Monday, August 6, 2018

Federalist piece compares trans people to Mussolini

“What, exactly, is the awful woman's malfunction?”
Maureen Mullarkey
Maureen Mullarkey is terribly troubled by the notion that transgender people should be treated with civility
What is this? Transgender offensive Monday? Maureen Mullarkey claims to be a painter and a critic. Whatever she is, she is also a bigot. Proving once again that nothing is too awful for The Federalist Mullarkey writes: What I Learned From Attending ‘Transgender 101’ At My Local Library. She learned nothing. She knew going in that she would learn nothing. She did this so that she could grouse about it.

Behold:
“Transgender 101,” a recent presentation in my local library, was more evidence—if any were needed—that transgenderism is an aggressive movement. And that today’s transgenderisti are way ahead of the old fascisti in socially driven language change.
Get a grip lady! People are transgender to mitigate the effects of a medical condition that is well documented. It is not a movement and trans people do not change our language.
The movement shares with Mussolini’s Fascist Party an appetite for dominance by means of language, with special attention to pronouns. Il Duce disallowed the formal lei and mandated universal usage of the informal, more comradely voi for ideological purposes. Like Mussolini’s partisans, transgender activists campaign to bend language to their will, radicalizing the populace by transforming speech customs. In time, behavior conforms to custom.
In polite society we address people as they choose to be addressed. Transgender people should be addressed in accordance with their gender presentation. It is, for example, obviously idiotic (if not stunningly awkward) to address Caitlyn Jenner with male pronouns or to call her “Mr. Jenner.” It would also be extremely boorish and religion is no excuse to be rude.

Mullarkey proceeds to demonstrate that she won't bow to convention:
Control of language was a keynote of the July 19 program in the Chappaqua Library in New York state. Jillian Celentano, a 57-year old transwoman, rides the library talk circuit through Westchester County and Connecticut advocating for the movement.

He is a twice-married and divorced realtor with Coldwell Banker in Orange, Connecticut, who “transitioned” two years ago. An activist/evangelist, he heads an LGBTQ afterschool program in a nearby New Haven high school and organizes support groups for transgender kids and adults. Earlier this year, he was one of 325 presenters at a True Colors conference that encourages LGBTQ youth from middle school up.
There is nothing wrong with any of Ms. Celentano's activities. She is not trying to control language. In contrast, she is trying to inform people what is appropriate. Mullarkey's use of male pronouns is petty, obtuse and crude.

Later on Celentano lays out the rules for proper etiquette:
Say gender confirmation, not sex change. Shun the word transgenderism. Do not ask a transgender for his or her “dead” name—the one on the birth certificate. Do not ask, “Are you sure you’re not just gay?” Never say tranny and be especially careful with he, she, and all other pronouns. Never ask a “TG person” if he or she has regrets. Always remember first principles: Among transsexuals, “Gender identity does not correspond to biological sex assigned at birth.” Only among the “cisgendered” does identity align with the assignment.
She failed to learn that transgender is an adjective, not a noun. What the fuck is wrong with any of that? Why would this create a problem for any rational person?

I lack the patience for much more of this. In the following passage she conflates etiquette with the dogma of the Catholic Church:
Biological sex assigned at birth. It follows that what is believed to have been assigned can be re-assigned. That is the catechetical verity at the heart of the transgender magisterium.
“They” all refuse to acknowledge the clearly established science that gender is a separate construct from natal sex. When the two are incongruent it causes gender dysphoria. The distress that some people suffer is mitigated with gender affirmation. It's really not all that complicated and this is all well documented in the medical science literature going back nearly a century. What, exactly, is this awful woman's malfunction?

This tirade goes on and on, regurgitating the nonsensical crap that we have heard 100 times. Apparently Mullarkey has been victimized by a transgender person trying to explain how transgender people should be addressed. It's the usual bullshit:
Drs. Paul Hruz, Lawrence Mayer, and McHugh address the fallacy of proselytizing for puberty blockers: “It presumes that natural sex characteristics interfere with the ‘exploration’ of gender identity, when one would expect that the development of natural sex characteristics might contribute to the natural consolidation of one’s gender identity.”
Hruz's specialty is pediatric diabetes. Mayer is an extraordinary statistician and epidemiologist. He is also a psychiatrist but not a qualified expert in this area. McHugh is a well known Defender of the Faith™ and pushing 90. Moreover, Johns Hopkins has undone McHugh. A couple of years ago, for example, they restarted their gender-affirming surgery program. Most importantly, none of these folks have published research in this area to a respected academic journal that submits articles to rigorous peer review.

One more paragraph and I am done:
Parents of children suffering gender dysphoria—a politically correct coinage for cognitive identity disorder—are intimidated from addressing their children’s disassociation from their biological sex. The threat of a teen suicide functions as a kind of extortion, coercing assent to their child’s distortion. Transgender advocates refuse to consider that the suicide rate might result from the very psychological disposition that led to transitioning to begin with. Accordingly, Jill pinned the tail on “unsupportive” families.
Gender dysphoria is the medically correct term for gender incongruence. Furthermore, according to a large body of research the treatment depends upon the degree of distress that the child is in. Children who are suffering obtain relief with gender affirmation. Their levels of anxiety and depression are close to the general population. Common sense dictates that removing those stressers diminishes the potential for self-harm.

None of this has anything to do with Mullarkey. She is free to behave like a troglodyte. It is deliberate and obtuse and no amount of evidence will influence her thinking which seems to be formed, not from science, but from religious dogma.

Related content:



No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.