Tag Archive for: LGBTQ

What Some Schools Are Teaching Kids Is So Obscene, Parental Rights Activists Can’t Even Read It On TV

  • Under federal guidelines, TV and radio stations cannot air obscene content, some which parental rights in education advocates say are in school curriculums.
  • “When my kids were younger or just in my earlier life, I can’t think of a time that I would be talking about a children’s book, and I couldn’t discuss it on the radio. This is a new phenomenon where you cannot discuss what is in a book used for children,” Erika Sanzi, Parents Defending Education director of outreach, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
  • Parental rights in education advocates have been told to avoid talking about different types of sex and images which appear in several school districts’ sexual education curriculums.

Parents and parental rights advocates seeking to shed light on what is being taught in schools say television stations won’t even broadcast what’s in their school curriculums because it’s too obscene.

It is against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) guidelines to describe sexual conduct or feature any “grossly offensive” language on a radio or television broadcast. Parental rights in education advocates told the Daily Caller News Foundation that television and radio stations do not allow them to talk about the obscene curriculums and books allowed in schools.

“When my kids were younger or just in my earlier life, I can’t think of a time that I would be talking about a children’s book, and I couldn’t discuss it on the radio,” Erika Sanzi, director of outreach at Parents Defending Education, told the DCNF. “This is a new phenomenon where you cannot discuss what is in a book used for children.”

Sanzi told the DCNF that a producer at a television station told her she could not discuss the different types of sex that 10-year-olds learn in the “Human Growth and Development” curriculum of a Wisconsin school district due to FCC regulations.

“There was anal sex, oral sex and vaginal sex,” Sanzi told the DCNF. “She was like, ‘oh, my God, like you can’t say that.’ The main thing that she was telling me was that I couldn’t use explicit terms for body parts and I couldn’t describe these different types of sex that that the kids learn about.”

Sanzi said other television stations and radio stations have made similar requests, citing FCC guidelines.

Schools around the country often feature sexually explicit content in their curriculums; the New Jersey Department of Education’s sexual education standards teaches fifth graders all the ways “pregnancy can be achieved” and introduces eighth graders to all the types of sex, including anal sex.

Some school districts feature books such as “Gender Queer,” which depicts illustrations of the main characters masturbating and receiving oral sex, and “This Book Is Gay,” which teaches “boy-on-boy sex” and is described as an instruction manual for LGBTQ students.

Scarlett Johnson, head of Ozaukee, Wisconsin’s Moms For Liberty chapter, was told by a cameraman for WISN 12 News that the station could not air footage of her signs featuring images and language used in a Wauwatosa School District’s sexual education curriculum because it was too obscene, she told the DCNF.

“He said ‘I am going to have to blur the images so much that no one will be able to tell what they’re looking at.’ The language on there, there was anal sex, there was erection, wet dreams,” Johnson told the DCNF. “There were the graphic images of the condoms and then the images of the vulva, vagina, penis. And they all came straight from the curriculum.”

Johnson said to that because she cannot talk about the graphic images and material in schools, she is forced to talk about different aspects of sexual education curriculums that do not give the entire picture.

“Because of that, we never talked about the real issues. I’m just getting upset about it and upset that it’s always ‘oh, you just don’t want to read some some kindergarten book about gay parents or princess boys,” Johnson told the DCNF. “It’s so much more than that.”

Under FCC guidelines, obscene content is always prohibited, while indecent and profane content is not allowed to be aired between the hours of 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. when “there is a reasonable risk that children may be in the audience.” Sanzi said she understands parents who raise concerns that the content not appropriate for public broadcast is in school curriculums.

“I certainly can understand why a parent would say if you can’t say it on the radio, and you can’t say it on TV and you can’t read it in a public board meeting, perhaps it’s not appropriate for our eight-year-olds,” Sanzi told the DCNF.

The FCC, New Jersey Department of Education, Hillsborough School District, Wauwatosa School District and WISN 12 did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

REAGAN REESE

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Idaho Library Director resigns after relentless pressure from local MassResistance citizens over graphic children’s books.

‘What Does Semen Taste Like?’: California School Uses Planned Parenthood Lesson To Teach Sexual Health

Drag Queens Take Center Stage In Midterm Battle Over Children’s Education

ADORNEY: The Woke Mob Is Like A Spoiled Child — It Won’t Stop Unless It’s Told “No!”

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Whitmer Administration To Hire ‘Sexual Orientation’ And ‘Expression’ Consultant For Foster Kids

The administration of Michigan Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer proposed a contract for a child foster care consultant on gender identity and sexual orientation, according to documents made public by the Washington Free Beacon.

The Children’s Services Agency, which “oversees all child welfare services for children,” is seeking a “Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Expression (SOGIE) Consultant” as of Sept. 12, according to documents made public by the Washington Free Beacon. The consultant would be a part of the “Diversity Equity and Inclusion Unit” and would focus on determining the “needs and concerns of LGBTQ staff, families and children.”

The consultant would create resources such as handouts, books, trainings and videos based on the results of a survey given to the LGBTQ community, the proposed contract stated. Trainings may cover topics that affect the LGBTQ community such as “implicit bias” and “historical needs.”

Within in the five largest counties of the state, Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Kent and Genesee, a transgender youth service must be provided, the proposal contract read. The consultant will also focus on trainings and resources specifically aimed at the LGBTQ youth.

At the six-month mark of the job, the consultant will provide an update on the “successes and opportunities for growth” of the LGBTQ community, the proposal contract read. The goal of the position is to heighten “sensitivity” toward the LGBTQ community and issues surrounding the community.

In January, Whitmer’s Children’s Services Agency was called “just devastating” by a federal judge after a report showed that children were living in unsanitary conditions and were not monitored even after making threats of self-harm, according to the Detroit News. As a part of a settlement from a 2006 lawsuit over the dangers of the foster care system, the Children’s Services Agency agreed to make reforms to the system.

The Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

REAGAN REESE

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

CDC Allocated $85 Million For Grants Requiring Schools To Start Student-Led Clubs Supporting LGBT Youth

Parent Group Challenges School District’s Planned ‘Transgender Awareness Week’

American Classrooms Face A ‘Pandemic Of Antisemitic Rhetoric,’ Experts Say

New Poll Shows Democrats Losing Ground With Latino Voters

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Colorado School Board Proposes Toolkit Suggesting Educators Hide Student Transitions From Parents

A Colorado school board proposed a “gender expansive” toolkit that directs educators on how to address transgender and non-binary students, including keeping gender transitions a secret from parents, according to the Post Independent.

The Roaring Fork School Board in Carbondale, Colorado, heard public comment on Wednesday with plans to vote on the toolkit on Oct. 11, according to the Post Independent. The “Toolkit for Supporting Transgender and Gender Expansive/Nonconforming Students” advises educators to keep a student’s gender identity a secret from their parents if the student wishes and to make changes to school records as they see fit.

“We previously affirmed students’ rights without yet specifying supporting practices,” Roaring Fork School District Chief Of Student And Family Services Anna Cole wrote in a memo to the board. “We have since learned the importance of providing clear guidance and programmatic support, and have heard requests from students and staff for more explicit procedures. The toolkit is our response to these requests.”

The toolkit suggests a “gender tree” to explain gender identity and calls the soil, “societal influence,” which is the way “social, cultural and institutional influence” shape “gendered individuals.” Included is “fluidity and history” as the “rings of the tree” to represent a person’s “deeply-felt sense of gender” that can expand beyond man and woman to “genderqueer and agender,” the toolkit showed.

Under the “toolkit,” educators are advised to allow students to use whichever restroom and locker room corresponds with their gender identity. On overnight trips, students should receive accommodations “on a case-by-case basis with the goals of maximizing the student’s social integration.”

“It’s one thing to identify as a gender, but quite another to compel others to use special pronouns, and to open bathrooms and locker rooms to transgender students or allow transgender students onto sports teams of the opposite sex,” a board meeting attendee said to the Post Independent. “The rights of those not identifying as transgendered are being trampled.”

In Florida, a school board implemented a sexual education curriculum that links to Planned Parenthood documents and teaches 12-year-olds “all the ways pregnancy can occur.” An Ohio school is allowing educators to wear LGBTQ badges, despite parental pushback, in an effort to show students they are allies to the community.

The Roaring Fork School Board and Roaring Fork School District did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

REAGAN REESE

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Parent Group Challenges School District’s Planned ‘Transgender Awareness Week’

‘Aligned With Our Mission’: Seattle Children’s Promises To Keep Operating On Trans Children

Airline Shows Off ‘Inclusive’ Uniform Policy With Trans, Cross-Dressing Flight Attendants

‘All Options Are On The Table’: Dozens Of Tennessee Republicans Push Hospital To Halt Gender Surgeries For Kids

Teachers Refuse To Follow Trans Policy That Requires Them To Use Students’ Birth Names On Official Records

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

‘Shame And Horror’: Tucker Carlson Doesn’t Mince Words Blasting Doctors Who Perform Sex Changes On Kids

Fox News host Tucker Carlson blasted doctors and universities involved in performing sex changes on children Wednesday evening.

“Never has American medicine been more transparently a racket than it is right now. With the most basic ethical guidelines gone, completely ignored, we should not be surprised to learn that some hospitals have decided to monetize the mental anguish of children,” Carlson said in reference to recent news stories on hospitals providing sex change treatments to children. “Consider the University of California at San Francisco hospital. Supposedly it’s one of the best in the world, UCSF, despite its august reputation, is not even trying to behave responsibly when it comes to children who have been convinced by TikTok they should change their sex.”

Carlson claimed that this meant that groups like the Human Rights Campaign and other activists supported such procedures, while hospitals viewed the procedures as moneymakers, playing a video from one administrator at Vanderbilt University shared by Daily Wire columnist Matt Walsh that reportedly outlined how one procedure brought in $40,000.

Walsh posted a thread on Twitter featuring videos of officials at Vanderbilt University Tuesday. Walsh later tweeted that Vanderbilt took the page down after his initial thread on the social media site.

WATCH:

Republican Gov. Bill Lee and Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee called for an investigation into the practices at Vanderbilt in response to the reports. The university denied wrongdoing in a statement, according to Fox News.

“The truth is people who are horrified for this are not the bad actors. Vanderbilt is a bad actor. They just admitted on camera to castrating children as young as 13 years old,” Carlson said.

“Five years from now, we’re going to look back at this, like a lot of things we’ve done recently, like destroying public art and statues, and the Covid vaccine, so many of the things we done without thinking about it in an environment where no one is allowed to protest and we’re going to look back at shame and horror,” Carlson said.

AUTHOR

HAROLD HUTCHISON

Reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Stacey Abrams Claims Six-Week Fetal Heartbeats ‘Manufactured’ To Help Men Control Women

Chicago Children’s Hospital Promotes Sex Toys And Gender Affirming Tools For Schools

Hospital Assigned ‘Trans Buddies’ To Pressure Doctors Into Affirming Children’s Gender Identity

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The Military Went Woke. Now It Can’t Find Recruits.

The transgender pronouns, diversity training, and lesbian wedding ads aren’t working. 


The military is facing the worst recruiting environment since the end of the Vietnam War.

The Army is at only 40% of its recruiting numbers for the fiscal year despite raising its maximum enlistment bonus from $40,000 to $50,000. It now offers new recruits up to $10,000 for showing up to basic training in 30 days. And is no longer even asking them for a high school diploma.

“We’ve never offered $50,000 to join the Army,”  Maj. Gen. Kevin Vereen, head of U.S. Army Recruiting Command, said.

While the Army runs anime lesbian wedding ads, it’s pushing away the recruits it needs, young patriotic men from traditional backgrounds. When the Biden administration’s brass decided to mandate vaccinations, they automatically rejected the 60% of potential recruits who aren’t.

By Obama’s second term, male Army ROTC cadets were being forced to march in women’s high heels. Under Biden, that escalated to mandatory transgender pronoun training while figuring out living arrangements for men who suddenly decide that they’re really women.

The Army has stopped worrying about winning wars and is instead working to establish the “Army as a global leader in DEI”. That’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. Obama’s Army Secretary Eric Fanning’s had already ordered mandatory implicit bias training for “soldiers and employees in senior leadership and management positions”. The Army is now preparing for the prospect of accommodating men in women’s housing and deploying HIV positive men.

While the Army brass complains that it can’t find recruits, even with gay wedding ads, transgender housing and HIV positive deployment, it’s been kicking out unvaccinated soldiers.

In February, it reported that commanders had  “relieved a total of six Regular Army leaders, including two battalion commanders, and issued 3,073 general officer written reprimands to Soldiers for refusing the vaccination order.” As of June, 60,000 Army Reserve and National Guard soldiers are unvaccinated. That’s 12% of the Army Guard and 10% of the Army Reserve.

“Army readiness depends on soldiers who are prepared to train, deploy, fight and win our nation’s wars,” Army Secretary Christine Wormuth claimed. “Unvaccinated soldiers present risk to the force and jeopardize readiness.”

HIV positive soldiers don’t present a risk or jeopardize readiness, but unvaccinated soldiers do.

Instead of spending $684 million on recruitment, and a $4 billion 10 year contract with Omnicom, one of whose subsidiaries worked on the Biden campaign, the Army could try to stop actively alienating and firing the young men actually willing to fight and die on the battlefield.

And maybe then the Army might be able to stop lowering standards and issuing moral waivers for criminal records. Or forcibly extending the assignments of recruiters and making them work on federal holidays in the hopes of recruiting 60,000 active duty soldiers.

A Quinnipiac poll earlier this year found that only 40% of Democrats would stay and fight if America were invaded, while 52% would run away. 68% of Republicans would stay and fight. 70% of men would stay and fight in contrast to, understandably, 40% of women, and 61% and 57% of Hispanic and white people would stay and fight, in contrast to only 38% of black people.

Polls like these provide obvious common sense guidelines as to whom to recruit. Instead the woke army, like the rest of the woke military, keeps trying to recruit the wokes who don’t want to fight for their country and don’t even think their country is worth fighting for.

While the Army is the most troubled of the military branches, the Air Force is 4,000 personnel underwater.

“We have warning lights flashing,”  Maj. Gen. Ed Thomas warned. “Our ‘qualified and waiting’ list is about half of what it has been historically.”

Good thing the Air Force, like other branches, is screening recruits for “extremism” and the unvaccinated, and focused above all else on increasing its diversity quotas. The Air Force is less interested in recruiting in the South and bemoans the fact that 86% of Air Force aviators are white men. And those are exactly the people whom the Air Force brass no longer want.

“As Airmen in the U.S. Air Force, it’s our duty to acknowledge our biases whether we realize they exist or not,” airmen who are accused of being racist because they’re white are being told.

No wonder there are warning lights flashing in recruitment.

Navy recruiters are focused on the popularity of Top Gun Maverick to bring in new recruits. But the hit Tom Cruise movie has little relationship to the reality of a woke Air Force whose racialist brass are obsessed with critical race theory and whose planes don’t actually fly.

In the movie, the pilots fly F/A-18s and no one screams at them about their pronouns and their unconscious racial biases. Or their vaccination status. In real life, F/A-18E/F’s have a 51% mission capable rate. And the Navy’s woke leadership is focused on fighting “systemic racism:”

The Navy is offering a $25,000 “quick ship” bonus to recruits. “The Navy is the only U.S. military branch currently offering this high of an enlistment bonus for any new enlistee,” it brags, and suggests that the “the enlistment bonus could be as high as $50,000.”

But the Navy, like the Army and other services, can’t buy its way out of a morale crisis.

The United States military is never going to win a bidding war against corporations. Amazon warehouse team members make more than starting recruits. And they’re generally less likely to die. The only real military recruiting edge is a patriotic commitment to defending your country.

Military recruiters blame a national manpower shortage and their advertising strategy follows the familiar one of corporations going woke, appealing to the perceived wokeness and narcissism of Gen Z. Major corporations are being roiled by the radical activists they have recruited this way who are demanding that corporate leaders adopt not only their values but their agenda. Or else.

The brass trying to dress up the military in woke colors to make it appear that it shares their values are writing a big blank check that no one, not even Gen. Milley, wants to cash.

The Obama and Biden administrations appointed brass who gutted the services and replaced patriotic and nationalistic values with woke virtue signaling and radical politics. Now they’re discovering that when jobs are going begging, no one wants to join a woke military.

Patriots don’t and wokes won’t either.

Wokes willing to die for a cause are a lot more likely to join riots than the military. Those who see the military as serving their cause are, like actual white supremacists, exactly the kinds of “dangerous extremists” who are just joining up to gain experience for domestic terrorism.

There is a solution to the recruiting crisis. It doesn’t involve spending hundreds of millions on ad campaigns or anime lesbian weddings. The place to start is with the reasons for serving.

In the aftermath of the disgraceful Afghanistan retreat and of a War on Terror that has been effaced by political correctness, military service appears more senseless to many than it did after Vietnam. And in a nation riven with division, the military has come to reflect those divisions, with its brass firmly putting their thumbs on the partisan scale and adopting the leftist ideas and woke cultural values that are hostile to the majority of the men under their command.

The military, like so many institutions, went woke, now it’s finding out that woke leads to broke.

Rebuilding morale begins with a renewed commitment to national values and patriotism, to serious warfighting and meritocratic striving, and to a culture built on teams, not racial divisions.

The David Horowitz Freedom Center’s pamphlets, “Disloyal: How the Military Brass is Betraying Our Country” and “How Obama and Biden Destroyed the Greatest Military the World Has Ever Seen” charted the shape of the crisis. Our military can be rebuilt, but it will take cleaning out the brass who were put in charge to dismantle it and transform it into another failed leftist operation.

And while the woke brass stay, the recruits stay away.

AUTHOR

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

RELATED VIDEO: Military Went Woke – and Began to Crumble

RELATED ARTICLES:

Texas Republican Party Declares Homosexuality An ‘Abnormal Lifestyle,’ Calls On SCOTUS To Overturn Lawrence and Obergefell rulings

Canada: Trudeau Liberals accused of ‘funding hate’ at Muslim Association of Canada conference

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

BOOM: Exxon Prohibits LGBTQ, BLM Flags Outside Corporate Offices

The proof is the pudding or in this case, the numbers.

Report: Exxon Prohibits LGBTQ, BLM Flags Outside Corporate Offices

By Breitbart News, April 23, 222:

Exxon Mobil Corp. does not intend to fly an LGBTQ flag in front of corporate offices in June during pride month, according to a report.

Bloomberg News reports having seen a new Exxon company policy that prohibits “external position flags,” including the LGBTQ and Black Lives Matters flags, from being flown in front of corporate offices. “Instead, the rule permits a flag representing an LGBTQ employees’ group that does not prominently feature Exxon’s corporate logo,” according to the outlet.

The move has sparked outrage among the company’s PRIDE Houston Chapter, as members of the group are now declining to represent the company in the city’s June pride celebration, according to Bloomberg.

“Corporate leadership took exception to a rainbow flag being flown at our facilities” last year, stated employees in the group in an email. “PRIDE was informed the justification was centered on the need for the corporation to maintain ‘neutrality.’”

Exxon Vice President of Human Resources Tracey Gunnlaugsson provided Bloomberg News with a statement on the matter, which reads in part:

The updated flag protocol is intended to clarify the use of the ExxonMobil branded company flag and not intended to diminish our commitment to diversity and support for employee resource groups. We’re committed to keeping an open, honest, and inclusive workplace for all of our employees, and we’re saddened that any employee would think otherwise.

Of the company’s roughly 63,000 employees around the globe, 3,000 are part of Exxon’s pride employee resource group, according to Bloomberg News.

RELATED ARTICLE: Disney Has Lost $50 Billion In Value Since Woke War With Florida

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.

Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.

Follow Pamela Geller on Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

CORPORATE PEDOPHILIA: Massive Protests Outside Disney After Meeting Leaked Of ‘Gay Agenda’ To Indoctrinate Children

Disney is a pedophile company.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Disney’s Business Model is Turning Kids Into Dysfunctional Adults | FrontpageMag

DeSantis broaches repeal of Disney World’s “special privileges” self-governing status in Florida

Disney Removes Use of “Girls” and “Boys” May Kill “Prince” and “Princess”

DeSantis: Disney ‘crossed the line’ for criticizing Parental Rights in Education bill

A Letter from Concerned Disney Employees…..

‘This Is Huge’: FOUR Woke Disney Employees Arrested in Human Trafficking Operation

Disney Sexualizes Little Kids As “Woke” CEO Bob Chapek Advocates For Sex Ed And Transgenderism in Kindergarten

NOT THE ONION: Disney World Cancels ‘Boys and Girls’ Greeting to Be ‘More Inclusive’

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

With Americans Unable to Buy Gas, Biden Wants to Spend $2,600,000,000 on Global Gender Equality

Americans are struggling to pay for gas, buy bread and meat, but the progressive regime always has money to burn on its political causes.

President Biden will request $2.6 billion for foreign assistance programs that promote general equality worldwide, he announced on International Women’s Day on Tuesday.

How about promoting the ability of Americans to work, eat, drive, and be able to pay their bills?

“Ensuring that every woman and girl has that chance isn’t just the right thing to do — it’s also a strategic imperative that advances the prosperity, stability, and security of our nation and the world,” Biden falsely claimed.

No, moving money to assorted leftist international groups is not a strategic imperative for America, just for the Left.

It has nothing to do with our “prosperity, stability, and security”.

If Biden wants to aid our “prosperity, stability, and security,” he can start by stopping the spending machine so that inflation doesn’t eat Americans alive.

And if he wants to help women, he can stop smelling their hair, groping them, and sexually assaulting them.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden’s Handlers Want Skyrocketing Gas Prices. The EPA Just Revealed Why.

Saudi Crown Prince: ‘I do not care’ what Biden thinks

Saudi Arabia, UAE won’t lower oil prices unless Biden works with them in Yemen

Saudi, UAE leaders refuse Biden’s calls about the Ukraine crisis

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

The Red, Green, Black and Rainbow Supremacists in America

“We are trained Marxists.” – Patrisse Cullors, Black Lives Matter Co-founder.


QUESTION: Who are the true supremacists in America?

We know that the true supremacists in America label anyone and everyone who disagrees with them white supremacists, even if they aren’t white.

The true supremacists in America are associated with the colors: red, green, black and rainbow. Let us explain how the supremist domestic terrorist threat is multi-color, radical followers of Mohammed, non-binary (gender-queer), multi-cultural and multi-generational.

The Reds are Marxists/Leninists. The Greens are Islamists and the radical environmentalists. The blacks are Black Identity Extremists (BIE or BLM). The rainbows are the LGBTQ+ anti-science and anti-social extremists. What binds them together is the Democrat Party.

This eclectic group of supremacists are indeed strange bedfellows.

They are the epitome of the idea that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. In fact they are enemies of one another who have come together for one goal and one goal only, to destroy America’s unique Constitutional Republican form of government.

The Red Supremacists

The Reds fall under three categories:

  1. The Squad, the most radical members of the U.S. Congress. The six members of the Squad are Democrats: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, NY-14, Ilhan Omar (MN-5), Ayanna Pressley ( MA-7), Rashida Tlaib (MI-13), Jamaal Bowman (NY-16) and Cori Bush (MO-1). These individuals have lead the charge to push the Green New Deal, which has become the cornerstone of Biden’s BBB agenda, demonize Israel, embrace Iran and the Palestinians, embrace the LGBTQ+ agenda and attack white people. On July 18th, 2019 we wrote, “There is no doubt that the narrative of the Democratic Party is being driven by freshmen (no misogyny intended) Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, and Ayanna Pressley…The Squad felt empowered by then President [Trump] to take action to defend themselves. What has happened is that they have confirmed what President Trump tweeted [about them]. What follows is this Squad then works to control of the narrative of the Democratic Party. They instantly become the face of the Democratic Party via social media, news networks and headlines in print publications.” What we predicted has come true.
  2. Supporters of Communist China. We are looking at Communist China, not because of what Hunter Biden did there, but because his father is in full blown appeasement mode to kowtow to the Chinese when it comes to Taiwan and the South China Sea. Since the end of the Olympics China has ramped up its pressure on Taiwan. The  in an April 16th 2020 article warned, “Amid coronavirus upheaval, the Chinese government’s evasion and deception has remained constant. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) alone is responsible for the global pandemic and resulting consequential economic devastation. However, if the medical community had been skeptical of the totalitarian regime –and the World Health Organization (WHO) had not aggressively defended it –the outbreak may not have spread. Taiwan, kicked out of the WHO in 2017 at Beijing’s behest, was denied access to WHO data. Taiwan’s successful containment of coronavirus was an alternative possibility for the rest of the world; had Beijing’s reports been challenged instead of accepted…The most important CCP objective is to maintain control. Ultimately the party does not care about human rights, or even human lives. To protect itself, the Chinese regime suppressed life-saving information at the cost of 22,071 American lives, a number projected only to grow.”
  3. Supporters Russia and Putin. The Democrats and the Biden administration began by cutting our domestic oil and natural gas production and by doing so has turned the energy keys to Europe over to Putin and this has directly lead to the invasion of the Ukraine. Craig Rucker during a talk in Virginia said, “Efforts to go net zero have diminished the ability of nations to provide sufficient energy to meet demand, and this gives tyrants like Vladimir Putin an opportunity to provide that energy in the form of natural gas and rake in millions to fund his war machine.” Marc Morano took Biden to task on Fox and Friends explaining,  “Russian oil imports are at an 11 year high. We’re importing 600,000 barrels a day from Russia. And Russia’s federal budget is 40% based upon oil and gas revenue.” Finally we have seen Russia produces 3 times more gas than Europe produces.  Why?  Because climate activists, partly funded by Russia, blocked fracking.

Walt Disney appeared before the House Committee on Un-American Activities in 1947. He warned about how his company and America was at risk of a Communist take over. Watch:

The Greens

The greens fall into two categories, the radical followers of Mohammed and the radical environmentalists. This combined green alliance, along with the Reds, has caused the following:

  1. Democrats and the Biden administration appeased the Muslim members of the party by taking a harsh stand against Israel and the Jewish people. On February 16, 2022, Biden killed the Israeli Pipeline Project thus empowering Russia’s energy dominance in Europe. According to The Hill, “The proposed pipeline would have given Europe an alternative to its heavy dependence on Russian gas. It would have conveyed about 10 billion cubic yards of Israeli and Cypriot natural gas to Europe via Greece and Italy each year.”
  2. The Radical Environmentalists. One of the first things Biden, via a January 20th, 2021 Executive Order, is kill the Keystone XL pipeline to appease the environmentalist lobby. The Executive Order titled “Executive Order on Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis” effectively undid everything President Trump did during his time in office to make America energy independent, encourage drilling in Alaska, providing cheap and reliable energy to the American people and give leverage to America in negotiations with other oil and natural gas producing countries like Russia.
  3. Giving Iran the Green Light to go Nuclear. It was announced by the Russians that the U.S. and Iran have reached a nuclear deal. National Review on March 4, 2022 reported, “President Joe Biden vowed this week to isolate Russia, yet his negotiators stayed at the table with their Russian counterparts in Vienna, putting the finishing touches on an Iran nuclear deal 2.0 that will benefit Russia and Iran and endanger the U.S. and its allies. The new agreement is even worse than the 2015 deal made by the Obama administration. Biden’s version would lift U.S. terrorism sanctions on Iran, the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, and leave Tehran’s illicit nuclear infrastructure intact without first demanding a full accounting of Iran’s secret nuclear work.” Death may finally be coming to America solely because of Biden’s appeasement of the mullahs.

The Blacks

Democrats continue to appease Black Identity Extremists (BIE). Black Identity Extremists were identified by the FBI as a threat to our national security. A report published by the Federal Bureau of Investigation on August 3rd, 2017 stated, “The FBI assesses it is very likely that BIEs’ perceptions of unjust treatment of African Americans and the perceived unchallenged illegitimate actions of law enforcement will inspire premeditated attacks against law enforcement over the next year. This may also lead to an increase in BIE group memberships, collaboration among BIE groups, or the appearance of additional violent lone offenders motivated by BIE rhetoric. The FBI further assesses it is very likely additional controversial police shootings of African Americans and the associated legal proceedings will continue to serve as drivers for violence against law enforcement. The FBI assesses it is likely police officers of minority groups are also targeted by BIEs because they are also representative of a perceived oppressive law enforcement system.” Black Identity Extremists include Black Lives Matter, which was co-founded by a self-identified Marxist, some members of the Democrat Black Caucus and black members of the Biden administration and cabinet.

On September 29th, 2020 wrote:

The organization Black Lives Matter (BLM) is not about black lives. BLM is a Marxist organization disguised as a civil rights organization. Instead of improving race relations, BLM exploits racial tensions to collapse America from within and replace our constitutional republic with socialism/communism. BLM is the ultimate humanitarian hoax being perpetrated on unsuspecting Americans who still believe that BLM cares about black lives. They don’t.

Patrisse Cullors, Black Lives Matter Co-founder, said, “We are trained Marxists.”

The Reds and Black are all in this together.

The Rainbows

The Rainbow LGBTQ+ agenda. The LGBTQ+ radicals have many friends in the Democrat Party, the White House and in the Biden Cabinet. We did a series on how Biden, Democrats and the media have sissyfied America. Biden’s Gay Cabinet includes, Karine Jean-Pierre Kamala Harris’ chief of staff, Pili Tobar deputy White House communications director, Denise Juneau, Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation and Rachel Levine a four star general and the Assistant Secretary for Health. Non-binary, a.k.a. gender queer, individuals are running the Biden Build Back Better agenda and pushing public policies and legislation that empowers gays over straights. These individuals are harmful to traditional families and anti-Muslim, anti-Christian and anti-Jewish.

Watch Woke Trans Activism = Communist Revolution:

Watch this video in which the globalists proclaim that “transhumanism” will eliminate free will and souls as if its a good thing:

The Rainbow LGBTQ+ agenda is anti-science, anti-feminist, anti-women’s rights and anti-social.

What is ironic is that those Democrats who are Muslim, Jews and Christians have fully embraced the LGBTQ+ agenda that has sissyfied our young men and put cis-gender males into women’s sports, on movie screens, in the Biden cabinet and in the Congress. Sodomy is a sin in all religions. Sin is now rising and has become a tsunami because of Democrat policies.

Watch Florida Governor Ron DeSantis take on this issue head on:

The Bottom Line

The current cancel culture/cultural war against America is Red, Green, Black, and Rainbow.

These minority groups have taken control of the Democrat Party and have lead to the election of Joseph Robinette Biden Jr.

You see the danger to America is not Joseph Robinette Biden Jr., but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of a Biden presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgement to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president.

The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Biden, who is a mere symptom of what ails America.

Blaming the prince of fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Biden, who is, after all, merely a fool. The Republic is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their president!

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

The Last Free-Thinker in Corporate America

This week brought the story of a courageous woman who sailed against the prevailing winds blowing through corporate America.  Jennifer Sey was ousted from her position as president of Levi’s for her outspokenness against school closures and mask mandates.  The company offered to make her CEO if she would just shut up.  When that didn’t work, they offered her a million dollar severance package in exchange for her silence.  She refused, in order to be free to speak her mind.  She told a news show:

“Well, for me, this whole thing [Covid-19 public health measures] has culminated [into] really being about the silencing of dissent and really not being able to hold a viewpoint that is outside whatever the mainstream narrative is – the ‘orthodoxy.’ I was very outspoken that closed schools were harming children – in my city, San Francisco, and in cities across the country – and that seemed like a very sensible position to me. It seems folks agree with that now, but it was unacceptable and I have to be able to say that. 

I don’t think schools would be open if parents like me weren’t saying that all along. So it’s a broader issue in the culture – it’s not a Levi’s issue, it’s not specific to Levi’s – the silencing of dissent is [a widespread issue].”

She pointed out that the Levi’s brand stands for rugged individualism, which suggests the company has turned its back on its long-held values.

There’s a lot of that going around these days, as corporate America has gone woke.  The latest examples include M&M’s going genderless, green for example losing the high heels and sultry voice.

Brother printers giving pro-LGBT books to preschoolers in Memphis.

Kraft Peanut Butter promoting preferred gender pronouns to kids.

Disney seeking to “transform culture” with its woke diversity and inclusion program.  Disney, it seems these days, never misses an opportunity to gratuitously insert a gay character into what is supposed to be family entertainment.  Critics call it ‘rainbow capitalism’.

American Express rolled out what is now standard issue Critical Race Theory training for its employees full of the usual microaggression and privilege blah-blah.  Workers are being told capitalism is inherently racist and, therefore, they are engaged in racist activity every day they show up for work.  CRT derives from Karl Marx whose goal was to replace all private companies with state ownership of the means of production.  I wonder if American Express executives know that.  I also wonder if woke corporations regret their contributions to the trained Marxists of Black Lives Matter now that its leadership has disappeared and $60 million has gone missing.

Then there’s Bed Bath & Beyond dropping MyPillow because they didn’t like Mike Lindell’s politics or his lack of confidence in election results, a view which just happens to be shared by one out of three Democrats.

The Kellogg Foundation is bankrolling a $500 a month guaranteed basic income to hundreds of illegal aliens in New Mexico. That’s a lot of corn flakes.

Don’t get me wrong. I like free markets. So do what you want.  If you want to play at left-wing activism instead of building shareholder value, fine.  Whatever sells.  If your soul sells, sell that, too.  Just don’t ask me to support you or buy your products when you’ve shown your contempt for me and millions like me on the political Right.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

Florida House Committee Passes Bill Banning Gender Ideology Discussions In Schools

A Florida House committee passed a bill banning discussions about gender ideology and sexual orientation in primary level classrooms on Thursday.

The House Education and Employment Committee overwhelmingly passed the ”Parental Rights in Education Bill,” also known as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill, to prohibit teachers from discussing LGBTQ-related issues with primary level students. The legislation intends to protect the “fundamental rights of parents” to choose what their children are taught.

“A school district may not encourage classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in primary grade levels or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students,” the bill states.

The legislation allows for a parent to pursue “declaratory or injunctive relief” against a school district that violates the new rules. The court may award parents attorney fees and court costs in the midst of the legal action.

The bill also requires school administrators to notify parents if there are any changes to a student’s “mental, emotional, or physical health or well being.” School personnel will be required to encourage students to openly talk with an adult about their wellbeing and are prohibited from withholding any information regarding their child’s physical and mental wellbeing from the parents.

The bill was introduced by Republican Florida state Sen. Dennis Baxley, who said the legislation “defends” a parent’s responsibility, according to The Hill.

“This bill is about defending the most awesome responsibility a person can have: being a parent,” Baxley said. “That job can only be given to you by above.”

Chasten Buttigieg, husband of transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg, called out Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis for allegedly making his state a difficult place for LGBTQ children to “survive in.”

“This will kill kids, @RonDeSantisFL. You are purposefully making your state a harder place for LGBTQ kids to survive in,” Buttigieg said. “In a national survey (@TrevorProject), 42% of LGBTQ youth seriously considered attempting suicide last year. Now they can’t talk to their teachers?”

A separate Trevor Project study found that LGBTQ students learning about the issue resulted in a 23% drop in suicide attempts last year. The Trevor Project’s director of advocacy and government affairs, Sam Ames, said the bill will harm LGBTQ students.

“This bill will erase young LGBTQ students across Florida, forcing many back into the closet by policing their identity and silencing important discussions about the issues they face,” Ames said. “LGBTQ students deserve their history and experiences to be reflected in their education, just like their peers.”

Jon Harris Maurer said teachings about sexuality and gender identity is “prejudicial” and insults LGBTQ students or those with LGBTQ parents. He argued that those that support the bill cannot call themselves “allies of the LGBTQ community.”

The bill requires the Department of Education to review and update school counseling, professional conduct principles and other guidelines to ensure they are in accordance with the new regulations by June 30, 2022.

COLUMN BY

NICOLE SILVERIO

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

K-12 Schools Bringing In Drag Queens To Teach Gender Ideology

Virginia’s Parents Revolted Against CRT In Schools. This Is What Their Kids Were Being Taught

Subverting Society by Replacing Biological Sex with Sodomy

Nebraska radical curriculum derailed after pressure by parent’s group

This transgender ‘folly’ is going to collapse, just as Eugenics did

“This very, very complex thing is being over-simplified,” says a world expert on the transgender phenomenon.


Dr. Paul R. McHugh is University Distinguished Service Professor in the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, where he served as Director of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences and Psychiatrist-in-Chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital from 1975 to 2001.

In a distinguished career that began with his training at Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, Dr. McHugh has taught at Cornell, the University of Oregon, and since 1975 at Johns Hopkins. He was the co-creator of the Mini Mental States Examination, one of the most widely used tests of cognitive function, and he sponsored the work that resulted in The 36-Hour Day, a bestselling guide for families and caregivers of patients with Alzheimer’s and other dementia conditions.

In the 1980s and 1990s, Dr. McHugh and Dr. Phillip R. Slavney published The Perspectives of Psychiatry and Psychiatric Polarities, which may be said to have embodied the tenets of the influential “Hopkins School” of the discipline. For the wider public, Dr. McHugh has published on psychiatry — both its findings and its failings — in The American Scholar, First Things, Commentary, Public Discourse, the Weekly Standard, and The New Atlantis. His books for general readers are The Mind Has Mountains (2006), a collection of his essays, and Try to Remember (2008), which concerns his role in debunking the “recovered memory” fad in psychotherapy. In 2015, the Paul McHugh Program for Human Flourishing was established in the Johns Hopkins Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences.

I note that Dr. McHugh is not Professor Emeritus at Johns Hopkins, which is worth remarking upon because this week he turns ninety years old. He is still a full-time faculty member in the university’s school of medicine — teaching, mentoring psychiatry students, and caring for patients. We spoke on Monday after he had spent the morning in the psychiatry department’s weekly grand rounds.

Matthew Franck: In Psychiatric Polarities, you and Phillip Slavney wrote that “mental life is dependent on the brain. … Yet mind and brain are not identical. Indeed, they are so different that the nature of their relationship is the fundamental mystery in psychiatry and the source of many of its conflicts.” Would it be fair to say that the successes of modern psychiatry stem from work that recognises this mysterious relationship of mind and brain, while its failures stem largely from therapeutic interventions that ignore this mystery or try to explain it away?

Paul McHugh: I think that mystery remains a great mystery, but is perhaps best resolved at the moment by seeing mental life as an emergent property of the brain. It emerges from it, but it doesn’t emerge as smoke; it remains an interactive process.

There are some aspects of human disorders and human mental life that depend upon the brain for their sustaining, but they don’t depend upon the brain for their generation — things like grief, and maybe post-traumatic stress disorder, and things of that sort. They depend upon an appreciation of the person, of what was there and was lost (for grief), or what was there and was frightening (for PTSD). The brain follows the mind in that way.

So the fact is that the narrative capacity of the human mental experience can be the source of various forms of psychiatric distress that psychiatrists try to help the patient both understand and perhaps re-script in a way that makes living with it more easy. And none of that actually depends upon the psychiatrist directly tinkering with the brain’s substance or the material itself.

So when we were, in the Polarities, saying that this is the issue, these two things, we didn’t mean to say that everything that the psychiatrist could successfully do would depend upon his working with the brain. He could make lots of mistakes there, as the frontal lobotomy experience demonstrated better than any, and then some abuse of medications today demonstrates.

But he could also make mistakes in the narrative by presuming things that were not there in actuality but were put in by him, or her, the psychiatrist, because they made a better story. I don’t think all the mistakes that psychiatrists make are related either to the area of the brain they work in or the area of mental life and its trajectory. They can make mistakes in both places.

MF: I know that you and your colleagues at Hopkins have really merged these questions in neuropsychiatry so that you’re attending to both brain and mind. But there have been schools of thought in psychiatry that emphasise one overwhelmingly at the expense of the other.

PM: Yes indeed, and that is the thing that we’re trying to avoid by making it clear that there are different methods that employ one or the other, or sometimes both together in a coherent way. But you know, I did train in neurology as well as psychiatry. My teachers made sure that at least I was exposed to the ideas on both sides of that very interesting emergent property.

MF: In one of your essays in The Mind Has Mountains, you observe “the power of cultural fashions to lead psychiatric thought and practice off in false, even disastrous, directions.” Two such fashions that captivated psychology and psychiatry in recent decades were “multiple personality disorder,” also known as “dissociative identity disorder,” and the idea of “repressed sexual memories” from childhood that adults can “recover” under therapy. What accounts for such therapeutic fevers gripping the mental health professions?

PM: That’s a very good question. I’m not sure I understand why we’re so vulnerable to this. It may well be in part that we are a discipline that cannot often use bodily material, like an autopsy or something, to prove ourselves right or wrong.

We have to use the power of persuasion to persuade patients and others to thinking the way we want them to think. And although that’s the fundamental principle of psychotherapy — psychotherapy is a persuasive enterprise, after all, that’s what it is, it’s nothing else but persuasion — persuasion, not only in psychiatry but maybe even in a democracy, its great vulnerability, as Tocqueville said, is the tyranny of popular sentiments.

The tyranny of popular opinion can hold in thrall a whole population, after all, for a while. I think psychiatry is vulnerable to that because it works with phenomena of mental life and problems of mental behaviour, and therefore is liable, without another kind of tradition or another source of knowledge, to be carried away. It happens about every ten or fifteen years.

MF: I recall your saying as well in that book that psychiatrists don’t have the sort of grounded reality of specialising in the skin or the eye or something about which there cannot be endless arguments once the evidence comes in.

PM: That’s right. The material evidence of the physical body has a great salutary effect on people who have strong opinions about things, as William Osler said long ago. He said, you know the great thing about the consultant is, he comes in and does the rectal that you forgot to do. The great thing about doctoring is that it’s a fundamental business; you stand on the bottom of life, and it’s one of the joys of it.

Why, though, psychiatry gets swept by these fantasies is still a further question. In part, I used to just think it was the Freudian commitment to suspicion of other people and of society and everything — it was one of the schools of suspicion —

MF: Sure, that there’s a dark id everywhere you look.

PM: That’s right, that somehow or other we’re always under the control of somebody else. Nietzsche and Marx and Freud were all of the same kind of calibre. I used to think that. I also think there’s a love on the part of psychiatrists for being men of the secret and having their own magical secret.

If somebody comes along and tells you “Here’s a wonderful magical secret that will open to you the nature of the world and the nature of humankind,” it’s usually silly in the long run. That’s usually picked up by people who have no traditional background of their own. After all, it’s a kind of golden calf; you come down from the mountain and really try to bring them something, and what do you find them doing? Dancing around the golden calf.

MF: The appeal is to make some idol of a solution to some big problem.

PM: That’s right. And although Moses thought it was only his people, his people were — are, of course — all of us.

MF: In 2016, you and Dr. Lawrence Mayer published a 143-page monograph in the pages of The New Atlantis titled “Sexuality and Gender: Findings from the Biological, Psychological, and Social Sciences.” This publication generated a good deal of controversy, coming not long after the Supreme Court’s creation of a constitutional right for same-sex couples to marry, and just as the issue of “transgenderism” was beginning to heat up. What prompted you and Dr. Mayer to undertake this project, and what should we take away from it?

PM: I was prompted by the idea that I ought to at least say something in this matter, because so many ideas were floating around, and if I couldn’t speak, who could? And when I looked at the scientific evidence of these things, the very idea that these things were immutable, and discrete, and people were “born that way,” it didn’t work from the science point of view, and they might, in our society, not be such good ideas, not good things for people to believe. So I thought, “Well, if I can’t speak at my stage and my development, nobody can speak, and I’ll see what happens.” So, it was very interesting. I found it extremely interesting.

It caused a ruckus, and that didn’t surprise me. But what did surprise me was how many people would say, well, you know, “This is just wrong,” but would never show me any evidence. Dean Hamer, whom I have admired and thought of as a very coherent geneticist and student of homosexuality down in NIH, said “This has all just been disproven, it’s bad science,” but he never pointed out anything or said, “Here’s the article that proves it.”

He was saying, “Look, this is the way we read the science today,” and he spent a lot of time talking about how this wasn’t a peer-reviewed article. Of course it wasn’t a peer-reviewed article. It wasn’t intended to be put out into the science literature. It was to try to evaluate what we thought the science literature taught to the ordinary public, like somebody would write in the New Yorker. And the useful way to refute such a thing is not to say “Those guys are stinkers!” or something. They should say “He’s overlooked something, and here’s the thing that he’s overlooked.”

It turned out that afterwards — long afterwards — people would say, “Well, you know, he’s right, but he shouldn’t have said it.” What it came down to was “He should have kept his mouth shut.” The reason they keep saying it is the usual explanation for not wanting to get all the truth out — that somehow it’ll encourage people to abuse other folks. Of course, we didn’t want that, and we don’t think that the truth is going to lead to anything other than further truth, as things go on.

MF: And better treatment of people. It’s interesting to me that you brought up that critique of peer review, because I had a follow-up on that front. I heard that a lot too when that long piece came out, that The New Atlantis is not a peer-reviewed journal, or that the work you and Dr. Mayer did was not peer-reviewed. And my first thought on hearing that was, well, of course not, what you and he did was the peer review. That is, you two, very knowledgeable in your field, did a comprehensive survey of studies in the field that had been peer reviewed in order to draw conclusions for a wider public about what we know and don’t know about sexual orientation and gender identity.

PM: It seemed to me they just didn’t want the conversation to go on. This way of calling it not peer-reviewed was to say that I was saying something that was supposed to be a new discovery. I wasn’t saying anything new, I was saying “This is how I read the literature.”

MF: People who dispute the way you and Dr. Mayer read the literature should not just say, “Well, that’s bunk.” After all, you were not reporting your own research but that of many, many others. They should point to these and those studies that you draw conclusions from and either show why they’re wrong or why you’re drawing the wrong conclusions from them.

PM: That’s right, and that’s what we said at the end of our article. We knew it was going to cause a fuss. Okay, go at it, and tell us what’s wrong.

MF: The bottom line of the monograph, it seemed to me, was that we still don’t know a great deal about the provenance of homosexuality and transgender or gender dysphoria. We have no particular reason to believe that either phenomenon is innate or biologically based or immutable.

PM: That’s right. Especially not immutable. That’s the most important thing.

MF: In a later piece in The New Atlantis, in 2017, you and Dr. Mayer were joined by Dr. Paul Hruz, a pediatric endocrinologist, in cautioning medical professionals against using puberty-suppressing drugs with children who present with gender dysphoria. Given the increasing incidence of patients presenting such psychological symptoms since that time, especially adolescent girls who wish to transition to “being” boys, as Abigail Shrier has written, this looks like it was a very timely intervention on your part. What is the concern, exactly, with these puberty-suppressing drugs?

PM: They come at a time when the person, the child, is not prepared to think about what their life would be like. Remember, puberty occurs between nine and fourteen when you’re a girl, and between eleven and fourteen when you’re a boy. These are children.

Anyone who’s had a ten-year-old girl or boy around knows that he or she is under your protective wing, in the sense not only of making sure he or she eats and is not abused today, but that he or she doesn’t make a mistake in their own decisions that will reverberate forever for them. We don’t let them get tattooed, we don’t — I wouldn’t let my daughter have her ears pierced until she turned sixteen. So these are very young children.

Secondly, this is a very complex process, puberty. Puberty is one of the great transforming neuro-endocrine events in anybody’s life. And we know only some parts of it; we do not know, for example, what triggers puberty. Back in 2005, the journal Science published its, I think, 125th anniversary issue, and they said, here are 125 big problems that remain for science. One of them was “What triggers puberty?” It’s a big mystery.

But one of the things we do know is that the human being is very different from the ordinary animal. With the animal, if they successfully go through puberty — and they go through it rather young — at the end of that, fundamentally, they are the complete being that they’re going to be. With human beings, some of the most interesting individuating characteristics of themselves occur only after puberty, probably with a combination of the intellectual powers and the energy that sexual development brings.

So I don’t think any child — and any parent, for that matter — can make an informed consent to permit the blocking of puberty and the transmission of another sex. That’s the first thing: you don’t have an idea what you’re doing. So how can you have an informed consent about it? Because nobody knows.

As important, and a reason for thinking that judgment is affected, is that children, young people, who believe that they belong in the opposite sex, if permitted to go through puberty normally, 85 to 95 percent of them will at the end of that time say “No, I am who I am.”

But if you give them the puberty blockers at age nine or ten, only 5 or 10 percent at the end of that time will say “I don’t want to go on further.” They always want to go on further. Something has changed in them. One of the things that change must be the way their brain is shaped when this triggering comes along for puberty. It gets thwarted. And the idea that it’s all reversible, that’s still very debatable.

Finally, the most important point is that scientists have one great vulnerability. They can be dealing with the most complex issue and try to oversimplify it and make it seem like a simple issue. In this case, we want to make a boy look like a girl — okay, so we’re going to do it with these hormones. Wait a minute: you don’t know this is a complex issue of the brain, neuro-endocrine relationships, hormones and — things that Paul Hruz knows even better than I. This very, very complex thing is being over-simplified.

MF: And there are real physical detriments that can come about in terms of bone mass, fertility, growth to mature height, all sorts of things.

PM: And who, at age eleven, knows? You might lose your fertility at age eleven; well, okay, you don’t know quite what that is. You might not know, given the other kinds of pressures that come into play. We don’t know all the pressures that are behind this gender dysphoria epidemic that we’re having, but we do have a lot of reasons for believing that social pressures on vulnerable and suggestible young people are at play there.

MF: In your own career, you’ve been standing athwart this for a very long time. In 1979, a few years after you came to Johns Hopkins, you directed the closing of the university hospital’s gender identity unit, responsible at that time for what we then called “sex-change operations,” and now it’s fashionable to call “gender-affirming surgeries,” after finding that such surgical transitions did not improve the overall mental health of patients. For this alone, you have been on the “enemies list” of transgender advocates for a long time. (Such surgeries were resumed at Hopkins in 2017.)

You have likened our “transgender moment,” as Ryan Anderson calls it, to other psychiatric fashions that ultimately collapsed under the weight of evidence against them — or due to the dearth of evidence for them. Transgenderism seems to be at peak strength today, in medicine, law, and public policy. Are you still sanguine about its ultimate collapse, like that of other culturally based phenomena in mental health sciences?

PM: I’m amazed at the amount of power and weaponry that it’s gotten behind it now, with the government and law and even medical organisations getting behind it, but I’m absolutely convinced that this is folly and it’s going to collapse, just as the eugenics folly collapsed.

Eugenics was quite as powerful, after all. I’m reassured that we psychiatrists have been everywhere before. Fortunately, Adolf Meyer, my predecessor at Johns Hopkins, was one of the few psychiatrists in the world, really, who said “I don’t think we can go this way with the eugenics movement.” And so I feel I’m in good company by saying this is going to collapse.

It’s going to collapse, particularly, in relationship to the injury to children, because these people are already beginning to build up evidence for the misdirection they were sent on. In Britain, the Keira Bell case that has just been handed down from their High Court is recognising the very inadequate psychiatric approach that was taken to leading this girl to now be a very damaged person. So it’s coming. And what’s going to happen in my opinion, at least with the young, the people under the age of twenty-one, will be that there will be huge lawsuits.

I can tell you exactly how the suits are going to play out. You know that person is going to wake up at age twenty-five and realise that that she’s got a five o’clock shadow, she’s had various mutilations in the body, she’s infertile, and she’s going to say, “How did you let this happen?” And then parents are going to say, “Well, the doctor said…” So they’re going to say “Let’s sue the doctors.”

They’re going to go to the doctors and say “What did you do this for?!” They’ll say, “That was a standard treatment for transgendered,” and the person is going to say, “But you see, I wasn’t transgendered, I was a child!” And they’re going to say “Holy smoke, you’re right, we can’t tell who’s transgendered, in truth.” And then the insurance companies are going to bail out, and a lot of people are going to be injured in reputation. But we’re going to be left with a number of much more injured patients. I’m very sure this is going to happen.

MF: In one respect, it almost seems as though psychiatry has confessed its lack of any answer to the problem of gender dysphoria and farmed out the solution to the endocrinologists and the cosmetic surgeons. They’re inviting those specialists in other fields to tinker with the body to conform to a dysphoria in the mind, rather than treating the dysphoria in the mind, which is the province of psychiatry.

PM: Exactly. And by the way, when I did actively close down the psychiatric role in permitting the gender surgery — after all, I couldn’t stop the plastic surgeons from doing it if they wanted — I just was saying that we in the department of psychiatry were no longer going to endow it with our permission. One of the plastic surgeons came up to me and did say, “Oh, thank goodness. How would you like it to get up in the morning, Paul, and face the day slashing away at perfectly normal organs, because you guys don’t know what’s the matter.”

MF: That’s interesting! So what you had the power to put a stop to was the referral to the surgeons.

PM: That’s right.

MF: And the surgeons would not proceed without it.

PM: That’s right. And the reversal [in 2017] was that the plastic surgeons came and said we’re going to take this up again. They didn’t wait for our permission to open a clinic at Johns Hopkins. In psychiatry, I was no longer the director, and our department didn’t fuss about it.

MF: So the resumption in 2017 was not owing to a decision in psychiatry but a decision over in surgery.

PM: That’s it, a decision over in plastic surgery. The nice thing is, the director of plastic surgery came and told me he was going to do it. But it was their decision, not ours.

MF: A slight change of topic here. As someone who has been a faithful Catholic his whole life, you have sometimes been characterised — I would say uncharitably — as a man whose professional outlook is unduly influenced by his religion. But the Catholic Church teaches, as you and I both know, that there is nothing science discovers that contradicts the faith. So what is really going on when this charge is aimed at you?

PM: I’m always surprised by that. I’m told that my views about repressed memory, that that was going to protect Catholic priests from being punished for abusing people. I never said that the truth wasn’t the truth with those men. I’m always very surprised by this charge.

I do say that I am an orthodox Catholic guy. Thank goodness I was raised with it, because of the wonderful Catholic realism that places you solidly on the ground in relationship to human nature and the human condition. But I never thought that in this area, it was my religion that was determining how I would think about it.

I suppose I have to say that when I was first fascinated by psychiatry when I was at the Medical School at Harvard, it might have been the relentless attacks by the Freudians on the nuclear family that shocked me, because I felt that the nuclear family was the source of all kinds of wonderful reflections on each other that permitted one to go out into the world. Instead, the suspicious Freudians saw it as a place of dominance and the like.

That may well have had something to do with my devotion to both my family and to the Holy Family that I had grown up thinking of as models. I would have thought if somebody wanted to say, “Look, his religion shielded him or protected him in this way, or blinded him in this way,” that would be an interesting conversation to have. But what does a tradition, a Judeo-Christian tradition, in particular, that honours the father and mother — how does it come at a discipline in medicine that begins to say that that’s the source of all your mental troubles?

But in these other matters, no-one can say what aspects of oneself affect how you think about a problem. Obviously, we’re creatures ourselves, and a lot comes out of where we are and who we are, and we don’t always completely know. But I believe that my positions on these matters, on these matters in particular, relate to the science and the psychiatry that matters. And that anybody of any persuasion or no persuasion at all will eventually come to agree with me.

MF: Yeah, “He’s a Catholic psychiatrist, therefore… ” seems to me to be a deflection from the discrete issues that should be directly tackled on the evidence and the arguments. Of course, there are many people in your profession, who are Jewish or Protestant or have no particular faith, who agree with you on the fundamental questions you’ve worked on in your career. But what you’re saying is that your Catholicism has actually made you in some respects a stronger, better scientist.

PM: I’ve always thought so. I think Christianity was the foundation of science. After all, “In the beginning was the Word” — the Logos. Well, that means something, to make science reasonable. That’s what I’ve always thought. But you know, I’ve been amazed, because I’ve been attacked this way now, even at Hopkins — which is a wonderful institution, by the way, and it has for the most part protected me. And I didn’t have these kinds of things said about me, at least right out, since I was in high school. So it was a big surprise. Although I’m sure that anyone would say that, as you go through life, you don’t know what other people are thinking about you.

I had a very funny one: when I was admitted to Harvard Medical School, I had to have an examination by one of the doctors there — a physical exam to make sure I was well and all. They did that for every medical student. And about ten years later I happen to come across my record that had been written by this chap, one of the doctors in Boston who said, “rosy-cheeked Irish boy who’s done well to come as far as he has.”

MF: I think we’ve found the title for our interview: “Rosy-cheeked Irish Boy Who’s Come a Long Way.”

PM: That was pretty funny. I mean, it does show you the climate that you’re in that you didn’t realise. I had no idea this was crossing his mind.

MF: One last question. Tell us, please, about the work of the now six-year-old McHugh Program for Human Flourishing. What do you hope that it will contribute to the future of psychiatry and to public understanding?

PM: I hope it’s going to be a rich contribution at the end of my career at Hopkins. My aim is to point out, and to help young psychiatrists, and all doctors for that matter, to understand that after you get somebody over a condition, often they have still a ways to go to be the kinds of people that they were intended to be when they were started off.

What began, for me, as a kind of public health hygiene, mental hygiene for the patient — saying “Look, this is the kind of thing you’ve got to do, you’ve got to think in terms of family life, work life, educational life, and community, and particularly often religious life, to be what you want to be” — has now transformed itself into an understanding of where the education of doctors tends to fall down. It tends to fall down in the very areas of the humanities and the understanding of human capacities that doctoring used to be founded on, before the sciences could really take it up and make it go.

So I’m hoping that people will see that an understanding of what human beings really can be emerges out of helping them through their physical as well as their mental illnesses, but then requires a continuing prescription for how they can continue in that way. And this way, I think, it will enrich the education of doctors in general, just like I think our Perspectives of Psychiatry has helped enrich an understanding of medicine in relationship to the conditions that afflict people mentally. So we’ve had a wonderful experience with it.

MF: Human flourishing is not a typical phrase in the vocabulary of medical professionals.

PM: It was a term that seemed to me to be the appropriate term. By the way, several people in my department thought it was a very Catholic term, I was surprised to see.

MF: If they think that Aristotle belongs to the Catholics, I guess we’ll take him.

PM: Right, that’s what I said to them, I thought it goes back to Aristotle.

MF: It’s a humanistic enterprise.

PM: It’s a fundamentally humanistic enterprise. Medicine is a humanistic discipline that uses science to accomplish what all human beings would like to see for themselves, in their capacity to sustain themselves. But ultimately it is to aim for a person who could be what God intended him to be. And, of course, it’s illuminating for me, like anything else in teaching. Once you start off on this, then you discover all the things that become important for yourself to learn.

MF: One really final question, for the record: Dr. Paul McHugh has no current plans to retire, correct?

PM: No plans to retire, no! Not me. I’m pressing on. I’m not retiring. I can’t carry on quite as much as I could before, but for the duties that I’m doing within the department, which are full-time for me, I’m going to continue as long as I can.

Republished with permission from The Public Discourse.

COLUMN BY

Paul McHugh

Dr. Paul McHugh, M.D. is the University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. From 1975 until 2001, Dr. McHugh was the Henry Phipps Professor… More by Paul McHugh

Matthew J. Franck

Matthew J. Franck is Contributing Editor of Public Discourse. He is also Associate Director of the James Madison Program and Lecturer in Politics at Princeton University, Senior Fellow at the Witherspoon… More by Matthew J. Franck

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

INSANITY: Biden Releases ‘National Gender Strategy’

There’s no end to Democrat madness and their war on G-d.

Biden released a ‘National Gender Strategy,’ and it is every bit as ridiculous as it sounds

By: Conn Carroll,  Washington Examiner, October 26, 2021:

If the Babylon Bee had been asked to write a “National Gender Strategy” to be posted on the White House’s website, it wouldn’t look any different than the document the Biden administration actually released last Friday.

The “fact sheet” contains every buzzword and policy that you would expect to hear from a progressive activist with a degree in gender studies

The four-page document begins by identifying “gender equity” as a “moral and strategic imperative.” Thanks to COVID-19, “we are at an inflection point,” the statement reads, as the pandemic has “magnified the challenges” that women and girls face — “especially women and girls of color.”

Given that the document asserts without any evidence that women of color have been hit hardest by COVID, it isn’t surprising that the document also promises “an intersectional approach” that “considers the barriers and challenges faced by those who experience intersecting and compounding forms of discrimination and bias related to gender, race, and other factors, including sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion, disability, age, and socioeconomic status. This includes addressing discrimination and bias faced by Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American people, Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders, and other people of color.”

To improve “economic security,” the document calls for investments in “care infrastructure,” but nowhere is any real infrastructure ever mentioned.

The document promises to “dismantle the barriers to equal opportunity in education” so that women can “compete on a level playing field.” Never mind that women now make up 60% of all college students and are awarded two out of every three college degrees .

Abortion is, of course, absolutely essential for the “health care” of women, according to the document, which also promises to “defend the constitutional right to safe and legal abortion in the United States, established in Roe v. Wade.”

If there is one document that best encapsulates how out-of-touch the Biden White House is with everyday concerns of voters, this “National Gender Strategy” may be it.

RELATED ARTICLES:

State Department Issues First Gender-Neutral Passport

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Gay Afghan Author Warns: Taliban Will ‘Weed Out,’ ‘Exterminate’ LGBT Community

The practice of killing gays is alive and well in many Muslim countries. The penalty for homosexuality is death in Islam. See HERE. The Taliban will certainly implement the directives in these texts with the utmost barbarity. The LGBT+ community will have to hide for their lives. The Taliban has already vowed to “crush gay men to death by pushing walls onto them.”

While “progressives” have been busy castigating Israel and the West, while capitulating to Islamic supremacists, gays do not live in fear for their lives in Western countries or Israel, as those countries uphold human rights and equality. Leftist women’s rights and gay activists have a blind spot when it comes to Islam.

Taliban will ‘weed out and exterminate’ LGBT+ people in Afghanistan, warns exiled gay author

by Patrick Kelleher, Pink News, August 17, 2021:

Gay Afghan author Nemat Sadat has warned that the Taliban will “weed out and exterminate” the LGBT+ community in Afghanistan following their seismic takeover.

There has been significant concern for the safety and wellbeing of women, girls and LGBT+ people in Afghanistan after the extremist militant group seized power.

The Taliban is expected to enforce its extreme interpretation of Sharia law across Afghanistan, which would see many women, LGBT+ people persecuted. Under it, queer people and women could be sentenced to death.

Speaking to PinkNews, Sadat said there is “no telling” how bad the situation will become for LGBT+ Afghans stuck in the country under Taliban rule.

Sadat and his family left Afghanistan when he was still a baby and they ultimately settled in the United States. In 2012, he returned to his birth city of Kabul to work as a professor of political science at the American University of Afghanistan (AUAF).

Widespread anti-LGBT+ sentiment meant that it was impossible for him to settle there. Warlords spread rumours that he was a practicing homosexual. Sadat reacted to the rumours by advocating for LGBT+ rights on campus and in his classroom.

Shortly afterwards, the Taliban got involved. The extremist group wrote a manifesto claiming AUAF had “become a bastion of gays and lesbians” because of Sadat’s activism, adding that he should be “targeted and killed”…..

RELATED ARTICLE: On the Same Day Taliban Vowed to Protect Women’s Rights, They Killed a Woman for Not Wearing a Burqa

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Supreme Court Declines to Hear Gender Case, Gives Up On Protecting Basic Values

Our elected representatives and their appointees need to do their duties, even when it isn’t politically expedient. That’s why the Supreme Court’s recent actions are cause for concern.

Earlier this week, the court announced that it wouldn’t review a 2019 ruling by a lower court that granted a gender-confused female high school student in Virginia the right to use male restrooms. Notably, none of the three justices appointed by President Donald Trump argued in favor of considering the appeal. Last December, the court declined to review a similar case, when parents in Oregon tried to challenge school policies allowing gender-confused students the right to use opposite-gender restrooms.

The Supreme Court’s submission on this issue is deeply troubling. Six of the nine justices are supposedly principled conservatives who should recognize the risks of normalizing gender confusion. Girls and young women across the country will have to endure humiliating privacy violations, and free speech will be at risk if public schools cannot state simple realities about biological sex. Perhaps the heightened agitation around the issue during “pride” month made the justices too wary of a backlash. If so, they are abandoning their responsibility to protect basic freedoms to appease a small group of activists who will never be appeased either way.

This dangerous trend hasn’t just taken root in Virginia. In 2016, the Obama administration tried to force public schools across the country to let boys into girls’ private spaces or risk losing funding. And when North Carolina passed a law protecting the rights of private businesses – not government – to affirm the reality of biological gender, activists pressured corporations to boycott the state, and the Obama administration sued.

The Supreme Court must protect the right to call a man a man and a woman a woman. And it needs to ensure that the wellbeing of children – including young people driven to gender confusion – is protected by not normalizing transgender ideology.

EDITORS NOTE: This 2ndVote column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.