I share your view that a demonic plot is afoot. Absolutely. Nothing else can explain the depth and breadth of atrocities being committed by the medical field. "Transgenderism" is but one of their forays.
I read in Matthew B Crawford's work that the first hospitals were started by Christians. The other day I was prompted to wonder, is this why the devil has taken up residence in the medical field?
The following is a quote from Philip Rieff, The Crisis of the Officer Class, which I came across in Aaron Kheriaty's The New Abnormal - The Rise of the Biomedical Security State (epigraph to Chapter 3, p131):
"The nightmare of the brave new world need not fear old-fashioned torture and gas chambers. The universal totalitarian institution will be the hospital, and the universal uniform of the new elites will be the white physician-therapist coast. The brave new world will be...one vast hospital".
Giorgio Agamben writes very interestingly about how we are setting up our political institutions to 'protect' "bare life" at the expense of citizens having any real say over what type of life we wish to live. We are being forced to accept "safety" over meaningful human values and those who determine medical safety increasingly shape what political categories we are allowed to have. Very concerning. See Agamben's controversial but very interesting (and readable!) text, "Where are we now? The Epidemic as Politics".
Have you read any of Dr David Healy's work? In particular I would recommend The Creation of Psychopharmacology. In one of the first few chapters he says one of the reasons for the book is to understand how as a society we arrived at a norm of giving psychotropic drugs to children.
It was published in 2002, so before transgenderism took off. But nonetheless explores what I consider to be essential antecedents to transgenderism (normalisation of medicating kids, plastic surgery moving from being restorative and reconstructive to cosmetic and becoming widespread).
I must also confess I haven't read all of it! The first few chapters and the last few. I found it compelling.
I don’t think the Latin mass is the answer but I admit that the trans movement has caused me to reflect on evil frequently lately. Grooming children to cut off their genitalia for someone else’s sexual pleasure, when they are still too young to even understand sex, is evil. And men conspire to do it - the doctors and surgeons for money, the queers for lust. But the focus on mastectomies for girls in their teens? That seems to be done for no other reason than to remove power from women. As feminists have pointed out, the exaggeration of cross dressing reveals misogyny. The cutting off of breasts seems to be about removing young women as potential sexual rivals but it is so extreme it does seem to go further - a callous and direct attack on female biology and as a consequence on the heterosexual family.
It is the family that gives me cause for hope. I supported the campaign for gay marriage because I thought that the gay movement’s argument for their right to form a family was persuasive. When 2 equals come together in love and want this to be publicly recognised that is a plus. When divorcees find one another and make new blended families that is a plus. When migrant families make multigenerational families that is a plus. All these families are very hard work, as are nuclear families at different stages, but these primal bonds of living closely together are very resilient. Those of us who have had the privilege of living in them are stronger for it.
As an historian I was struck by the lengths to which all Australian governments over many decades tried to destroy Aboriginal families, physically tearing mothers from their children and siblings from one another. It just didn’t work. First chance they had Aboriginal people found new partners and began forming new families and once they grew strong enough went looking for their long lost biological family.
It is my hope that young people’s need for love and security will see many leave the trans cult to form their own families. As those who go into teaching, nursing, training and coaching know, there are many ways to nurture and parent and love. (Pet ownership is the de facto role these days but the global pet industry throws a whole fresh set of environmental concerns.)
This is the direction I would like to see the biological realist movement go although feminists have a long held antipathy to patriarchal nuclear family so framing to include the broad sweep of biological realists from Christians to atheists will need to be precise.
This is tricky terrain and I appreciate your cautious push-back.
Whilst diversity in families is always going to be there, I think we get into trouble if we do not recognize that it is the natural reproductive family, grounded in secure and safe heterosexual marriage, which is the basic type of good family life in Western culture. In our push to embrace diversity, we seem to have lost contact with the idea that everyone who exists actually has a biological mother and a biological father. In reality, nobody actually has a biological mother who is a transwoman or a biological father who is a transman, or a lesbian father or a gay mother. This is just how it is. Whilst, of course, natural heteronormative families can go terribly wrong, and whilst some people never know who there father even is, and some women and children face terrible abuse from what evolutionary psychologists aptly call “bad men”, there still remains a natural ‘organic’ basis for the creation and formation of human life and socialization, which we now seem determined to technologically and legally ‘progress’ beyond.
The queer reform movement’s overt attack on heteronormativity is now imposing queer sexualities and queer linguistic, performative, legal, and cultural conventions on us all, and its aim is to make broadly understood sex-defined gender conventions and marital assumptions a thing of the past. Queer activists are now institutionally and legally empowered to label and punish anyone who won’t let go of old-fashioned sex-based gender conventions and heteronormativity as bigots, transphobes, genocidal Nazis, etc.
The manner in which the queer movement has disingenuously highjacked the gay rights movement is something well understood by the LGB Alliance, and gay psychotherapists such as Dr Az Akeem persuasively argue that ‘Gender Affirming Care” is exactly the sort of gay conversion therapy that we really should outlaw. I don’t have a view on gay marriage or queer or gay families raising adopted children. But the simple fact is (and I do not mean this in any judgmental manner) such families are contrary to nature. I have wonderful neighbours who I like very much whose family is literally two gay men and a poodle. And I consider their personal lives to be none of my business and may they find happiness in life. They are very good neighbours (indeed, I am often street shamed by how immaculate their garden is compared to mine). But being gay does mean that they cannot have children together. They solve that problem by the closeness of their own relationship and by having a wonderful pet. That seems to me to be a nature respecting way of solving their problem. So I think we still need to recognize that heterosexual marriage is the grounds of the biological realities of family life, and uphold and protect that, even whilst we are liberal and respectful towards people who have a non-heterosexual sexuality. But this is not where queer is taking us. Queer is determined to destroy the heteronormative family.
On the Latin Mass, fair enough, that was a bit of a tongue in cheek comment by me. The English language Catholic mass, as with any traditionally anchored liturgy (Anglican, Lutheran, etc) retains a God focus that is refreshingly at odds with much of the therapeutic, individualist, consumer mentality that has invaded evangelical Protestantism since the charismatic movement of the 1980s. So fair call. But yes, pray! There is a dark spiritual power at work in the queer movement’s strikingly successful push for cultural and legal hegemony, and I think this is a demonic power because it so opposes our natural humanity, and particularly female dignity, natality, and the natural progression from girl to woman and boy to man. This is an anti-humanist anti-naturalism with a seriously mephitic odour, for those who have the spiritual nose to sense it. Yes, work and pray!
Hi, Dr. Tyson. I'd like your feedback on the neurological front to this war in heaven/on earth for remaking the New Man and shaping his ability to perceive, or even recognize reality and conceptualize of metaphysical concepts like "God". I do think this is a sorely neglected front on the crusade to "Trans" humanity and achieve diabolical deification by destroying our individual consciousness.
You may of course, express your thoughts here in reply :)
I share your view that a demonic plot is afoot. Absolutely. Nothing else can explain the depth and breadth of atrocities being committed by the medical field. "Transgenderism" is but one of their forays.
I read in Matthew B Crawford's work that the first hospitals were started by Christians. The other day I was prompted to wonder, is this why the devil has taken up residence in the medical field?
The following is a quote from Philip Rieff, The Crisis of the Officer Class, which I came across in Aaron Kheriaty's The New Abnormal - The Rise of the Biomedical Security State (epigraph to Chapter 3, p131):
"The nightmare of the brave new world need not fear old-fashioned torture and gas chambers. The universal totalitarian institution will be the hospital, and the universal uniform of the new elites will be the white physician-therapist coast. The brave new world will be...one vast hospital".
Giorgio Agamben writes very interestingly about how we are setting up our political institutions to 'protect' "bare life" at the expense of citizens having any real say over what type of life we wish to live. We are being forced to accept "safety" over meaningful human values and those who determine medical safety increasingly shape what political categories we are allowed to have. Very concerning. See Agamben's controversial but very interesting (and readable!) text, "Where are we now? The Epidemic as Politics".
Yes, Kheriaty draws on lot on Agamben in the book. Agamben's work, including The Epidemic as Politics, is on my reading list!
Have you read any of Dr David Healy's work? In particular I would recommend The Creation of Psychopharmacology. In one of the first few chapters he says one of the reasons for the book is to understand how as a society we arrived at a norm of giving psychotropic drugs to children.
It was published in 2002, so before transgenderism took off. But nonetheless explores what I consider to be essential antecedents to transgenderism (normalisation of medicating kids, plastic surgery moving from being restorative and reconstructive to cosmetic and becoming widespread).
I must also confess I haven't read all of it! The first few chapters and the last few. I found it compelling.
Forgive me if you're already familiar with it.
Thanks for this recommendation KM; I have not previously heard of David Healy. Sounds like a fascinating book.
I don’t think the Latin mass is the answer but I admit that the trans movement has caused me to reflect on evil frequently lately. Grooming children to cut off their genitalia for someone else’s sexual pleasure, when they are still too young to even understand sex, is evil. And men conspire to do it - the doctors and surgeons for money, the queers for lust. But the focus on mastectomies for girls in their teens? That seems to be done for no other reason than to remove power from women. As feminists have pointed out, the exaggeration of cross dressing reveals misogyny. The cutting off of breasts seems to be about removing young women as potential sexual rivals but it is so extreme it does seem to go further - a callous and direct attack on female biology and as a consequence on the heterosexual family.
It is the family that gives me cause for hope. I supported the campaign for gay marriage because I thought that the gay movement’s argument for their right to form a family was persuasive. When 2 equals come together in love and want this to be publicly recognised that is a plus. When divorcees find one another and make new blended families that is a plus. When migrant families make multigenerational families that is a plus. All these families are very hard work, as are nuclear families at different stages, but these primal bonds of living closely together are very resilient. Those of us who have had the privilege of living in them are stronger for it.
As an historian I was struck by the lengths to which all Australian governments over many decades tried to destroy Aboriginal families, physically tearing mothers from their children and siblings from one another. It just didn’t work. First chance they had Aboriginal people found new partners and began forming new families and once they grew strong enough went looking for their long lost biological family.
It is my hope that young people’s need for love and security will see many leave the trans cult to form their own families. As those who go into teaching, nursing, training and coaching know, there are many ways to nurture and parent and love. (Pet ownership is the de facto role these days but the global pet industry throws a whole fresh set of environmental concerns.)
This is the direction I would like to see the biological realist movement go although feminists have a long held antipathy to patriarchal nuclear family so framing to include the broad sweep of biological realists from Christians to atheists will need to be precise.
I also don’t have a problem with prayer.
Thanks Libby for your always thoughtful comments.
This is tricky terrain and I appreciate your cautious push-back.
Whilst diversity in families is always going to be there, I think we get into trouble if we do not recognize that it is the natural reproductive family, grounded in secure and safe heterosexual marriage, which is the basic type of good family life in Western culture. In our push to embrace diversity, we seem to have lost contact with the idea that everyone who exists actually has a biological mother and a biological father. In reality, nobody actually has a biological mother who is a transwoman or a biological father who is a transman, or a lesbian father or a gay mother. This is just how it is. Whilst, of course, natural heteronormative families can go terribly wrong, and whilst some people never know who there father even is, and some women and children face terrible abuse from what evolutionary psychologists aptly call “bad men”, there still remains a natural ‘organic’ basis for the creation and formation of human life and socialization, which we now seem determined to technologically and legally ‘progress’ beyond.
The queer reform movement’s overt attack on heteronormativity is now imposing queer sexualities and queer linguistic, performative, legal, and cultural conventions on us all, and its aim is to make broadly understood sex-defined gender conventions and marital assumptions a thing of the past. Queer activists are now institutionally and legally empowered to label and punish anyone who won’t let go of old-fashioned sex-based gender conventions and heteronormativity as bigots, transphobes, genocidal Nazis, etc.
The manner in which the queer movement has disingenuously highjacked the gay rights movement is something well understood by the LGB Alliance, and gay psychotherapists such as Dr Az Akeem persuasively argue that ‘Gender Affirming Care” is exactly the sort of gay conversion therapy that we really should outlaw. I don’t have a view on gay marriage or queer or gay families raising adopted children. But the simple fact is (and I do not mean this in any judgmental manner) such families are contrary to nature. I have wonderful neighbours who I like very much whose family is literally two gay men and a poodle. And I consider their personal lives to be none of my business and may they find happiness in life. They are very good neighbours (indeed, I am often street shamed by how immaculate their garden is compared to mine). But being gay does mean that they cannot have children together. They solve that problem by the closeness of their own relationship and by having a wonderful pet. That seems to me to be a nature respecting way of solving their problem. So I think we still need to recognize that heterosexual marriage is the grounds of the biological realities of family life, and uphold and protect that, even whilst we are liberal and respectful towards people who have a non-heterosexual sexuality. But this is not where queer is taking us. Queer is determined to destroy the heteronormative family.
On the Latin Mass, fair enough, that was a bit of a tongue in cheek comment by me. The English language Catholic mass, as with any traditionally anchored liturgy (Anglican, Lutheran, etc) retains a God focus that is refreshingly at odds with much of the therapeutic, individualist, consumer mentality that has invaded evangelical Protestantism since the charismatic movement of the 1980s. So fair call. But yes, pray! There is a dark spiritual power at work in the queer movement’s strikingly successful push for cultural and legal hegemony, and I think this is a demonic power because it so opposes our natural humanity, and particularly female dignity, natality, and the natural progression from girl to woman and boy to man. This is an anti-humanist anti-naturalism with a seriously mephitic odour, for those who have the spiritual nose to sense it. Yes, work and pray!
Hi, Dr. Tyson. I'd like your feedback on the neurological front to this war in heaven/on earth for remaking the New Man and shaping his ability to perceive, or even recognize reality and conceptualize of metaphysical concepts like "God". I do think this is a sorely neglected front on the crusade to "Trans" humanity and achieve diabolical deification by destroying our individual consciousness.
You may of course, express your thoughts here in reply :)
Thanks SJ. I have found your comments on chat. Very interesting. Shall respond.