacy/paramount of breeding and family. I certainly don't think there is a free-floating duty to breed and form groupings (families) within which to raise children, but I'm open to the idea that it is to be encouraged.
You seem to miss the point that sexual attraction is innate. No amount of "effort" is going to make a homosexual person heterosexual or vice versa.
The Shakers were a self-abnegating religious group, to the extent that they did not procreate. Is it any wonder they no longer exist? Unless you are part of the Human Extinction Movement, you are committed to perpetuating the species in general, and your own culture in particular.
You may have noticed that homosexual people are without exception a product of heterosexual reproduction.
By contrast, Shaker is something one (presumably) chooses to become.
Your analogy is absurd.
The Shakers failed only because they didn't continue to win converts. Now, imagine if they had. The transition from support of non-reproducing folk, to destruction of reproductive capability (i.e. trans being superior to homosexuality) is the analogous point.
Are we talking about Trans now, or homosexuality?
The two things are nothing to do with each other.
Did you read the article?
I think 'life' is far too complicated, diverse and confusing to be able to claim what the 'purpose of life is!'. But there is a simple truism namely 'the more we know the more we know we don't know.'
There is a role for people at the edge of the bell curve. The irony is that a society that is geared towards the mainstream can tolerate/indulge/utilise its non-mainstream people. At the monent we run things back to front where the margins want to push further into the middle.
By the way, I think you meant wise aunts, but maybe wine aunts could also be fun.
Great post, Helen. I covered some of this in an older post I did about Andrew Sullivan and the civil war in the alphabet tribe:
https://morgthorak.substack.com/p/andrew-sullivan-and-the-alphabet
Sullivan and his ilk have been eclipsed by the insanity of the Troon Cult.
The book sounds good. Good review, thanks for sharing. I'm glad at least some trans-critical books are making it through the publishers' pulpers.
Parents who "trans" their kids seem to fall into a few types:
A. Vicious homophobes dressed up as activists. Would secretly like to live in Iran. Prefers a mutilated child wearing an ill-fitting costume forever to a healthy, happy homo.
B. Too-polite prosecco liberal that yes, really thinks kids know better than adults (a common parenting style now IME.) Hates their own parents.
C. Narcissistic social credit seeker who would probably wouldn't mind the kid being gay, but it would be second place to the glory of trans. Usually mums with at least 7 different social media accounts. Says "kiddo" a lot.
Then you've got the ones who see that it's awful and try to fight it, with varying degrees of success. Poor kids these days. I'm glad my sister and I got to be tomboys in the 90s. It was normal.
Ah yes, that was (part of) category C really, but I should have specified.
I wish I could remember where I saw it, but I read a meme that said something like, supporting trans kids really means "supporting Cluster B mothers."
I'm sure all three are in play, tbh.
Meanwhile, watching Islamist Greens swipe council wards off Labour up and down the country served to remind me that (A) has now got an electoral foothold it never really had before. Labour and the SNP were mainly (B) and (C) on gender woo, which is bad enough but can be walked back in a way (A) can't be.
I'll be honest, I wasn't even picturing Muslims in scenario 1, just whites who like to bang on about how great Iran's trans stance is and who have a barely-hidden streak of old fashioned homophobia. But yes, interesting/horrifying bedfellows. I saw the "Allahu akbar" councillor win in Leeds. Apparently it's a victory for Gaza. I usually associate local councils with bins and planning complaints, but I must be behind the times.
Who will devour whom? Will be fun at least to watch, hoping they devour each other.
My thesis, at least in Australia, is that the Greens are in fact a political wing of Marxism. It’s probably stating the obvious on one level but is a ‘revelation’ on another level.
This thesis is based on a 2 year study of modern day Marxism in Australia. The connection between Islam and the Greens is a mutual hatred of capitalism and the lifestyle choices based around individuality that goes with capitalism!
This understanding, I think, gives a sharper focus on how to push back. ‘We’ are better positioned to push back when we’ve isolated what we’re pushing back against instead of being diverted into ‘sideline’ issues. I’ve written part of this up in ‘unmasking Marxist marketing’ but more ‘thought’ analysis to follow.
The ugly root of all this (at least on the ideological end), that is far too entrenched to be dug out, is the great faith of our academic Marxist class, fundamentalist social constructionism.
Our self-appointed priesthood of the Equalitarian future, after the abject failure of their grand utopian project, the global Communist Revolution, came to a fork in the road: one path was called Reality and the other was called Social Constructionism, meaning in this case that if people still believed in oppressive retrograde binaries such as Good/Bad True/False Smart/Stupid My country/Your country and of course Man/Woman, it meant they simply hadn't had enough "revolutionary consciousness" ingested with their mother's milk, and thus needed some Freudian "Sex is at the root of all psyches" snake oil mixed in with their Marxist-Protestant egalitarianism.
This led to the class struggle being moved into our underwear drawers and into the genitals of children. If "sex is a social construct" (something so stupid only a Western academic could speak it) and it's possible to socially construct a revolution against the mammalian sex binary, then every child led away from the "norm" (even the norm of homosexuality) is another weapon in the war for "socialist liberation."
This is how a generation of children were taught that sex is oppression and they can "identify" out of it, because it served the personal, professional and emotional needs of our Social Justice priesthood, who these days teach even kindergarten, and who still imagine themselves as existing at the apex of morality, because of how deeply they care about "the marginalized" and how devoted they are to utopian egalitarianism—and the sad truth is that, even as the bodies of mutilated and sterilized children keep piling higher, at least here in America the social constructionists of Gender still control all the high ground of culture and have not had a bit of shine rubbed off their halos.
It seems that every reigning belief system has a body count, and in our time Leftist social constructionism is the foundational sacred belief of almost every educated person (whether they know it or not), and the "Trans child" is the child sacrifice this faith demands.
Yep! We've gotta see through the fog of bitching and screaming, to become fully alert to the subterranean agenda thats having huge success in engendering (at least the appearance of) chaos.
https://substack.com/home/post/p-144227224?source=queue
People keep guffawing about "Trans kids for Palestine" etc, making the obvious comment about how Hamas would behead them all, while keeping their eyes closed to the underlying commonality: since nothing matters but advancing the (mostly imaginary) Revolution, as long as you have the same goals as the Revolution (the destruction of liberal-capitalist democracy and as many Europeans as they can get their hands on), then you are instant allies and those other doctrinal contradictions are just footnotes to be ignored.
The Soviets, supposed secular universalists, allied with all sorts of theocratic regimes.
But since just about every cultural/intellectual leader in the West is some type of liberal, and liberals are programmed to never see or have any enemies to the left, it is verboten to say "what these people want is the destruction of our civil liberties and ultimately our societies"—that just codes as too conservative. It is better to let a few Jews get attacked then it is to speak up and lose your career, status, friends etc.
Thus the Long March marches on...
spot on. We are involved in 'war' against people in our own 'freedom' societies who seek to destroy our societies. They follow the principles of Sun Tzu 'The Art of War'.... 'get the enemy to defeat itself.' That's whats in play. We are defeating ourselves. The first part of push back is to realise what is at play and refuse to be self-defeating. The second essential part is to call out loudly what is actually going on. Expose those who seek to have us destroy ourselves!
You do wonder what the goal is, do they think that by tearing everything down, we will be default revert to a pure state of noble savage nature?
The goal is always the same: total rule by the Leftist philosopher-king caste.
The state of nature they most desire is the state of the Soviet Union upon its birth: a captive populace of supposed "blank slates" to be molded and etched by "critical consciousness", a society where at last their genius is recognized and where the wicked capitalists are sentenced for all their crimes, most especially their crime of being richer and more powerful than the professoriate.
All of Leftism is the Will to Power of secular disaffected intellectuals, who hate capitalism because of how deeply it wounds their amour-propre. They are a priesthood forever in search of their very own theocratic dictatorship.
a fascinating article on Marxist product placement - illustrated with the footers (such as "socialist.alliance .org") on professionaly produced placards - eg re Gaza.
The Class Struggle in Our Underwear Drawers would make a great book title.
I thought this as well. Great line.
Hi Helen, I messaged you recently a couple of times (email & DM). I'm guessing you never got to view them?
I haven't decided how to respond (if at all) to the direct messaging feature on Substack. So apologies for the delay, but I'm not sure it's a facility I want to use. Please bear with me.
No apology needed....I only used the DM because the email seemed to get lost in cyberspace (I realise that some Substackers only rarely check their inbox).
> a mature response to the AIDS crisis
Huh? The response to the AIDS crisis consisted off:
1) Insist it's not happening.
2) Insist it can't possibly have anything to do with homosexuality.
3) Even if it does, insist that the bathhouse shouldn't be closed to avoid further stigmatizing gay men.
4) Finally admit the scope of the problem and close the bathhouses once the situation got bad enough that their fear of death overcame their fear of stigma.
5) Blame all the problems caused by steps 1) to 3) on Reagan.
6) As a damage control measure, start a BS "anyone can get AIDS" campaign to try to minimize the stigma.
Yes, it would seem that much of the trans movement is rooted in the ACT-UP model.
You're talking about the US, and the behaviour of activists there. The book is about Britain (and yes, I get that a British charity shouldn't have called itself after an American event/location when we have plenty of our own to choose from).
Do remember, however, that there are other countries in the world that adopted different (and far more effective) policies in response to AIDS, and that by the standards of developed liberal democracies, the US is poorly governed, and has been for decades.
That’s what social workers are trying to do to my same sex attracted daughter. They keep calling her another name and male pronouns and referred her to Tavistock behind our back. I refuse to affirm so she doesn’t talk to me. Groomers and nonces the lot of them.
Dear lord this is grim. It is literally transing the gay away. All I can suggest is that there are now organisations that will have your back on this issue: Sex Matters, LGB Alliance, Free Speech Union etc.
Sadly my daughter is deep in the cult. She also reported me to police for deadnaming her. I think this also came from the social worker. My daughter is very easily manipulated.
"This absence of theory of mind—common but not universal when dealing with people unlike oneself—has implications. " And it seems that empathy not only does not counter the eg male female gap but rather adds to it. Without evolutionay psychology how can one understand one's own mind, let alone anyone else's?
To whom you are attracted sexually is purely subjective and therefore cannot reasonably be contested by an outside observer. Where you decide to live your life on a spectrum of superficial, stereotypical male to female attributes (and we all do) is also purely subjective and similarly cannot be questioned. However, your biological sex reflects an objective reality which cannot be changed by your subjective personal view and futile attempts to do so can result in serious health impacts to you as well as actual harms to members of the sex you are impersonating (especially women). Finally, others who are grounded in objective reality should never be forced to accept your subjective version of your actual biological sex.
It can be contested and could be measured accurately in an unconscious person, much like a reflex arc. It’s embedded in the hypothalamus.
Virtually everyone who wasn't homosexual and opposed 'the gay' knew this would happen. They were mocked and called 'homophobic'.
Anita Bryant was right.
Every 'gay activist' was wrong.
At one time I was supportive but homosexual supremacism has made me the enemy of 'gay' everything.
It became apparent to me some time ago that the transgenderism movement would eliminate homosexuality and thus homosexuals. If a boy seems to be attracted to boys, it is not because he is gay, it is because he is really a girl and we must change his body to conform to this fantasy. Likewise for girls.
It's the way they have done it in some countries for years. They castrate gay youth in Iran.
There are too many similarities between the practice of Islam and the leftist agenda.
I read Barnes’ book last year. What may have started as a genuine and honest program to help these children seemed to morph into a fast track to get the kids “fixed” and satisfy the parents and the overseers at Tavistock GID. It seemed many of the practitioners were very sincere and dedicated to their patients but the model of care, number of referrals, parents , etc overrode the actual care of these kids. I don’t practice in mental health but after reading this, it’s glaringly obvious a giant cookie cutter approach was used.
Not much new here. One demon faction fighting another to gain their Master’s favor.
Cass?
Tavistock?
Tardis?
Dunny door?
Chemsex?
Tender?
Eurovision?
I wanted to but didn't really understand this review ... guess I'm still something of a hick raised on the rim of western civ in Snohomish County. I do recall that Gavin McInnis used to remark on the wilder, frequency modules of gay sex compared to straight ...
There can be a biological basis for homosexuality that is just an option, it would combine with socialisation. Homosexuality could also be a by-product of our hyper-sexuality (men!). It’s likely to have more than one cause, because we’ve not found “it” yet, and people are trying hard!