Notes on the Journey

Archive for the ‘lgbtq’ Category

Transgenderism Is Depopulation

The North Pole Is On Fire

GarnetCreek_7-15-2019

Massive fires are burning out of control in the Arctic Circle. Global Warming is accelerating exponentially. Human civilization is about to end. We will very likely all be dead by 2026 when the planet will no longer be able to support life as the atmosphere becomes Venus-like and plants are unable to sprout.

Chemical corporations and their close cousins, Big Pharma and Big Medical, have dreamed up a solution that they believe will reduce population while it keeps us all distracted from the fact that we are in the process of committing mass murder/suicide of all life on Earth.

download.jpg

I live in Iowa City. This spring the floods were so intense that farmers were unable to plant crops. Iowa City is home to Gender Enforcement Clinics, one for adults and one especially for children.

This upset me for awhile because I couldn’t understand why doctors would want to de-sex children. I did get caught up in trying to warn people about it. I wrote to various agencies – that had originally been developed to help women cope with male violence and male privilege – to ask them why they now believe that males and females are completely interchangeable and why it is that doctors are the only ones with the authority to determine what constitutes appropriate sex role stereotypes which are then enforced with cross sex steroids.

I was concerned that women were losing our right to have bodily privacy and that men would be invading our private spaces and taking away the Title IX protections we fought for by claiming that feeling like a woman literally makes you a woman, even if you have a penis. Of course they always answered me in terms that showed they believe that I am a bigoted imbecile. How ridiculous of me to get in the way of the mass sterilization project!

I follow climate data, which takes some diligence, since the United States government is officially closing it’s Arctic monitoring stations and sending all it’s climatologists packing. Yesterday I saw the headline The North Pole Is On Fire and it hit me, like a proverbial hot kiss at the end of a wet fist: TRANSGENDERISM IS DEPOPULATION. Our Corporate Chemical Fathers found a way to get people to flock to “gender clinics” to have themselves chemically sterilized under the ruse of “changing sex.” Because there is no actual sex change taking place. No chromosomes are being altered. Every cell in a person’s body remains their natal sex, no matter what kind of chemically-induced deformities develop that make a person APPEAR to be the opposite sex.

52676600_606372733167830_2444819067056422912_o

What is taking place at a gender clinic is that men and women, boys and girls, who are uncomfortable with our sex slavery gender role system and who have been led to believe will escape their pain by poisoning and mutilating themselves, are being DE-SEXED. Their ability to develop sexual gametes inside their testes and ovaries is being destroyed by synthetic corporate steroids. Planned Parenthood, which now has banned the use of the word WOMAN when referring to women’s healthcare issues,  is selling cross sex steroids to children because cross sex steroids are BIRTH CONTROL. Every medically transgendered person you see has been sterilized, neutered, rendered unable to bear children. (Except of course for the AGP perverts who get sexual thrills from dressing women’s clothes and going out in public to get a rush from the shock and disgust they see in people’s faces. It’s a sex addiction and they keep their intact penises while gaslighting everyone.)

People are flocking to these clinics to have themselves chemically neutered and paying to have themselves and THEIR CHILDREN sterilized. And any person, but especially any woman, who questions the wisdom of this sadomasochistic crap is subjected to severe sanctions.  

Every time I see a rainbow flag or the baby shower colors of the “tranz” flag, all I can see now are the mastectomy scars on a 12 year old girl.

51417490_316543689210116_8517355726371291136_n

And now I understand why this has happened and why it will continue and I am no longer going to actively oppose this lemming-like self-destruction. Transgenderism is a big distraction from the fact that we are now in the process of going extinct from carbon pollution. And it really is better if all the “tranz’ victims of the corporate medical system DON’T reproduce. More for me and my own grandkids as we all starve as the entire system collapses.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tips for raising a transgender child

52676600_606372733167830_2444819067056422912_oI took a break from monitoring the expansion of the sadomasochistc gender cult in Iowa City, but I picked up an issue of the trans rag, The Real Mainstream, that is published here and distributed in kiosks and the library and this story reached out and slugged me in the jaw. Fuck this shit. This is eugenic child abuse. Why won’t people wake up and see what these monsters are selling to the public?

 

“When I grow up, I want to be a girl.”

Genevieve Carter (not her real name) is, in many ways, a typical nine-year-oldthird-grader. She loves gymnastics and math, and is the embodiment of childhood enthusiasm. Her thick brown hair falls below her shoulders, and her bright smile frequently lights up her face.

She is also transgender.

“She used to say she wanted to be a builder,” her mom, Louisa, says. “Then she started saying she wanted to be a girl when she grew up.”

This was three years ago, while Genevieve was in Kindergarten. That summer, Genevieve’s parents started letting her choose whether to dress as a boy or a girl. She always picked to be a girl, and has been known as one ever since.

“Children as young as 2-4 likely have a concept of their gender identity.” Says Dr. Katie Imborek, medical director of the University of Iowa Health Care Offsite Primary Care and co-director of the UI Health Care LGBTQ Clinic. “It is not uncommon to see children this young displaying gender non-conforming behaviors. However, they may be somewhat older before they have dysphoria related to the way that they wish to express or practice their gender.”

“I never felt perfect.” Genevieve said. “I always felt that something was wrong, that something was missing.”

After attending kindergarten as a boy, Genevieve started first grade as a girl. Louisa met with the school over the summer and later with the teachers to make sure they understood and to answer any questions they might have.

“Public schools cannot discriminate against your child for being transgender.” Says Max Mowitz, Program Coordinator at One Iowa. “In Iowa, they are protected under the Civil Rights Act.”

If your family lives in a very non-affirming town, Mowitz says, ask the child what he/she/they wants. Most would rather be out, even knowing the backlash they might face.

The first thing to do when your child has told you he/she/they might be transgender is to start going to therapy/counseling. Not because it is a mental health issue, but so the child can talk about it with a professional. Make sure the mental health professional is LGBTQ affirming. Family therapy is a good first step to deciding how to support your transgender child.

Louisa explains that it is important for the parents to see a therapist as well. “Many parents feel a sense of loss. It is a valid feeling, but you need to make sure not to show it to your child, but to deal with it with a therapist instead.”

She also says parents may need to work on coming to terms with the fact that their child is looking and sounding different. “Make sure not to misgender them.” She adds.

“Discuss it with your pediatrician or family medicine provider.” Says Imborek. “You want a referral to a pediatric endocrinologist who can discuss options of puberty blocking medications, usually around the age of 9-14.”

Genevieve has an appointment every year to discuss how things are going for her. Her family is on the lookout for signs of puberty so she can get the hormone blocking shots.

Some adults worry a child might believe they are transgender, then change their mind after taking the puberty blocking medications. There is a small number of children to whom this does happen, but the hormone shots are not permanent changes.

The puberty-blocking medications prevent the child from the traumatic experience of going through puberty as the gender with which they do not identify. Experts agree that kids who grow up in the gender with which they identify have fewer mental health challenges than those who grow up as the wrong gender.

In the early stages of your child expressing their gender identity, parents may struggle with allowing them to express themselves. If your son starts painting his nails, you may worry they may be bullied because of it and want them to stop. “It is difficult to risk your child getting bullied.” Mowitz told me. “But it is more difficult for your child not to do it.”

“I got teased in Kindergarten for having girly stuff.” Genevieve explained. “I had a My Little Pony lunchbox and backpack. But I told a teacher and the girl was told to stop.”

“Your child will experience bullying from internalized homophobia and transphobia.” Mowitz explained. “The best thing you can do for them is to be supportive and affirming of who they are.”

As a parent, you may be LGBTQ-affirming in a general sense, yet still struggle with a transgender child. “You need to understand your own stance and then be their ally.” Mowitz says. “Speak up if you hear transphobic comments, and hold family and friends accountable.”

Genevieve’s only worries right now, as a nine-year-old transgender girl, are that she can’t “make a baby,” and that when she gets to dating age, people might “freak.”

But Genevieve also says she knows she has a good support system, and they will help her through it.

“I feel better than I did [when I was a boy]. Some days I actually feel perfect; I don’t feel like anything is missing.”

 

safe_image

“JAZZ” after his castration surgery to cxreate a fake vagina

 

MY RESPONSE:

Of course they will never allow my comment to be viewed, but this is the comment that I left: ” In a short time, this androcratic sado-religious practice will be revealed for what it is, eugenic sterilization and mutilation of gender non-conforming children. For the sake of profits for the medical cartel. Expect massive lawsuits. This insane practice does absolutely NOTHING to break down the sexual power hierarchy that creates the hallucination we call gender, in fact, it forces gender conformity through mutilation of healthy children’s sexual organs, along with experimental poisoning with drugs that have never been tested for safety in kids. These kids are the guinea pigs. Shame on all of you for promoting this horror.”

IT IS A GENITAL MUTILATION CULT!!! WAKE UP.

No child should ever have this done to them. What the hell is wrong with people?

51645237_316543739210111_5747171029554298880_n51659941_316543795876772_4496236799294701568_n51417490_316543689210116_8517355726371291136_n

62517763_10100260661140677_2568290078212227072_o.jpg

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds Protects Gender Non-Conforming Kids From Medical Abuse

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds Signs Bill with Discriminatory, Anti-Transgender Provision

 

Today, HRC reacted to news that Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds has signed into law the state’s Health and Human Services Department funding bill, which contains a discriminatory, anti-transgender provision that allows legislators to refuse state funding for critically important, often life-saving transition-related care for transgender Iowans.

“It’s deeply disappointing that Gov. Kim Reynolds is caving to the pressure from some radical lawmakers in the Iowa Senate, instead of protecting the rights and dignity of transgender Iowans,” said JoDee Winterhof, senior vice president of policy and political affairs at the Human Rights Campaign. “Gov. Reynolds had the option to line-item veto this provision and leave the rest of the funding bill intact, but she did not. This sends a strong message that she is not working for all of her constituents and a craven desire to please Iowa’s most extreme lawmakers. As a native Iowan, Iowa deserves better — and different — leaders.”

The discriminatory provisions were amended into the HHS budget without warning last Friday and in such a way that the House didn’t get to vote on whether to amend the language back out of the bill. These procedural maneuvers by Senate Republicans were a deliberate and brazen attempt to quietly rollback the rights of transgender Iowans. In March, the state’s Supreme Court ruled that Iowa’s Civil Rights Act protects transgender Iowans from discrimination based on gender identity, including in the provision of services via Medicaid. This legislation directly attempts to undermine that ruling.

In other states’ studies of the impact of providing transition-related care to transgender citizens under state programs, this type of care was shown to be cost-effective. 17 states and the District of Columbia offer these services as part of their Medicaid coverage and have not reported significant cost burdens.

 

FOR REFERENCE, HERE IS WHAT THIS WILL PREVENT:

Groups of girls signing up to be mutilated and sterilized together:

51659941_316543795876772_4496236799294701568_n

Horrific mutilation toward a goal that is the worst corporate medical lie of all time.

52676600_606372733167830_2444819067056422912_o (1)

 

Eugenic sterilization and mutilation of healthy body parts for corporate profit:

 

 

Swansea Shame: GET THE “L” OUT!

 

59636647_1214805318696628_7498247965140582400_n

59555372_1214807878696372_1780814503164772352_n

The Corporate Takeover of The Gay Rights Movement

LBTQ FACTS AND FIGURES

FOLLOW THE MONEY. Who benefits from the medical eugenic abuse of children?

Michael Biggs, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford

LGBT_wordsStonewall
Focus of British organizations: StonewallEquality NetworkLGBT Youth Scotland
Focus of U.S. organizations: Human Rights CampaignGLAAD
British grants: Big Lottery FundBBC Children in Need
Revenue of British organizations: Mermaids.

LGBT_wordsEqualityNetwork

Source: Stonewall’s annual reports to the Charity Commission.
Method: Adobe’s advanced search used to count the number of whole words in each pdf document: (1) lesbian, lesbians; (2) gay; (3) bi, bisexual, bisexuals; (4) trans, transgender, transsexual, transsexuals.
LGBT_wordsLGBTYS.png
Source: Equality Network’s annual reports to Companies House.
Method: A Scottish feminist counted the number of words in each document: (1) lesbian, lesbians; (2) gay; (3) bi, bisexual, bisexuals; (4) trans, transgender, transsexual, transsexuals.
LGBT_wordsHRC.png
Source: HRC’s annual reports.
Method: Adobe’s advanced search used to count the number of whole words in each pdf document: (1) lesbian, lesbians; (2) gay; (3) bi, bisexual, bisexuals; (4) trans, transgender, transsexual, transsexuals.
LGBT_wordsDCprotest (1).png
LGBT_wordsGLAAD.png
ource: GLAAD’s annual performance reports.
Method: Adobe’s advanced search used to count the number of whole words in each pdf document: (1) lesbian, lesbians; (2) gay; (3) bi, bisexual, bisexuals; (4) trans, transgender, transsexual, transsexuals.
LGBT_BigLottery.png

Source: Database on 360 Giving. All grants from Big Lottery Fund whose title or description includes: lesbian OR gay OR bisexual OR transgender OR transsexual OR LGBT OR LGBTQ.
Method: Sum of the value for grants whose description contains the specified text string. Description missing for some grants in 2014 and earlier years.

LGBT_BBCChildren.png

Source: BBC Children in Need, Grant Funded Projects … as at November 2017.
Method: Grants identified by searching each document for the following words: lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans.

LGBT_Mermaids.png

Source: Mermaids’ annual reports to the Charity Commission; reports for previous incarnation (charity number 1073991) obtained from the Charity Commission under Freedom of Information.
Method: Income deflated by Consumer price inflation time series.

Michael Biggs, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford

US Federal Civil Rights Laws — Developments Affecting Women

women-rights-india

US Federal Civil Rights Laws — Developments Affecting Women

Wednesday, May 1, 2019

SOME NOTES ON THE PROPOSED US EQUALITY ACT (S.788) 
by Dar Guerra


There is currently a Bill (The Equality Act, S. 788) in the US Senate Judiciary Committee which proposes to radically revamp women’s civil rights protections in the process of obtaining coverage for sexual orientation and gender identity. The bill has already been approved in the House. If it is approved by the Senate Committee it will go to the Senate floor for a vote, then to the President for veto or signature.
Current mainstream opinion is that it will not get out of Committee (previous similar bills did not) this year. However, a lot of money has been spent to obtain the support of billion-dollar corporations like Apple and Google this time around. It is being sold to the Senate and public as a simple expansion of existing law to remedy employment discrimination (though it is much more than that).
Also, if the Harris Funeral Homes case and its associated cases (Zarda and Bostock) are decided by the US Supreme Court before further Senate action and do not support trans and sexual orientation inclusion in federal civil rights law, this Bill will be the only egg left in the basket for transactivists and there will be even more pressure to enact it. Finally, if a Democratic Congress is elected in 2020 there is a very good chance of passage at that time, IMO.
This is some of the political context. Here is the text of the Bill:
The Bill has 12 Sections:
1. Title: “The Equality Act”
2. Findings and Purpose
3-9. Amendments to the Civil Rights Act of 1964
10. Amendments to Fair Housing Act
11. Amendments to Equal Credit Opportunity Act
12. Amendments to federal jury law: USC Title 6 Chap 121
The overall effect of these changes is to include sexual orientation and “gender identity” within the protected category of “sex” in all these laws, but there are a number of other new additions and qualifications too.
Changes to the current laws that may negatively affect women’s rights are summarized below with my comments:
1. The Bill is presented as supplanting current law on sex discrimination, by announcing its purpose is to “prohibit discrimination based on sex” in addition to gender identity and sexual orientation.
Comment: There is already a federal legal framework in place prohibiting sex discrimination. The current law on sex discrimination is adequate and has developed from more than 50 years of cases. There is no call from women to change current law. The current established line of precedents will be disturbed if the Bill is enacted as if it supplants the current nondiscrimination law, rather than supplementing it.
2. The overall structure of the Bill is designed to require federal nondiscrimination laws to expand their “sex” protected category to include gender identity and sexual orientation. “Include” is defined: “…including, but not limited to, consistent with the term’s standard meaning in Federal Law”.
Comment: This opens the “sex” category to further expansions. For instance, though LGBTQ is referred to often in the Findings, the “Q” is dropped in the proposed changes. Sexual orientation is defined as “heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual”, leaving out “Q”. “Q” is not referred to in the Gender Identity definition either. No attempt is made to define or include “Q”, probably because there is no specific objective way to define it and it is seen as a strategic liability at this time. The broad definition of “including” makes it possible to agitate to add it in later.
Further, whether pedophilia is a kind of sexual orientation is a topic of debate in medical and legal circles at this time. Transvestism and “drag” performers are often “included” as being types of gender expression. The expansion and general structure of this Bill would focus attempts to add such groups into the sex category and direct attention to issues of tiny minorities, away from the issues of hundreds of millions of U.S. women.
“Gender identity” (and sexual orientation) are therefore piggybacking into the “sex” category rather than presented as new protected categories. GI is a kind of discrimination with roots, history, and issues so different from the roots, history, and issues involving biological sex that it is confusing and chaotic to combine it with sex as a kind of sex discrimination. This structure negatively impacts the rights of women.
Women have no other specific categorical protection in federal law (except the right to vote). If the same legal protective category refers to both members of the active, aggressive, litigious, wealthy “L”GBTQ group and the group of women, then women’s rights will be permanently wedded to that group legally and in consequence, socially. This may mean that nothing specific to women may be dealt with separately. It will mean that language referring to women legally will change. The addition of the “L”GBTQ group may lead to a single-identity status without internal boundaries. Biological women and men may become appendages (as for instance if a new overall category is called “TGBLC”, with “C” standing for “Cis” women and men). The result will be a serious dilution of efforts to remedy inequality of biological women based on sex, which the original legislation was intended to accomplish.
3. The Bill also defines gender identity (and sexual orientation) as separate statuses. This appears to add two new protected categories to the federal nondiscrimination laws, as well as adding the very same categories to the existing “sex” category. (see sec. 7 (f) (3) of the Bill: “…a reference in that section 1106 to…sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity)…shall be considered a reference to ‘…sex, sexual orientation, gender identity…”)
Comment: This is unheard of in law. Separate and conflicting lines of cases would ensue. This at first appears to be poor drafting but is more likely an attempt to introduce the politically unpopular notion of separate categories to federal law by slipping it into a definition that may be missed.
4. The Bill resolves existing legal conflicts regarding shared facilities and events in favor of gender identity over biological sex.
The Bill specifically states that “shelters”, “care centers”, “salons”, “health care facilities”, and any “establishment” that provides “recreation”, “public gathering”, and “exercise” may not discriminate based on gender identity. “Establishments” are expanded to include non-physical places, and “individuals” who provide such services or programs are prohibited from such discrimination. “Restrooms”, “locker rooms”, and “dressing rooms” are also specifically included as such facilities.
Comment: Again, the definitional sections of the Bill are being purposed to make major legal changes. In this case, many pending cases in the courts dealing with these very conflicts between women as a class and gender identitarians as a class will be resolved by the Legislature, rather than by the courts. It is important to women to affirm their rights to privacy under Roe v. Wade in the context of these court challenges, and removing them from a precedential setting and reasoned argument and resolving them in this summary manner is not in the interests of women.
For examples, there are lawsuits pending involving a transgender male who has not undergone SRS, who is suing several small business women who provide intimate grooming to women such as bikini waxing. There are lawsuits involving girls who are distressed at being forced to share locker rooms with men. Women’s gatherings which are advertised publicly might not be able to limit attendance to biological women. Women’s religious organizations which limit rituals and church services based on biological sex would not be able to do so (the Bill also expressly prohibits exceptions for religious institutions). The courts are much better suited to sort out these conflicts.
The case of Roe v. Wade, so central to women’s rights, may be affected by this Bill’s enactment. Women’s right to privacy cannot easily be made legally consistent with men’s new right to “gender expression”.
5. The Bill supplements, or may supplant, women’s protections under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act by specifically covering “related medical conditions” of pregnancy.
Comment: Since trans women are covered under these new provisions, this provides a legal framework to support ongoing pressure from the trans community for medical support and insurance coverage aiding biological men to “chestfeed”, receive artificial wombs, etc.
6. “Conversion therapy” is pronounced to be “discrimination”, a legal term. However, this statement is found in the preliminary “Findings” section, which is ordinarily factual and is not usually part of the enactment, though Findings may be used to interpret the enactment itself. It says: “The discredited practice known as “conversion therapy” is a form of discrimination that harms LGBTQ people by undermining individuals [sic] degree of self worth, increasing suicide ideation and substance abuse, exacerbating family conflict, and contributing to second class status.”
Comment: The term is used here in the context of medical professionals counseling adults and children regarding dysphoria and a desire to change their gender. This statement interferes with good medical practice by intimidating professionals who will not be able to discuss NOT transitioning or address uncertainties of their patients without possibly being accused of violating federal law. This is not in the best interests of women and girls’ health.
By placing this statement in the factual “Findings” section, the drafters of the bill avoid the scrutiny applied to the rest of the enactments, yet manage to insert “conversion therapy” as a discriminatory practice into the deliberations of judges.
The promotion of one-sided “affirmation therapy” is especially concerning in light of the young age of girls consulting medical professionals.
7. Some of the most significant language of the proposed Bill is found in various sections on Statutory Interpretation and Definitions. “Gender identity” is defined in Sec. 9(2) (a) (2): “The term ‘gender identity’ means the gender-related identity, appearance, mannerisms, or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, regardless of the individual’s designated sex at birth”.
Comment: This definition greatly expands the currently-understood meaning of gender identity. The trans-representing organization Human Rights Campaign, for instance, defines it as “One’s innermost concept of self as male, female, a blend of both or neither – how individuals perceive themselves and what they call themselves.” https://www.hrc.org/…/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identit…
Medscape defines it similarly, and differentiates it from “gender role” which is observable and may be objectively observed: “Gender identity is defined as a personal conception of oneself as male or female (or rarely, both or neither). This concept is intimately related to the concept of gender role, which is defined as the outward manifestations of personality that reflect the gender identity. Gender identity, in nearly all instances, is self-identified, as a result of a combination of inherent and extrinsic or environmental factors; gender role, on the other hand, is manifested within society by observable factors such as behavior and appearance.” https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/917990-overview
The usual meaning of gender identity is therefore expanded in the Bill to include not only an internal, subjective perception, but the objective behavior that manifests in society from that role. Since the legal term “sex” is being re-defined in the Bill to include “gender identity”, it should be noted that the actions of heterosexual biological women contravening sex stereotypes are subsumed in “gender identity”. The term “gender identity” is expanded to cover not just transgender, but all gender-role-non-conforming (GNC) people.
“Gender expression” appears to cover persons who cross-dress occasionally, express sexual fetishes in their mannerisms, and no doubt other stigmatized similar groups. Their insertion into the new federal civil rights framework needs further study.
8. Sec. 9 (2)(a)(4) re-defines the legal term “sex” in the U.S. Civil Rights Act as follows: “The term ‘sex’ includes (A) a sex stereotype; (B) pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition; (C) sexual orientation or gender identity’ and (D) sex characteristics. including intersex traits.
Comment: Stunningly, this definition does not include “sex”. Insufficient attention has been given to the impact of such a proposed new nationwide law affecting sex discrimination that does not include the biological sexes. This omission appears deliberate, as trans ideology currently challenges the existence of biological sex. What then, is the remedy for a biological woman discriminated against in employment because the employer does not want to hire women? The erasure of the intent of the original prohibition of sex discrimination in employment, education, sports, and public facilities appears to be complete, unless women discriminated against on the basis of their biological sex can find a way into one of the other categories.
The word “traits” in the phrase “intersex traits” is undefined and vague. “Intersex” is not defined. The effect is to support the transactivist ideological position that sex is a spectrum.
9. Section 2 of the Bill sets forth twenty detailed “Findings”. A Finding is a statement of underlying facts and principles accepted by the Bill’s proposers and incorporated as providing the factual basis for the proposed legal action. The Findings include the following example:
a. Subsec. 10 finds that defined discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity by state and federal government violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Comment: This is a legal conclusion which could be claimed to control the Judicial Branch henceforward. It appears to overreach the usual scope of Findings provisions. It arguably affirms a new and separate cause of action for filing discrimination lawsuits.
The Findings also include the statement that barring discrimination in foster care, adoption, and child welfare services will help LGBTQ children. While this is true, it is worth noting that a number of religious organizations supporting such services for children may shut down.
10. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 no longer may be a defense for discrimination, according to sec. 9.
Comment: This may be of benefit to women, as use of this law to deny women abortions and contraception is increasingly widespread. However, to insert what amounts to a repeal of this federal law in the definitions section of this proposed Bill is unusual, and will lead to more confusion and litigation than if the repeal is separately enacted.
11. The established exception to the sex discrimination law in employment for bona fide occupational qualifications (bfoqs), is limited such that even if there is a bfoq (such as for a home health attendant position), “individuals are recognized as qualified in accordance with their gender identity” (Sec. 7 (b)(3), unlawful employment practices).
Comment: The bfoq exception applied to “sex” has always been limited to employment conditions in which the biological sex is a relevant consideration (such as home health carers). Under the Bill, then biological men who otherwise could legally be excluded from home health care of disabled or elderly women, must be included if their gender identity is “woman”.
 
CONCLUSION: The Bill would result in a complete overhaul of federal civil rights laws. It is likely to lead to decades of litigation because it is structured to include gender identity into the established “sex” protected category, which means there is no way of sorting out conflicts between the interests of women, including women’s right to privacy, and the distinct issues of gender identitarians. This structure is therefore unnecessarily and very substantially flawed. The introduction of a new protected category of “gender identity” (and also of “sexual orientation”) is a better way of structuring protections for these groups, if the Legislature wishes to adopt these new categories.
The established interests of women under the current “sex” category are diluted and erased to some extent by the overbroad and vague definition of gender identity. All protections relating to their right to associate with women, live with women, receive personal care from women, use facilities in which they undress or perform biological functions distinct from men, receive affirmative action to remedy prior de jure discrimination against women such as scholarships, participation in sports, shelter from domestic violence and rape, and many other protected conditions, are expressly opened to men who conceive of themselves as females, without any other qualification or the application of any objective criterion.
For these reasons and others outlined here, United States Senate Bill 788 should not be supported by women.

Disclaimers: This review of Senate Bill 788 is not legal advice. It is legal journalism and contains opinions. No individual or group has contributed to the writing of this article. This article does not represent the position of any group. The author is a women’s rights advocate, and this article does not purport to be a comprehensive, objective analysis of the proposed Bill. The article’s scope includes only potential impacts on women’s rights, and expresses no general opinion regarding the introduction of gender identity and sexual orientation into other relevant federal civil rights legislation. This article is copyrighted and all rights are reserved unless there is express permission of the author for a specific use.

© 2019 Dar Guerra

The Transgender Movement and Bad Stats: A Debunking Compilation

The Transgender Movement and Bad Stats: A Debunking Compilation

It has come to our attention, that, scattered across half a dozen posts, is debunking of a variety of statistics associated with the transgender movement. We fear they may be a little buried in some very long posts. We wondered how to fix this problem. The solution is this article.

Nothing excites readers like the Medium equivalent of a television clip show, which is exactly what this is. We’ve decided to gather all those statistics together in one handy article, so you can reference it in all your online Twitter debates, as God intended.


The US Transgender Survey is a source of many statistics about transgenderism you will find in international policy debates, arguments on the internet, and cited by LGBTQI+ activist organizations. It is run by the National Center for Transgender Equality (NCTE).

It describes its survey to the IRS with the following:

““SURVEY: THE U.S. TRANS SURVEY IS THE NEW NAME OF THE LARGEST SURVEY EVER DEVOTED TO THE LIVES AND EXPERIENCES OF TRANSGENDER PEOPLE. THE USTS IS A SURVEY FOR ALL TRANSGENDER IDENTITIES, INCLUDING TRANSGENDER, GENDERQUEER, AND NON-BINARY PEOPLE, AND WILL BE THE LARGEST AND MOST DIVERSE TRANSGENDER SAMPLE TO DATE. THE USTS IS OUR COMMUNITY’S SURVEY: THE USTS DATA SET AND RESULTS WILL BE AVAILABLE TO COMMUNITY ADVOCATES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND RESEARCHERS FOR YEARS TO COME.” [sic]

The IRS form lets us know how much that survey cost — $318,154. So, what information about the transgender community did $318,154 give us?

We took a look at the lauded NCTE survey, the National Transgender Discrimination Survey(NTDS) which is downloadable from their website, to find out about what information it can give us.

The problem is that the survey, despite its six figure costs, contains numerous methodological flaws, rendering it’s information useless. It isn’t worth discussing what the survey actually shows us, because it is a survey where the sample was built on self-selection. It isn’t random. The survey, which was run online, had as its first question ‘have you already taken this survey before?’, and warned that taking the survey repeatedly would not increase the number of entries into a prize draw (you can view a screenshot here). That meant the survey could have been taken over and over again by the same person. It was also meant to provide US-based statistics, but had no geo-location restrictions. That’s not a valid data-set. That’s not even going to pass an undergraduate statistics course. Supposedly NCTE cleaned the data-set, but I am not sure how you can clean a survey with such flaws. It should only serve as an indicator for further research at best, not a bible or a reason to bring about legislative change. It brings into question every statistic in the survey. Other criticisms were that it tried leading participants into a particular response.

Read more HERE

Radical Feminist: The Equality Act Would Hurt Women

Radical Feminist: The Equality Act Would Hurt Women

 

A Star Is Boring: Hollywood And Tranz

I watched the movie A Star Is Born starring Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper last night. I’m an old person and believe it or not, I never actually saw Lady Gaga perform before. She was not what I expected, at least not until she got rich and famous and plastic and hypersexualized and pornified. Bradley Cooper is not half bad as an actor and if he was really doing the singing and playing his part required, then I’m rather impressed with that. Overall it was corny and hokey and sentimental and not a terrible way to pass a couple of evening hours before bed.

But the reason I’m bothering to write a blog post about this movie is because of my feelings about the tranz actors playing the drag roles which are obligatory in every film about show biz.

Back in the Jurassic, one of the feminist standard books that women of my generation were reading was the book Daughters of Copper Woman by Anne Cameron.

In this retelling of Northwest Coast Native myths entrusted to her by Aboriginal women of Vancouver Island, Anne Cameron weaves together the lives of mythic and imaginary characters. This remarkable work of fiction offers a message of sisterhood and hope for women of all races, ages and countries.

One of the stories that stuck with me was the one about the women who acted as “sacred clowns” , walking behind people who were too puffed up, taking themselves too seriously, and making fun of them. This helped to create social cohesion.

I was generous enough at one time to see the drag phenomenon as a kind of clowning act, serving the function of revealing human foibles and folly,  lampooning traditional sex role behavior.  I watched Torch Song Trilogy  by Harvey Fierstein with my teenaged daughter with the idea that I was teaching her about tolerance for gay men. I thought drag was harmless fun,

But now that I know what I know about autogynephilia and Trans Rights Activism ,
I found that I was rather appalled at the performances of these men. I know these men despise women and that this cross-dressing (medical eugenics/sterilization/steroid poisoning/castration/plastic boobs) practice is an obsessive sexual addiction on a par with necrophilia. These men have a sexual fantasy in their minds about what femininity is and they have literally transformed women’s bodies into collections of dead objects to be pasted on their own bodies. They are not just “fun gay boys” as I once believed.

images.jpgThese sick men are grotesque clowns. But much worse than ordinary clowns who understand it’s just paint and all in jest.  Pantomiming women’s slavery is just not fucking funny anymore.  And imagine this: Imagine forcing people to acknowledge and respect your innate clown IDENTITY and getting laws passed (funded by uber-wealthy clown capitalists) to give clowns special legal protections and to give all clowns complete free access to all public and private spaces, everywhere, at all times, no questions asked. Heck, you don’t even have to put on a clown suit or show that you belong to a clown union. We are expected to instinctively know they are clowns or face prosecution for hate speech if we mis-clown them.  Oh! – and the public must pay for clown paint, clown drugs and clown surgeries.

 

Gender Dysphoria The Equality Act and Medically Transitioning Children

Gender Dysphoria The Equality Act and Medically Transitioning Children

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: