Radix Journal

Radix Journal

A radical journal

Tag: Homosexuality

Born Again

Transsexuality, Gender Dysphoria, and Sexual Alienation as an Identity My Friend Alex In October 1999, I began my degree in Theology at Durham University. Durham is a small, Medieval Cathedral…

Transsexuality, Gender Dysphoria, and Sexual Alienation as an Identity

My Friend Alex

In October 1999, I began my degree in Theology at Durham University. Durham is a small, Medieval Cathedral city in the northeast of England. Like Oxford and Cambridge, Durham University (England’s third oldest university) is composed of a number of colleges in which you live. Mine was called the College of St Hild and St Bede. In the first week of term, there were many “getting-to-know-you” events, to make it easier to become friends with people beyond those who lived on your corridor. Somehow, I got talking to a very unusual young man. He was called Alex Waddell.

We had a few things in common. Alex was from Reading, in the southeast of England, not far from London, where I came from. Like me, he had been to a “state school” (in U.S. English, a “public school”), as opposed to a private school, which so many students at the college had attended. Most importantly, Alex was studying Philosophy. This interested me a great deal, and I had toyed with reading a Philosophy degree myself. He’d also had a “Gap Year” in the Czech Republic, teaching English and reviewing cocktails for magazines. This fascinated me because, at the time, I’d only been to France, Spain, and Holland. He also dabbled in writing poetry, as did I. So we had things about which to converse. Making conversation with Alex was rather hard work, however. He spoke in a very idiosyncratic way; a sort of staccato, with pauses in unexpected parts of the sentence. And he tended to deal with everyday statements as though they were philosophical propositions.

“So, are you trying to tell me that you’re going to go to the college bar?”

“Yes, Alex, I am.”

“And you’re asking me if I’d like to come with you to the college bar?”

“That is correct.”

“And when you propose going to the college bar, do you mean that we’re just going to go there and hang out or are you implying that we’re going to go there and have a drink.”

“I’m asking you if you’d like to come with me to the college bar and have a drink, Alex.”

“And do you literally mean a drink, or is that a term for a more indefinite number of drinks? If so, I might have to go to the cash point . . .”

Alex moved around a great deal, unable to sit still, a habit which was very distracting. He told me that this was due to suffering from curvature of the spine. This had been corrected a few years earlier in a lengthy operation in which metal rods had been inserted into his back. He also mentioned some kind of “syndrome” that caused muscle and abdominal pain. I later discovered that suffered from fibromyalgia, which causes not just muscle pain and abdominal problems but also sleeplessness and depression. And Alex was a vegetarian, for philosophical reasons, something that was considered extremely eccentric at the time.

The word “eccentric” really encapsulated Alex. The word “autistic” was not yet widely known, but it seems fairly clear now that this is what he was. He had trouble understanding how others might feel, which led him to be socially clumsy, thoughtless, and generally bizarre, but he was also highly analytical in his thinking, congruous with evidence that “systematizing” and “empathy” (in the sense of “theory of mind”) sit at opposite ends of a spectrum.[1]

In line with this autism diagnosis, Alex was almost child-like in his guilelessness and lack of self-awareness. The small number of us that were his friends—there were two of us at his 21st birthday party in June 2001—euphemistically referred to him as “avant-garde.” This “party” was a plaintive affair. His parents had given him a substantial amount of money to take all of his friends out for a meal. But there were only two of us. Our pleas with him to just let us go to McDonalds and then blow all the dosh on gin were not well-received. His parents would be displeased, he told us, if they knew that the money had not been primarily spent on eating at a restaurant.

As the academic year continued, evidence of Alex’s autism became increasingly clear. He woke up the entire college out-building in which he lived—Hild Gym—at about 4 AM one morning by burning toast in the kitchen and thus setting off the fire alarm. Another time, a girl who lived on his corridor ran herself a bath and then left it, momentarily, to take a phone call. Upon her return, the bathroom door was locked. This was because, while she had been on the phone, Alex had gone to the same bathroom, with the same ablutionary intentions, found that a bath had been run already, and presumably thought to himself, “That’s lucky. Someone must have run the bath and then changed his mind.” He thus locked the door and got in. As the year passed, Alex became withdrawn, stopped washing, grew his hair long, and got shouted down at the Durham Union Society (a debating society) for a laughable and rambling intervention on the subject of prostitution. I remember someone hollering at him, “Sit down, sir!” Every time he tried to speak. The audience clapped, and this continued until he finally gave up and resumed his seat.

The following academic year, we didn’t live in college, as most second years “lived out,” in houses in the city, so I didn’t see Alex as much. Not having any close friends, he was living with a group of students whom he didn’t know. In that academic year (2000-2001), Alex was pursuing an American international student to whom he was attracted. He was also after a girl who studied at the university’s campus in Stockton, a sizable industrial town 34 miles away. The two were, effectively, separate universities, so I don’t know how Alex had made a connection to Stockton—possibly he had done so by using “the Internet,” something we normal students tended to eschew. But it transpired that Alex was going there on the bus, buying cannabis and selling it to students in Durham, where cannabis was more difficult to obtain and thus more expensive.

In the Spring term, Alex became president of the Philosophy Society. These student societies usually took your money at “Fresher’s Fair” and then did very little. But, with philosophy-obsessed Alex at the helm, things were different. He managed, in about October 2001, to persuade the Oxford philosopher of religion Richard Swinburne (b. 1934)—who has been described as “the premier rational defender of Christianity of our time”[2]—to come and speak to the society. Everyone who had done A-Level Religious Studies had read about this giant. His appearance was so wildly popular that Alex hired the Durham Union Society Debating Chamber for it, and it was full to capacity, mostly with people who weren’t members of the Philosophy Society and so had to pay to be there. As Alex introduced Oxford University’s Nolloth Professor of the Christian Religion, so many people must have been asking themselves: Who was this eccentric—by then sporting a tennis-player’s headband—who had managed to achieve this coup? It was the same eccentric that told a group of teenage “locals,” from the window of my ground-floor flat, that all “Geordies” (people from Newcastle Upon Tyne and its environs, including Durham) were stupid, leading to Alex, myself, and two others having to cower in my flat while the offended Geordies threw stones at it. And it was the same eccentric who, the following academic year, did something very eccentric, indeed.

I met up with Alex in early October 2001. I didn’t see him again, other than at the Richard Swinburne meeting, for the rest of the term. It was December 2001, the night of the Christian Union’s Carol Service in Durham Cathedral. The Christian Union was a fundamentalist Christian student society, in which I had many friends. A third of my 15-person out-building in my first year—“Bede Gym,” a corridor over a gym—had been members, and I ended-up living with “God Squad-ers” for the rest of my time at university. Later, I even wrote my doctoral thesis, and first book, about them.[3] At their encouragement, I always attended their Christmas Carol Service, held in the splendor of Durham Cathedral, which has been voted “the best building in Britain.”[4] However, for some reason, the Christmas Party of the university’s LGB (Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual) Society always took place on the same evening as the Christian Union’s Cathedral Carol Service. As the two groups, in many ways, couldn’t be more different (the Christian Union opposed homosexuality, for a start), and because I was young and pretentious, I made a point, in order to be “avant-garde,” of always going to both events: the evangelical carol service, and then the LGB party in the Student Union building.

So this is what I did in December 2001. The tattooed-lesbian, Kerry, who was in charge (tattoos were very rare at the time) was an acquaintance of mine. In the darkened, disco-light-illuminated room, she introduced me to people and, eventually, she led me over to a rather pretty, young girl, whom I was immediately convinced I’d met before. She seemed out of place. She was very feminine. She had long hair, make-up, and an ankle-length skirt. She stood in stark contrast to the “butch” lesbians that constituted the bulk of the other females at the party.

“This is Dreya,” said Kerry. “This is her first time here.”

“Have we met before?” I asked, innocently.

“Um . . . no, I don’t think so,” came the high-pitched reply.

“I’m sure I recognize you.”

“Um . . . no, I don’t think we’ve met.”

There was a long pause and then, genuinely shocked, it came to me.

“Alex! What the fuck is going on?!”

My memories after this are vague. I recall Kerry telling me that I shouldn’t ask what was “going on” because “This is a safe space for Dreya.” I’d never heard of the concept of a “safe space”—meaning “place where your comforting delusions may not be questioned”—that was later to become so ubiquitous. I went upstairs to the bar and told my two friends—one of whom had been at Alex’s 21st and who also studied Philosophy—what was “going on.” I persuaded Alex to come upstairs and explain himself to them. What had happened?

What is Transsexuality?

We’ll return to what happened to Alex later. But, clearly, he was beginning the process of “transitioning” from being a “male” to being a “female.” Cross-dressing, of course, has been perennial throughout human history, usually confined to performative contexts: erotica, satire, theater, camp, or, in some cases, religious and folk rituals. But by the turn of the 21st century, something distinctly new has emerged in the Western world: transgenderism as an identity—one that is demographically significant, legally recognized, and, seemingly, on the rise.

It is difficult to be sure what percentage of Western populations are transgender, not least because the numbers are increasing. In 2016, UCLA’s Williams Institute estimated that 0.6 percent of the U.S. population (1.4 million people) were transgender.[5] Rates were slightly higher in the states of California, New Mexico, and Georgia. Age also plays a factor: while 0.5 percent of adults over 65 are transgender, the rate is noticeably higher about 18- and 24-year-olds. A recent study of school children from Finland, aged 16 to 18, estimated that 3.6 percent of males, though only 2.3 percent of females, displayed some symptoms of Gender Dysphoria.[6]

Moreover, there is also a certain aggressive and assertive character to the “trans” identity that is hard to miss (though, granted, this quality is not unique in today’s political climate). In 2019, a journalist for The Guardian, a biological woman, halted and reversed her “transition” to manhood in order to have a baby, then took up her transition once more afterwards. She demanded that a British registrar falsify history by designating her as the child’s “father” on its birth certificate. When the registrar refused, this “transman” took the authorities to court. Upon losing her case, she remarked on how “not fair” it all was.[7] A similar determination or spitefulness was seen at the Democratic Socialists of America Conference that same year, when a transwoman made a “point of personal privilege” in order to angrily demand that speakers not to use the term “guys” (a typical American colloquialism meaning “everyone”) when referring to delegates, which he condemned as “gendered-language.”[8]

And this spitefulness has, to a large degree, succeeded in changing the academic and legal arenas. Under English Law, despite the fact that no biological change has taken place, if you “transition” in this way, to the extent of having surgery so that you appear (often not very convincingly) to be of the “opposite sex,” then you are, legally, of that opposite sex and can obtain a “Gender Recognition Certificate” to prove it. A court case in December 2019 found that it was not legitimate to refute or undermine such a change. It became legal to fire somebody if they publicly expressed the opinion that a transsexual could not, in good conscience, assert that they were a member of the sex into which they had transitioned. Specifically, a 45-year-old woman, Maya Forstater, was removed from her job at the Centre for Global Development in London for tweeting “Men cannot become women.” She took her employers to a tribunal, claiming that the sacking breached her Human Rights, because she was fired due to her beliefs. She lost the case.[9] The Canadian psychologist and author Jordan Peterson (b.1962) rose to fame largely due to his refusal to abide by state-mandated regime of using the chosen pronouns choice of transsexual students. This small act of defiance made him a conservative hero. Regardless, pronouns themselves have multiplied in recent years—many have adopted the non-binary “they” as first-person singular—and entered public consciousness in a way previously unimaginable.[10] Newspapers’ style-guides have been altered to accommodate transsexuals, and even non-transsexuals have begun defining their pronouns of choice on their social-media pages. Everyone, it seems, is encouraged to rethink themselves and their sexual identity.

This is a major social trend, and I have discussed the ideological and religious perspectives that lie behind it elsewhere.[11] But what I want to focus on here is the causes of transsexuality or, more properly put, Gender Dysphoria. Gender Dysphoria is a condition whereby a person feels profound distress due to what they regard as a mismatch between their biological gender and what they feel like on the inside, or what they feel that their gender should be. They believe that they can alleviate these feelings by, as much as possible, outwardly becoming their desired gender. Other recognized “dysphoria” include anorexia, when a person believes that they are fat, despite the fact that they are dangerously thin; and Mind-Body Integrity Disorder, when someone believes they are physically mutilated, yet they are not, and thus they mutilate their body.

What are we to make of this? What are the root causes of this, for many, baffling phenomenon?

Homosexual Transsexuals

A common conception (or you could say cliché) about transsexuals is that they are people “born in the wrong body.” This begs an important question: “How did they come to believe this?” How could they become convinced—to the point of drastically changing their appearance and lifestyle and even undergoing medical treatment and surgery—that they have, say, a female “soul” and a penis?

Transsexuals could suffer from this conception because they really do have the brain of X and the genitalia of Y. They were, in a way, “born into the wrong body.” However, if transsexuals also suffer from other delusions and personality disorders, then it is probable that there is some underlying factor that explains why they passionately feel this way. This is particularly true if these delusions and disorders manifest in advanced age.

This is what has been proposed by the psychologist Ray Blanchard in his so-called Transsexualism Typology.[12] Blanchard argues that some “transwomen” (male-to-female transsexuals) are homosexual transsexuals. They are highly feminized, and they want to become, as far as possible, heterosexual women. And they show signs of opposite-sex behavior at a very young age. The rest are what he calls autogynephilic transsexuals. These are male fetishists who are sexually aroused, or otherwise profoundly satisfied, by the idea of having a female body, something which correlates with wanting to take action to obtain one, and which becomes an interest for such people during or after adolescence. In other words, autogynephilic transexuals transform their own body into an object of desire—a kind of erotic loop. More recently, Blanchard has averred that his model is also likely to apply to “transmen” (female-to-male transsexuals).[13] Blanchard has estimated that at least 75 percent of transsexuals are autogynephilic and that percentage is growing, as more and more people “discover” that they are trans.[14]

Not surprisingly, trans activists generally find Blanchard’s Typology difficult to deal with and often attempt to suppress discussion of it. As Alice Dreger has summarized in her book Galileo’s Middle Finger (2015):

There’s a critical difference between autogynephilia and most other sexual orientations: Most other orientations aren’t erotically disrupted simply by being labeled. When you call a typical gay man homosexual, you’re not disturbing his sexual hopes and desires. By contrast, autogynephilia is perhaps best understood as a love that would really rather we didn’t speak its name. The ultimate eroticism of autogynephilia lies in the idea of really becoming or being a woman, not in being a natal male who desires to be a woman.[15]

Clearly, my friend Alex was in the autogynephilious category, and this category is the far more common of the two.

So let us make sense of the more unusual category first: those who display gender dysphoria from a very early age. The earlier a condition manifests itself, the more likely it is to be primarily an expression of genetics, or an epigenetic phenomenon, which has occurred early in development, especially in utero. In this regard, the heritability of Gender Dysphoria is relatively low. A review concluded that Gender Dysphoria is about 0.5 heritable in males and 0.4 heritable in females.[16] Another review found that Gender Dysphoria was approximately 0.3 heritable among adults. The authors reviewed three studies of child samples, one of which contradicted the other two. Two of the studies found a heritability of about 0.3.[17] Thus, the common belief that some people are “born into the wrong body” is, broadly-speaking, inaccurate. Gender Dysphoria is as much environmental as it is genetic, if not more so, in males; in females, it is certainly more so.

There is a convincing case for arguing that homosexual transsexuality is a direct result of “developmental instability.” “Developmental Instability” refers to development occurring in a suboptimal fashion. An example of this would be a person growing up to have an asymmetrical face. Developmental instability is caused by a combination of environmental pressures—if you are fighting off disease then you don’t have the bio-energetic resources left over to grow a fully symmetrical face—and also by mutant genes. If you have lots of mutant genes—a condition known as “high mutational load”—then you have a poor immune system and must use proportionately more of your resources in fighting off disease, leading to a less symmetrical face. You may also have inherited mutant genes relating to the face. Homosexual transsexuality—and, less directly, Gender Dysphoria in general—appears to be a manifestation of developmental instability.

One indication of developmental instability is left-handedness. Humans are generally right-handed, and, if their brain has developed symmetrically, then that is what they will tend to be. Accordingly, left-handedness betokens an asymmetrical brain and, thus, developmental instability, and correlates with many neurological and auto-immune problems, including asthma and allergies.[18] Blanchard reports that there are elevated levels of non-right-handedness among both homosexual and autogynephilous transsexuals. He also shows that there is elevated left-handedness among homosexuals, pedophiles, and many others whose object of sexual arousal is atypical. Blanchard proposes that these may all be explicable, in part, by developmental instability. Specifically, in the case of a male homosexual, a pregnant female will react to male hormones, emitted by a male fetus, by releasing female hormones. If she releases too many of these, or if the fetus’ immune system cannot protect itself against them—which, in both cases, may be due to mutation—the result may be a highly feminized child, such as a homosexual. In this regard, it has been found that homosexual males, on average, are more physically and mentally feminized than are heterosexual males, yet they still regard themselves as male. An important piece of evidence in favor of this model is that there is a clear birth order effect on male homosexuality. Every older brother a male has increases his odds of being homosexual by 0.3. This is partly because the mother’s immune system will react more strongly with every male pregnancy, and there might be group-level evolutionary benefits, as well: if there are already a large number of boys, then a homosexual boy will not elevate inter-male conflict any further.[19] Blanchard’s model of the causes of homosexuality has been applied to people suffering from Gender Dysphoria. There is a clear birth order effect: male homosexual transsexuals fall into a significantly later birth order than do autogynepilious transsexuals.[20] Consistent with this, it has been shown that the brains of homosexual transsexuals (whether transmen or transwomen) differ significantly from those of the same gender who are not homosexual transsexuals:

Cortical thickness and diffusion tensor imaging studies suggest that the brain of [Males-to-Females] presents complex mixtures of masculine, feminine, and demasculinized regions, while [Females-to-Males] show feminine, masculine, and defeminized regions.[21]

These data would indicate that the minority of transsexuals who are “homosexual transsexuals” are, to a certain degree, “born into the wrong body.” This is principally due to epigenetic processes that occur in utero. Homosexual transsexuals are likely to be marked out by the way in which they will have intense difficulty conforming to the expectations of their biological sex from an extremely young age.

Further evidence of both forms of transsexuality being manifestations of developmental instability can be seen in the health of transsexuals. Their physical and mental health is far worse than is that of so-called “cis-gender” people. Transwomen, compared to males, report markedly elevated levels of high cholesterol, high blood pressure, vision problems, hearing problems, chronic pain, arthritis, digestive problems, lung problems, kidney complaints, diabetes, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, depression, and anxiety. They are also more likely to abuse alcohol, and even hard drugs such as heroin and crack, and engage in commercial sex work. Transmen are elevated in terms of obesity, smoking, asthma, depression, schizophrenia, sexually transmitted diseases, pubic lice, inflammatory conditions, previous menstrual irregularities, and premature or delayed menarche. They are also elevated in hyperandrogenism and, therefore, in a series of complications associated with elevated testosterone in females, including adrenal hyperplasia, polycystic ovary syndrome, and hypogonadism.[22] Transmen also have elevated rates of fibromyalgia (the condition Alex suffered from), though this is not significantly higher in transwomen than it is among the general population.[23] Some of these conditions help to explain why the sufferers are transsexual (as we will see below) or reflect the stresses inherent in being transsexual. But others, such as hearing problems, are likely to simply reflect the underlying factor of high mutational load and developmental instability.

Transsexuality and Fetishism

For Blanchard, the kind of transsexual who most attracts public attention—and who are behind the prominence of transgenderism in contemporary public discourse—is the kind who suffers from autogynephilia. This is a fetish, or paraphilia, whereby a man, for example, is “sexually aroused by the thought of himself as a female.”[24] Autogynephilia ranges in its severity from mere transvestitism, where a man is deeply satisfied by dressing as a female, to, in its most extreme cases, transsexualism, where a male wants to alter his body such that it is more female-like. Perhaps it could be argued that demanding that society accept them as “real women” with precisely the same rights as “biological females” is an even more extreme manifestation of this paraphilia. Remaining a “she-male” would merely be a partial manifestation of this paraphilia.[25] It can be argued, however, that autogynephilia is more than simply a paraphilia, as there is a strong element of delusion involved in autogynephilia, which is not found in other paraphilia. In this sense, as discussed above, autogynephilia is as much an example of dysphoria as it is an example of a paraphilia.

If it is reasonable to conceptualize transsexuality as a paraphilia, then the correlates of transsexuality and other paraphilia should be very similar. The same should be the case with the correlates of other dysphoria. So, what is associated with more widely experienced fetishes—such as masochism, sexual sadism, or paedophilia? Reviews have consistently found that paraphilia is comorbid with hypersexuality, Autism Spectrum Disorder, Borderline Personality Disorder, Narcissistic Personality Disorder, and Psychopathic Personality Disorder.[26]

Hyper-Sexuality

Paraphilia experience is placed on a spectrum ranging from no arousal to extreme and exclusive arousal by the paraphilia in question. It has been found that paraphilics have low cerebral serotonin levels, something which leads to high testosterone levels and thus a high sex drive. They report higher levels of sexual arousal, meaning that they might associate non-sexual targets, such as objects, with arousal because they are so easily sexually aroused. They report more diverse sexual interests, greater sexual orientation fluidity, more sexual activity, and a higher number of lifetime sexual partners than do non-paraphilics. These findings are very interesting in evolutionary terms, because they would potentially help to explain how paraphilia remains in populations.[27] In line with the predictions made by Blanchard’s model, it has been found that transsexuality is comorbid with hypersexuality.[28] Hypersexuality, and other sexual dysfunctions, also correlate with anorexia.[29]

Autism Spectrum Disorder

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), as already discussed, is associated with deficiencies in empathy and a concomitant propensity towards extreme analytical thinking. It has been conceptualized as the “Extreme Male Brain,” and autistic people tend to be physically masculinized, displaying various markers associated with high levels of male hormones.[30] Congruous with this, autistics tend to attach meaning to concrete visual representations: they are interested in “things,” rather than people, disliking the unpredictable and unscripted nature of human interaction. You probably know someone who seems highly detached socially, overly logical, and is obsessed with his job, hobby, or some arcane, whether it be video games, online gambling, or evolutionary psychology.

Paraphilia crosses over with autism in the sense that paraphilia involves strong attachment to an object (usually a visual stimulus) and is highly scripted, in the sense that specific situations involving this stimulus can be particularly sexually arousing. It has been found that High Functioning (intellectually normal) autistics, particularly those who are male, are more likely to have paraphilic interests than are the general population.[31] Consistent with Blanchard’s model, it is quite clear that transsexuality is associated with autism. Gunter Heylens and his colleagues found that transgender persons were six times more likely than the general population to suffer from Autism Spectrum Disorder, with transwomen being more likely to have an Autism Spectrum Disorder than transmen.[32] Anna Van der Miesen and colleagues, who conducted a systematic literature review, found that children with Gender Dysphoria score higher on all subdomains of Autism Spectrum Disorder than do controls.[33] It is therefore a reasonable conclusion that transsexuality is associated with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Anorexia, a prominent example of a dysphoria, is also robustly associated with ASD, according to a systematic review of eight studies.[34]

Borderline Personality Disorder

Autism is associated with Borderline Personality Disorder and is characterized by a weak sense of self. Autistics lack the feeling that they are the same person across time and lack the feeling that they are in control of their thoughts and actions, possibly because, lacking empathy, they find that they cannot predict the consequences of their actions and, hypersensitive to stimuli, they easily become overwhelmed by the world. The result is a chaotic and frightening void, which can result in a coping mechanism whereby you create an extreme and certain identity. However, eventually, chronic self-doubt results in the collapse of this identity and the adoption of another, sometimes very different one. This, in turn, is the essence of Borderline Personality Disorder, which is elevated in both paraphilics and autistics.[35] BPD is characterized by difficulties regulating emotion, feeling intense emotions, and having problems returning to a stable baseline, frequent mood swings, a fear of abandonment, and a disturbed sense of self. Specifically: “The self is impoverished, poorly developed, or there is an unstable self-image, which is often associated with excessive self-criticism; chronic feelings of emptiness; and dissociative states under stress.” Such a person has difficulty developing a sense of self that is stable in terms of beliefs, and life goals over time. He can have extreme and polarized self-conceptions, sometimes to the extent of developing multiple personalities; he can lack a coherent image of who he is; he can undergo “explosive shifts into states where the perception of self is distorted and shows weak correspondence with external reality”; and he may lack a capacity to flexibly adapt to change. Sufferers experience discontinuity in their development of self, rapidly alter their roles and relationships, and “identify only with their present affective states and have no sense of their continuity over time.”[36]

It has been found that sexual masochism is 10 times higher in women with Borderline Personality Disorder than it is among controls.[37] Many other studies, also of men, have found a robust association between paraphilic sexuality and Borderline Personality Disorder.[38] It is also associated with Gender Dysphoria. At least two separate studies have found that 80 percent of transgender people display symptoms of Borderline Personality or related disorders.[39] Anorexia, as another example of a dysphoria, is also associated with Borderline Personality Disorder.[40]

Narcissistic Personality Disorder

In terms of a strongly distorted sense of self, Borderline Personality Disorder crosses over with the related condition of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Indeed, in some respects, Narcissism can be understood as an example of Borderline Personality Disorder, though it is more common among males than females. Narcissistic Personality Disorder is characterized by:

  1. Grandiosity, with expectations of superior treatment from other people;
  2. Fixation on fantasies of power, success, intelligence, or attractiveness;
  3. Self-perception of being unique, superior, and associated with high-status people and institutions;
  4. Needing continual admiration from others;
  5. A sense of entitlement to special treatment and to obedience from others;
  6. Being exploitative of others to achieve personal gain;
  7. Unwilling to empathize with the feelings, wishes, and needs of other people;
  8. Being intensely envious of others, and believing that others are equally envious of them;
  9. A pompous and arrogant demeanour.[41]

Narcissistic Personality Disorder has also been found to be a key predictor of paraphilic sexuality.[42] It is also associated with Gender Dysphoria. One study found that, of a male and female sample of people suffering from Gender Dysphoria, 57 percent fit the criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder and 81 percent fit the criteria for some kind of personality disorder, mainly Borderline Personality Disorder.[43] A review has found other studies that have highlighted this relationship between Transsexuality and Narcissistic Personality Disorder.[44] It has been found that Anorexia is associated with Narcissistic Personality Disorder, specifically with the “vulnerable Narcissism” sub-type.[45] Such people display all of the symptoms of standard Narcissistic Personality Disorder except “grandiosity.” This is replaced by “vulnerability,” characterized by a constant need for reassurance that one is exceptional, by introversion and by being self-absorbed, high in Neuroticism (feeling negative feelings strongly) and hyper-sensitive to criticism. In all of these senses, the Vulnerable Narcissist is the opposite of the Grandiose Narcissist, for the latter will be confident that he is exceptional, will be extraverted, and will appear relatively impervious to criticism.[46]

Thus, we can see why Narcissism would be associated with transsexuality. The autistic is prone to sexual arousal by objects (fetishes), to a weak sense of self (fundamentally questioning who and what he is), and to Narcissism (as a means of coping with his fundamental sense of fear and chaos). These would come together in his being sexually aroused by the ideal of himself as the perfect female. Those who questioned his femaleness would, therefore, risk destroying his necessary coping-mechanism, resulting in “Narcissistic Rage.” It has been suggested that this makes sense of the often aggressive and furious way in which trans activists seem to respond to those who dare to disagree with them.[47]

Psychopathic Personality Disorder

Psychopathic Personality Disorder, now officially known as “Anti-Social Behavioral Disorder,” is characterized by,

  1. Inability to sustain consistent work behavior;
  2. Non-conformity, irritability and aggression;
  3. Failure to honor financial obligations;
  4. Frequent lying, failure to plan ahead and impulsivity;
  5. Reckless behavior;
  6. Inability to function as a responsible parent;
  7. Failure to maintain long-term monogamous relationships;
  8. Lack of remorse;
  9. Conduct disorder in childhood.[48]

Psychopathic traits are associated with paraphilia, possibly because of the way in which psychopaths are highly interested in power and control, causing them to be aroused by voyeurism and sadism, in the case of males.[49] However, it may simply be that psychopathic personality and paraphilia are both expressions of developmental instability. As we would predict, there are elevated levels of psychopathology among transsexuals.[50]

In summary, it can be seen that people who suffer from Gender Dysphoria display all of the key psychological traits that are associated with paraphilics. And like paraphilics, they are more likely than controls to be hyper-sexual, to suffer from Autism Spectrum Disorder, to be diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder or Narcissistic Personality Disorder, and to display evidence of Psychopathic Personality Disorder. In addition, we have noted that all of these characteristics are found, to an elevated degree, among those who display another well-researched dysphoria—namely anorexia nervosa.

Gender Dysphoria and Masculinization

We are confronted with additional question. Are late-onset transsexuals suffering from a delusion about themselves? Or are they correct in their assertion that they were “born into the wrong body” but have, for some reason, only recognized this as adolescents or adults? If it is the former (that is, they are delusional), then sufferers from Gender Dysphoria should display the same, or similar, correlates to those who suffer from other mind-body dysphoria, such as anorexics. Specifically, they should display evidence of masculinization, and it is masculine traits that are associated with other dysphoria, including anorexia, which is generally a dysphoria from which females suffer.

A study led by Riittakerttu Kaltiala-Heino has tested this possibility. The authors conducted a series of systematic reviews on original studies in order to test the relationship between Gender Dysphoria and at least one correlate of androgens (male hormones) out of Autism Spectrum Disorder, Left-handedness, 2D:4D Ratio (the shape of the hands[51], being male, and male heterosexuality. They found that people with Gender Dysphoria did, indeed, tend to display these signs of masculinization. They were more likely to be left-handed, suffer from Autism Spectrum Disorder, have a low (masculinized) 2D:4D ratio, be male, and want to have sex with females, even if they were male-to-female transsexuals. The authors found studies indicating that 65 percent of gender transitions in the U.S between 2002 and 2013 were male-to-female. They also found research from Finland, from 2019, which found that 3.6 percent of male children—but only 2.3 percent of female children—displayed some symptoms of Gender Dysphoria.[52] They also pointed out that a 2015 survey of 3,000 transwomen reported that at least 60 percent claimed to be gynephilious (sexually attracted to women) in their new gender; 27 percent were exclusively gynephilious; and 19 percent exclusively androphilious (sexually attracted to men). For what it’s worth, the most famous transwoman of them all, Caitlyn Jenner (formerly Bruce Jenner), is reportedly in a relationship with another transwoman.[53] Among transmen, in contrast, only 12 percent were exclusively gynephilious, while 23 percent were exclusively androphilious, but the proportions of those who were non-exclusively attracted to either sex were not reported. They observed that 2 percent of the British population claim to be lesbian, gay or bisexual; so, clearly, transwomen, as the authors would predict, overwhelmingly retain male sexual interests. And even among transmen, what is effectively lesbianism, which is associated with masculinization, is strongly over-represented.[54]

The authors also found that other dysphoria display similar correlates. Female anorexics, compared to controls, are not only higher in autism but also have a lower 2D:4D ratio: their hands are more masculinized than is generally the case with females. The authors hypothesized that autism may be key to understanding the development of dysphoria. Dysphoria are also comorbid. Thus, transsexuals have elevated levels of anorexia.[55] The authors argue that autistics tend to have a weak sense of self, making them more prone to the disturbed sense of identity, and of reality, that is inherent in all dysphoria; in other words, you believe that you are something that you are not. Autistics would also be more likely to develop fetishes, and it is in its paraphilic nature where gender dysphoria diverges from other dysphoria. This is consistent with Gender Dysphoria being characterized as a paraphilia of “erotic target identity inversion,” whereby people attempt to become the object by which they are sexually aroused.[56] Accordingly, it appears that transsexuality should be characterized both as a paraphilia and as a dysphoria and, moreover, that there is considerable crossover between these two concepts in terms of their correlates. Autism itself, for example, has been found to be a manifestation of developmental instability. Not only is it associated with numerous markers of developmental instability, such as sinistrality, but it is robustly correlated with paternal age. This is because, as men age, their semen includes more de novo mutations, including those which lead to the development of autism.[57]

What are the Environmental Causes of Transgenderism?

So, having established that there is a sound theoretical case for understanding transsexuality both as a paraphilia and as a dysphoria, we now need to make sense of its environmental causes. This is crucial because, as we have seen, it is significantly a function, in the case of autogynephilious transsexuals, of environmental factors, although many of these may be confounded by genetics. That transsexuality is strongly environmental is consistent with evidence that it develops in adolescence, as the later a phenomenon develops, the less strongly genetic it is likely to be, generally speaking. Indeed, the persistence of Gender Dysphoria is predicted by how young a person is when they first display symptoms: and the younger it develops, the more persistent it is.[58] A primarily environmental explanation would be congruous with a growing body of evidence that many transsexuals wish to revert back, such that they physically resemble their biological sex, some years after transitioning.[59] Indeed, this would be congruous with transsexuality being a paraphilia that becomes more or less intense due to environmental variables.

Gynaecologist Lisa Littman has referred to what she calls “rapid-onset Gender Dysphoria,” in which adolescents with no previous indication of gender confusion appear to very suddenly declare themselves “non-binary” or transgender. Littman avers that this may be the expression of a “social coping mechanism” for other issues, such as adolescent homosexual phases. This is rendered increasingly common by “social contagion.” Indeed, Littman notes that:

Parents describe that the onset of gender dysphoria seemed to occur in the context of belonging to a peer group where one, multiple, or even all of the friends have become gender dysphoric and transgender-identified during the same timeframe. Parents also report that their children exhibited an increase in social media/internet use prior to disclosure of a transgender identity.[60]

Unlike with most cases of late-onset transsexuality, this is a predominantly female phenomenon: 82 percent of a sample of parents who reported having an adolescent child who experienced rapid-onset Gender Dysphoria were referring to a daughter, 41 percent of these had expressed interest in a non-heterosexual orientation prior to declaring their Gender Dysphoria, 62 percent had a history of mental illness, and 38 percent belonged to a peer group who had all declared themselves “non-binary” or “trans” at around the same time. In these respects, Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria is highly comparable to anorexia. This also seems to occur, in a socially contagious fashion, among adolescent female peer-groups and, as we have discussed, it has the same corollaries as Gender Dysphoria and also correlates with it.[61] It is thus not without good reason that a number of commentators have asked “Is Transgender the New Anorexia?”[62] This is a perfectly reasonable question to ask, at least with regard to Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria.

Due to the relative rarity of transsexuality, the studies on its environmental causes are generally clinical studies with small sample sizes, meaning that it behoves us to be cautious of their results. With that caveat, it has been observed that boys who later suffer from Gender Dysphoria tend to be raised in suboptimal environments, in which the parents frequently fight with each other and in which the fathers have low self-esteem and are emotionally distant, while the mothers are high on psychopathology, leading to the boy having an unclear sense of self-value and a high level of anxiety. It has been averred that these conditions may result in sexual identity problems, and that Gender Dysphoria thus has a significant environmental component. Clinical observation of girls with Gender Dysphoria indicates that they tend to have emotionally distant mothers, with whom they are often in conflict and fathers who abuse their mothers, possibly leading the girl to identify as a boy.[63] Another study found elevated levels of Borderline Personality Disorder among the mothers of boys who suffer from Gender Dysphoria.[64] A study in Taiwan found that students with Gender Dysphoria are more likely to have unaffectionate parents.[65] There is evidence that girls with anorexia tend to have emotionally distant mothers as well. Their mothers are more likely to suffer from Alexithymia, that is, having difficulties verbalizing and otherwise expressing emotions.[66] Females with Gender Dysphoria tend not merely to exhibit Autism Spectrum Disorder symptoms but also evidence being higher on measures of psychopathology.[67]

The problem with all of these studies, in terms of understanding the environmental causes of dysphoria, including Gender Dysphoria, is that they are heavily genetically confounded. If the mothers of transgender boys are high on psychopathology, then it may be that being raised by such a mother elevates the likelihood of Gender Dysphoria. But it may also be that such a mother is highly masculinized, or otherwise high in mutational load, and it is this that has led to in utero developmental instability, eventually manifesting in a transsexual son, who is also likely to have inherited, to some extent, his mother’s psychopathic personality traits. The same is true with regard to Borderline Personality Disorder, which is elevated among both transsexuals and their mothers. So, it is extremely difficult to tease out the environmental causes of Gender Dysphoria. It is possible that there is a symbiotic relationship between genetics, in utero developmental instability, and childhood environment, whereby the son of a mother with Borderline Personality Disorder is more likely to manifest this, and thus potentially Gender Dysphoria, due to genetic tendencies, developmental instability due to high mutational load in both himself and his mother leading to developmental instability in utero, and the unstable childhood environment created by his mother. But this hypothesis, while plausible, needs to be formally tested.

The Breakdown of Selection and Gender Dysphoria

This leaves us with a further question: Why has there been a rise, in recent years, in the prominence of transgenderism? This may be partly explicable in terms of the Social Epistasis Amplification Model, which has been presented by Michael Woodley of Menie and his colleagues.[68] They note that Darwinian selection has relaxed considerably since 1800 in advanced Western countries. In 1800, the child mortality rate was 40 percent; it is now 1 percent.[69] Before the Industrial Revolution, those who had mutations (which are almost always detrimental to mental and physical health) were purged from the population every generation. These mutations of the body, which led to a poor immune system and dying from childhood diseases, for example, were comorbid with mutations of the mind, such as inclinations towards maladaptive sexuality or any form of behavior that would likely reduce fertility. This is because the mind is 84 percent of the genome. This renders it a massive target for mutation, meaning that if you have mutant genes of the body, you will almost certainly have mutant genes of the mind.[70]

This dramatic change in infant mortality would have a number of related effects. Firstly, there would be more people with maladaptive mutations of the mind, such as deviant sexuality or even a propensity towards Gender Dysphoria. Secondly, these people would be more likely to be maladaptively influenced by hormones in utero. Thirdly, society would be influenced, in a maladaptive way, by these maladapted people—thus the term “spiteful mutants,” coined by Woodley of Menie and his team—which would interfere with the development of some non-mutants. Indeed, some of these “spiteful mutants” might actively encourage easily influenced young people to experiment with the idea that they are “non-binary,” to believe that this was “normal,” or to believe that it was a social good to be non-binary or transsexual.

Moreover, such “spiteful mutants” would act to undermine institutions and ideas that promoted the development of adaptive behavior and ways of thinking, such as religiousness. In modern societies, religiousness is associated with mental and physical health, as well as fertility.[71] This would be consistent with evidence that significantly genetic conditions, such as depression, can be socially contagious.[72] If you, as a genetically healthy person, spend time with a “spiteful mutant,” he can render you maladaptively inclined.[73] And we would expect the process to occur relatively quickly. Religiousness would hold maladaptive ideas at bay until a tipping point was reached, after which a society would switch relatively promptly to maladaptive behaviors. It seems that once approximately 25 percent of the population holds a particular counter-cultural view, then the society loses confidence in the dominant viewpoint and starts to move, quite rapidly, towards the counter-cultural one.[74] This would explain the relative rapidity with which traditional religious ideas, including religion-inspired sexual taboos, have collapsed in many Western countries since the 1960s.

In the 1950s, in Western countries, a person would be less likely to know about the existence of transsexuals. If he happened to suffer from Gender Dysphoria himself, he would likely do he could to repress this, knowing that he would be shunned if he did not. He might, possibly, even believe that such behavior would anger his god. This ability, to force yourself to think in a socially adaptive manner, is known as “effortful control.”[75] In the following decade, these social controls that militated against maladaptive thinking and behavior, such as religion, began to collapse. At the time of writing, it might be argued that it is “socially adaptive” to force yourself to believe that much in the above discussion must be false, despite the fact that it is based on careful scientific studies, with the results often being widely replicated. This is best exemplified in the firing of Maya Forstater, mentioned above, for stating a scientific fact. As we noted, she lost her Employment Tribunal in which she challenged her firing. Judge James Taylor, presiding over the tribunal, made the following ruling:

If a person has transitioned from male to female and has a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC), that person is legally a woman. That is not something [Miss Forstater] is entitled to ignore. [Miss Forstater’s] position is that even if a trans woman has a GRC, she cannot honestly describe herself as a woman. That belief is not worthy of respect in a democratic society. Even paying due regard to the qualified right to freedom of expression, people cannot expect to be protected if their core belief involves violating others’ dignity and creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment for them.[76]

In other words, believing in the empirical truth, and asserting that you believe in the empirical truth, is a stance that is not, in itself, “worthy of respect in a democratic society.” There should be no legal protection for those who construct a worldview based on science, reason, and empirical evidence, if aspects of this worldview lead to negative emotions in some people, specifically people who have mind-body dysphoria. Such a ruling might be seen to strongly incentivize “effortful control” in order to convince oneself that “Black is White.”

A Cuckoo in the Nest

As transsexuality have become increasingly prominent, it’s only natural that many have grown suspicious that transsexuals are taking on these new identities mendaciously—that is, they are swapping genders as a way of gaining attention or even advantage. It could be argued that if you are a narcissist—and thus strongly desire validation, admiration, and sympathy—then you might be able to convince yourself that you are born in the wrong body. In a society in which being a member of a supposedly victimized group is valued—a reversal of what was previously the case—then unscrupulous people are incentivized to reinvent themselves on occasion.

Rachel Dolezal is the most notorious example of this kind of behavior. A biologically White woman raised in Montana, Dolezal adopted typically African-American dress, hair, and speech patterns and, at a relatively young age, became President of the NAACP chapter of Spokane, Washington—a high-status position that, presumably, would not have been open to a White. When Dolezal’s deception was revealed, she was excoriated int he media as a liar or con artist—or even, ironically, as the ultimate expression of “whiteness”[77]; but there is reason to believe that Dolezal genuinely felt that she was part of the Black experience, either through effortful control or, perhaps, childhood trauma.[78] More recently, Dr. Jessica Krug, formerly of George Washington University, did something similar, posing as Black for many years and apparently taking advantage of the “diversity” regime currently dominant in Western academia.[79]

So, if you are a White, heterosexual male—and excluded from the new victimhood nobility—you may find yourself drawn towards transgenderism, particularly if you already suffer from the array of psychological problems associated with it, which we discussed above. There has been some notable pushback to transwomen entering women’s domains, particularly women’s sports.[80] But the trend is well underway and seemingly unstoppable. In 2019, CeCe Telfer became the first transsexual athlete to win an N.C.A.A. track-and-field championship (in the 400-meter hurdles), and across all sports, transwomen are competing as women and, not surprisingly, finding success. Sports are segregated by sex for a reason, and biological males have obvious advantages in the areas of strength, quickness, and aggression in intersexual competition; this rule holds even for biological men who have undergone hormonal therapy after transitioning.[81]

Regarding the “consciousness” of transexuals, we should remember that deception—and even self-deception—can sometimes be an evolutionary strategy. The cuckoo bird, for instance, engages in what is known as “nest parasitism”: the cuckoo mother lays an egg in the nest of another species, usually after kicking out one of the eggs already there. The cuckoo hatchling then proceeds, instinctively, to banish other competing hatchlings from its new nest, becoming its adoptive mother’s sole focus. Whether or not the hatchling is “conscious” of its ruthless subterfuge is of academic concern. The fact is, it acts in a way that increases its well-being and ability to survive. If society is structured to incentivize and valorize transsexuals, then we should not be surprised that it produces more transsexuals—along with a myriad of new ethical and identitarian dilemmas.

Returning to Alex

So, we have substantially made sense of transgenderism, which is best understood as both a dysphoria and as a paraphilia. In this regard, it has the key correlates of both, including severe disturbances of personality. This would perhaps explain the aggressive narcissism which many people have observed in transsexuals, with autism (and thus masculinization) possibly being the factor that connects everything together.

This brings us back to Alex, my friend from Durham University. There was an irrational and bombastic side to Alex. He attended left-wing protests, where he could be rather rambunctious. His Master’s thesis, Logic in Context: Some Considerations Concerning the Philosophy, Sociology and History of Logic (2006), begins with a quote from the English philosopher A. A. Luce (1882-1977), beneath which Alex wrote: “I will remark without hesitation that I regard the contents of this quote as arrant and polemical nonsense.” Part of the quote is further referred to as “gibberish.”[82] In the student bar that night back 2001, Alex’s logical abilities rather broke down in the face of a student of Arabic, who asked Alex what he hoped to achieve by what he was doing. Alex commented that what he was doing was only logical to other transgender people, to which it was retorted that there’s no such thing as subjective logic—something Alex well knew. Indeed, Alex could be rather dogmatic. This led him, for example, to present the fallacious argument, in the pages of Philosophy Now magazine, that “race” is a purely social construct, simply because “races” have some genes in common.[83] This position, manifestly, fails due to the fact that races, as examples of humans, will, by definition, have some genes in common. This, however, was the same person who set up a talk at the Durham University Philosophy Society entitled, “Is Feminist Philosophy a Contradiction in Terms?” This event was advertised on a poster featuring Pamela Anderson in black underwear.

My friends and I were dumbfounded by what we discovered about Alex back in December 2001. One of my classmates, who was also at Alex’s 21st, later remarked that such behavior was simply a manifestation of Alex’s “avant-garde genius”:

He’s going to do it. He’s actually going to mutilate his body. Maybe he’s not mentally ill at all. Why would anybody who was a man want to become a girl? Most men wouldn’t even entertain something so fucking insane. But not Alex. No way! He’s too avant-garde! That guy is a fucking avant-garde genius. I can only conclude that this is some sort of ultimate act of violent, avant-garde artistic sarcasm.

Interestingly, in 2008, there was an essay competition in the magazine Philosophy Now, where you had to answer the question: “Who is the Best Philosopher?” Rather than advocate for Heraclitus or David Hume, “Andrea” argued that she was. This breathtakingly original tactic meant that she was one of the winners. Her essay was entitled: “The answer is: Me!”[84]

I didn’t see Alex, or Dreya, much in the Spring term. But in my final term at university, the same comical situation kept recurring. I would walk up the road of Victorian houses to the university library and a slender, pretty blonde girl would smile at me and wave from the other side of the road. “This is my lucky day!” I would think to myself . . . before realizing that it was Alex.

I last saw Alex (or Dreya) in September 2002, when we met up in Bristol in the southwest of England. Just back from a holiday in Malta with his parents, Alex was planning to do a Master’s degree in Political Philosophy at the University of Sussex in Brighton, a seaside town in southern England, known for its gay scene. We lost touch.

In October 2009, I was scrolling through the Mail Online, when my attention was drawn to a photograph of a pretty girl wearing a mortar board and graduation robes. I knew her from somewhere. Who was she? You guessed it: it was Alex. So much had happened in the meantime. He had been working as a prostitute in Brighton, operating out of his own home. And he had been found dead, and the flat, set on fire. The report said nothing about his transsexuality. Once I got over the shock, I knew immediately what must have happened. I could imagine it vividly. Some middle-aged, single man, probably uneducated, a laborer or something, pays Alex for sex. He comments on how amazingly neat Alex’s vagina is or how uncommonly perfect his breasts are. Alex, in his autistic innocence, replies, “Yes. Well, they are very perfect, unnaturally perfect, but that’s because I was actually born male, so, like, that would explain their near-perfect shape.” The manly builder, who prides himself on his manliness, realizes that he’s had sex with a man. He completely loses all self-control. He strangles Alex and then he sets fire to the flat in the hope of avoiding detection.

I was sure that this was what had happened. I was so sure that I telephoned the newspaper to tell them so. The News Desk journalist was incredulous at being informed that “Andrea Joanna Waddell” (as was now the name) was once “Alexander John Waddell.” He didn’t believe me. He asked if anyone could corroborate what I was saying, so I gave him the phone number of a friend from university who did just that. It turned out that my instinct was shared even by the prosecution when the case came to trial in May 2010. The murderer, a 42-year-old Sky TV fitter called Neil McMillan, pleaded “not guilty,” but was convicted due to forensic and CCTV evidence. He had paid Alex £140 for sex but, at some point, also being very drunk, he lost his temper, punched Alex in the face, and strangled him. Alex fought back, leading to scratches and cuts on McMillan, but to no avail. We’ll probably never know why McMillan strangled Alex, but the prosecution was convinced that it was likely because McMillan discovered that Alex was transsexual. The prosecuting barrister, Mr. Russell-Flint, said “McMillan may have attacked her in anger and in drink after discovering she had once been a man.”[85]

As the trial progressed, Alex’s naivety became ever clearer. He kept £37,000 in cash at his flat in a filing cabinet in the sitting room. He advertised his services on websites such as one called “Adult Works.” Alex had even contacted the “National Union of Prostitutes” to ask how he could go about paying tax on his earnings.[86] In June 2010, McMillan was handed a life sentence, with the judge instructing that he serve a minimum of 22 years.[87] Then in November, McMillan was found guilty of having raped a woman in a hotel room in September 2009, just a few weeks before he had murdered Alex. He was sentenced to be detained at Her Majesty’s Pleasure.[88] After the original trial, Alex’s family revealed yet more tragic information about him:

Her life reads like a catalogue of disasters. She was bullied at school, knocked down by a car in Battersea, mugged in Prague, and once attacked by a gang of young thugs in Reading. While completing her second degree she developed acute ulcerative colitis which was nearly fatal, but she underwent successfully surgery resulting in an ileostomy, which was later reversed.[89]

The family had said, in 2009: “Andrea was often incapacitated by pain and unable to work, and we know she was concerned about how to make a living and be independent. If her decision on how to achieve this took her down unusual paths, who are we to judge?”[90]

I am not so much interested in judging Alex, either. But we should try to understanding him and people like him. This is especially important now that such people are increasingly socially prominent—and particularly now that you can lose your job if you fail to accept their assertions about gender and identity as unconditional facts. In January 2020, Rachel Levine was appointed by U.S. President Joe Biden as assistant health secretary, making “her” the first openly transgender federal official.[91]

Alex suffered from Gender Dysphoria and Paraphilia. Consistent with these being manifestations of dysphoria and paraphilia, Alex was autistic and seriously physically and mentally ill, points also congruous with these traits being products of developmental instability and high mutational load. Even his left-wing viewpoints have been shown to be associated with evidence of mutational load, which makes sense, as they tend to correlate with not having children, meaning that those who hold them are maladaptive.

Of course, saying this may be regarded as a “judgment” upon Alex (albeit one empirically based). But if more people had “judged” Alex, and helped him through his mental illness—rather than encouraged him to make a virtue out of it—he may well have been alive today, perhaps writing poetry, reviewing cutting-edge cocktails, and leading his local Philosophy Society.

 


 

References

  1. Simon Baron-Cohen, “The Extreme Male Brain Theory of Autism,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6 (2002): 248-254. ↩︎
  2. Kelly James Clark, Philosophers Who Believe: The Spiritual Journeys of 11 Leading Thinkers (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1993), 179. ↩︎
  3. Edward Dutton, Meeting Jesus at University: Rites of Passage and Student Evangelicals (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008). ↩︎
  4. Jonathan Glancey, “The Votes Are In: Your Favourite British Building,” The Guardian, September 16, 2011, https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2011/sep/16/britains-best-building-readers-vote-results (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  5. Williams Institute, “How Many Adults Identify as Transgender in the United States?” UCLA School of Law, June 2016, https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/trans-adults-united-states/ (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  6. Riittakerttu Kaltiala-Heino, Marja Työläjärvi, Nina Lindberg, “Gender Dysphoria in Adolescent Population: A 5-year Replication Study,” Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 24 (2019): 379-387. ↩︎
  7. Robert Booth, “Transgender Man Loses Court Battle to be Registered as Father,” The Guardian, September 25, 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/sep/25/transgender-man-loses-court-battle-to-be-registered-as-father-freddy-mcconnell (accessed January 15, 2020). ↩︎
  8. Amanda Prestigiacomo, “Triggering On A New Level: Video Of Democratic Socialists Of America Convention Goes Viral,” Daily Wire, August 7, 2019), https://www.dailywire.com/news/triggering-new-level-video-democratic-socialists-amanda-prestigiacomo (January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  9. Jake Hurfurt, “Britons Have No Right to Ask Whether a Transgender Person is Male or Female, Rules Employment Judge in Landmark Ruling AGAINST Tax Expert Who Was Sacked For Tweeting ‘Men Cannot Become Women,” Mail Online December 19, 2019, https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7808685/Britons-ask-transgender-person-male-female-judge-says.html (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  10. Avinash Chak, “Beyond ‘He’ and ‘She’: The Rise of Non-binary Pronouns,” BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34901704 (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  11. Edward Dutton, Witches, Feminism and the Fall of the West (Whitefish, MT: Washington Summit Publishers, forthcoming). ↩︎
  12. Ray Blanchard, “Varieties of Autogynephilia and Their Relationship to Gender Dysphoria,” Archives of Sexual Behavior, 22 (1993): 241–251. ↩︎
  13. J. Michael Bailey and Ray Blanchard, “Gender Dysphoria is Not One Thing,” 4thWaveNow, December 7, 2017, https://4thwavenow.com/tag/autohomoerotic-gender-dysphoria/ (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  14. Louise Perry, “What Is Autogynephilia? An Interview with Dr Ray Blanchard,” Quillette, November 6, 2019, https://quillette.com/2019/11/06/what-is-autogynephilia-an-interview-with-dr-ray-blanchard/ (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  15. Alice Dreger, Galileo’s Middle Finger: Heretics, Activists, and One Scholar’s Search for Justice (London, Penguin, 2015); quoted in Louise Perry, “What Is Autogynephilia? Quillette, op cit. ↩︎
  16. Kenneth Zucker, Anne Lawrence, and Baudewijntje Kreukels, “Gender Dysphoria in Adults,” Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 12 (2016): 217-247. ↩︎
  17. Tina Polderman, Baudewijntje Kreukels, Michael Irwig et al., “The Biological Contributions to Gender Identity and Gender Diversity: Bringing Data to the Table,” Behavior Genetics, 48 (2018): 95–108. ↩︎
  18. Ray Blanchard, “Review and Theory of Handedness, Birth Order, and Homosexuality in Men,” Laterality, 13 (2008): 51-70. ↩︎
  19. David Moskowitz, Jonathan Turrubiates, Hector Lorano, and Christopher Hayek, “Physical, Behavioral, and Psychological Traits of Gay Men Identifying as Bears,” Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42 (2013): 775-784. ↩︎
  20. Ray Blanchard and Peter Sheridan, “Sibship Size, Sibling Sex Ratio, Birth Order, and Parental Age in Homosexual and Nonhomosexual Gender Dysphorics,” Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 180 (1992): 40-47. ↩︎
  21. Antonio Guillamon. Carme Junque and Esther Gómez-Gil, “A Review of the Status of Brain Structure Research in Transsexualism,” Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45 (2016): 1615-1648. ↩︎
  22. Sari Reisner, Tonia Poteat, JoAnne Keatley, Mauro Cabral, Tampose Mothopeng, Emilia Dunham, Claire Holland, Ryan Max, and Stefan Baral, “Global Health Burden and Needs of Transgender Populations: A Review,” Lancet, 388 (2016): 412-436. ↩︎
  23. Dana Levit, Jacob Ablin, Valeries Aloush, and Iris Yash, “Evaluating Fibromyalgia Symptoms in Transgender Patients,” Arthritis and Rheumatology, 71 (2019): (suppl 10). ↩︎
  24. Anne Lawrence, “Autogynephilia: An Underappreciated Paraphilia,” Advances in Psychosomatic Medicine, 31 (2011): 135-148. ↩︎
  25. Ray Blanchard, “The She-Male Phenomenon and the Concept of Partial Autogynephilia,” Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 19 (1993): 69-76. ↩︎
  26. See Practical Guide to Paraphilia and Paraphilic Disorders, edited by Richard Ballon (New York: Springer, 2016). ↩︎
  27. Christian Joyal and Jan Ankfold, “Paraphilia,” in Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science, edited by Todd Shackelford and Vivian Weekes-Shackelford (New York: Springer, 2017); Michele Heare, Maria Barsky, and Lawrence Faziola, “A Case of Mania Presenting with Hypersexual Behavior and Gender Dysphoria That Resolved With Valproic Acid,” Mental Illness, 8 (2016): 2. ↩︎
  28. James Cantor and Katherine Sutton, “Paraphilia, Gender Dysphoria, and Hypersexuality,” in Oxford Textbook of Psychopathology, edited by Theodore Millon, Robert F. Krueger, and Paul H. Blaney (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015). ↩︎
  29. Giovanni Castellini, Lorenzo Lelli, Valda Ricca, and Mario Maggi, “Sexuality in Eating Disorders Patients: Etiological Factors, Sexual Dysfunction and Identity Issues. A Systematic Review,” Hormone and Molecular Biology and Clinical Investigation, 25 (2016): 2. ↩︎
  30. Baron-Cohen, “The Extreme Male Brain Theory of Autism,” op cit. ↩︎
  31. Daniel Schöttle, Peer Birken, Oliver Tuescher and Daniel Turner, “Sexuality in Autism: Hypersexual and Paraphilic Behavior in Women and Men With High-functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder,” Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 19 (2017): 381-393. ↩︎
  32. Gunter Heylens, Lore Aspeslagh, Jesper Dierickx, et al., “The Co-occurrence of Gender Dysphoria and Autism Spectrum Disorder in Adults: An Analysis of Cross-Sectional and Clinical Chart Data,” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 48 (2018): 2217-2223. ↩︎
  33. Anna van der Miesen, Annelou de Vries, Thomas Steensma, et al., “Autistic Symptoms in Children and Adolescents with Gender Dysphoria,” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 48 (2018): 1537-1548. ↩︎
  34. Heather Westwood and Kate Tchanturia, “Autism Spectrum Disorder in Anorexia Nervosa: An Updated Literature Review,” Current Psychiatry Reports, 19 (2017): 41. ↩︎
  35. Viktoria Lyons and Michael Fitzgerald, “Atypical Sense of Self in Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Neuro- Cognitive Perspective,” InTech Open (March 6, 2013, doi: 10.5772/53680. ↩︎
  36. Natalie Gold and Michaelis Kyratsous, “Self and Identity in Borderline Personality Disorder: Agency and Mental Time Travel,” Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 23 (2017): 1020-1028. ↩︎
  37. Álvaro Frías, Laura González, Cárol Palma, and Núria Farriols, “Is There a Relationship Between Borderline Personality Disorder and Sexual Masochism in Women?” Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46 (2017): 747-754. ↩︎
  38. Antonio Prunas, Rossello Di Pierro and Roberto Bernorio, “The Relationship Between Personality Organization and Sexual Life in a Community Sample of Men,” Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy, 4 (2016): 345-358. ↩︎
  39. Atefeh Ghanbari Jolfaei, Azadeh Mazaheri Meybodi, and Ahmad Hajebi, “The Frequency of Personality Disorders in Patients With Gender Identity Disorder,” Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 28 (2014): 90; Kurt Seikworski, Sabine Gollek, Wolfgang Harth and Michaela Reinhardt, “Borderline Personality Disorder and Transsexualism,” Psychiatrische Praxis, 35 (2008):135-41  ↩︎
  40. Clive Kelly and Matthew Davies, “A Review of Anorexia Nervosa, Its Relationship to Autism and Borderline Personality Disorder, and Implications for Patient Related Outcomes,” Journal of Psychiatry and Psychiatric Disorders, 3 (2019): 207-215. ↩︎
  41. Hiram Caton, “The Exalted Self: Derek Freeman’s Quest for the Perfect Identity,” Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 5 (2005): 4. ↩︎
  42. Ashley Watts, Madeline Nagel, Robert Latzman, and Scott Lilienfeld, “Personality Disorder Features and Paraphilic Interests Among Undergraduates: Differential Relations and Potential Antecedents,” Journal of Personality Disorders, 33 (2018): 22-48. ↩︎
  43. Atefeh Ghanbari Jolfaei, Azadeh Mazaheri Meybodi and Ahmad Hajebi, “The Frequency of Personality Disorders in Patients with Gender Identity Disorder,” Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 28 (2014): 90. ↩︎
  44. Anne Lawrence, “Shame and Narcissistic Rage in Autogynephilic Transsexualism,” Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37 (2008): 457-461. ↩︎
  45. Federico Amianto, et al., “Narcissism and Eating Disorders in Adolescent Population,” EC Paediatrics, 5 (2017): 58-63. ↩︎
  46. Emanuel Jauk, Elena Weigle, Konrad Lehmann, et al., “The Relationship between Grandiose and Vulnerable (Hypersensitive) Narcissism,” Frontiers in Psychology, 8 (2017):1600. ↩︎
  47. Anne Lawrence, “Shame and Narcissistic Rage in Autogynephilic Transsexualism,” Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37 (2008): 457-461. ↩︎
  48. Richard Lynn, “Racial and ethnic differences in psychopathic personality” Personality and Individual Differences, 32 (2002): 273-316. ↩︎
  49. Rob van Bommel, Kasia Uzieblo, Stefan Bogaerts and Carlo Garofalo, “Psychopathic Traits and Deviant Sexual Interests: The Moderating Role of Gender,” International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 17 (2018): 256-271. ↩︎
  50. Cecilia Dhejne, Roy Van Vlerken, Gunter Heylens , and Jon Arcelus, “Mental Health and Gender Dysphoria: A Review of the Literature,” International Review of Psychiatry, 28 (2016): 44-57. ↩︎
  51. Males tend to display relatively little difference in finger length compared to females. ↩︎
  52. Riittakerttu Kaltiala-Heino, Marja Työläjärvi, and Nina Lindberg, “Gender Dysphoria in Adolescent Population: A 5-year Replication Study,” Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, (2019), doi.org/10.1177/1359104519838593. ↩︎
  53. Owen Tonks, “Love Is In The Air: Who is Caitlyn Jenner’s Partner Sophia Hutchins and How Long Have They Been Dating?” The Sun, November 26, 2019, https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/6773717/caitlyn-jenner-girlfriend-sophia-hutchins-age-married/ (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  54. Edward Dutton and Guy Madison, “Gender Dysphoria and Transgender Identity is Associated with Physiological and Psychological Masculinization: A Theoretical Integration of Findings, Supported by Systematic Reviews,” (2020),  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-020-00489-z ↩︎
  55. Simona Giordano, “Eating Yourself Away: Reflections on the ‘Comorbidity’ of Eating Disorders and Gender Dysphoria,” Clinical Ethics (2017), https://doi.org/10.1177/1477750916661977 (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  56. Anne Lawrence, “Autogynephilia: An Underappreciated Paraphilia,” Advances in Psychosomatic Medicine, 31 (2011): 135-148. ↩︎
  57. Michael A. Woodley of Menie, Matthew A. Sarraf, Radomir N. Pestow, and Heitor B. F. Fernandes, “Social Epistasis Amplifies the Fitness Costs of Deleterious Mutations, Engendering Rapid Fitness Decline Among Modernized Populations,” Evolutionary Psychological Science, 3 (2017): 181-191. ↩︎
  58. Thomas D. Steensma, Jenifer K. McGuire, Baudewijntje Kreukels, et al., “Factors Associated With Desistence and Persistence of Childhood Gender Dysphoria: A Quantitative Follow-up Study,” Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 52 (2013): 582-590. ↩︎
  59. Jack L. Turban and Alex S. Keuroghlian, “Dynamic Gender Presentations: Understanding Transition and “De-Transition” Among Transgender Youth,” Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 57 (2018): 451–453; S. Danker, S.K. Narayan, R. Bluebond-Langner, “A Survey Study of Surgeons’ Experience with Regret and/or Reversal of Gender-Confirmation Surgeries,” Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery – Global Open, 6 (2018): 189. doi:10.1097/01.GOX.0000547077.23299.00. ↩︎
  60. Lisa Littman, “Parent Reports of Adolescents and Young Adults Perceived to Show Signs of a Rapid Onset of Gender Dysphoria,” PLoS ONE, 13 (2018): e0202330, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202330 (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  61. Stephen Allison, Megan Warin, and Tarun Bastianpillai, “Anorexia Nervosa and Social Contagion: Clinical Implications,” Australia and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 48 (2014): 116-120. ↩︎
  62. Robert Tracinski, “Is Transgender the New Anorexia?” The Federalist, September 6, 2018. https://thefederalist.com/2018/09/06/transgender-new-anorexia/ (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  63. Kenneth J. Zucker, Susan J. Bradley, Dahlia N. Ben-Dat, et al., “Psychopathology in the Parents of Boys With Gender Identity Disorder,” Journal of the American Academy of Child Adolescent Psychiatry, 42 (2003): 2-4. ↩︎
  64. S. Marantz and S. Coates, “Mothers of boys with gender identity disorder: a comparison of matched controls,” Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 30 (1991): 310-315. ↩︎
  65. Meng-Chuan Lai, Yen-Nan Chiu, Kenneth D. Gadow, Susan Shur-Fen Gau and Hai-Gwo Hwu, “Correlates of Gender Dysphoria in Taiwanese University Students,” Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39 (2010): 1415-1428. ↩︎
  66. L. Balottin, R. Nacinovich, M. Bomba and S. Mannarini, “Alexithymia in parents and adolescent anorexic daughters: comparing the responses to TSIA and TAS-20 scales” Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, 10 (2014): 1941-1951. ↩︎
  67. R. Kaltiala-Heino, M. Sumia, M. Työläjärvi, and N. Lindberg, et al., “Two years of gender identity service for minors: overrepresentation of natal girls with severe problems in adolescent development,” Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 9:9. ↩︎
  68. Woodley of Menie, Sarraf, Pestow, and Fernandes, “Social Epistasis Amplifies the Fitness Costs of Deleterious Mutations, Engendering Rapid Fitness Decline Among Modernized Populations,” op cit. ↩︎
  69. Anthony Volk, and Jeremy Atkinson, “Is Child Death the Crucible of Human Evolution?” Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 2 (2008): 103-116. ↩︎
  70. Woodley of Menie, Sarraf, Pestow, and Fernandes, “Social Epistasis Amplifies the Fitness Costs of Deleterious Mutations, Engendering Rapid Fitness Decline Among Modernized Populations,” op cit.. ↩︎
  71. Edward Dutton, Guy Madison and Curtis Dunkel, “The Mutant Says in His Heart, ‘There Is No God’: The Rejection of Collective Religiosity Centred Around the Worship of Moral Gods is Associated with High Mutational Load,” Evolutionary Psychological Science, 4 (2018): 233-244. ↩︎
  72. Joiner, “Contagious Depression,” op cit. ↩︎
  73. See Matthew Sarraf, Michael A. Woodley of Menie, and Colin Feltham, Modernity and Cultural Decline: A Biobehavioral Perspective (Basingstoke, Hants: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019). ↩︎
  74. Damon Centola, Joshua Becker, Devon Brackbill, and Andrea Baronchelli, “Experimental Evidence for Tipping Points in Social Convention,” Science, 360 (2018): 1116-1119. ↩︎
  75. Kevin MacDonald, “Effortful Control, Explicit Processing, and the Regulation of Human Evolved Predispositions,” Psychological Review, 115 (2008): 1012-1031. ↩︎
  76. Forstater v. CGD Europe & Anor (Religious or Belief Discrimination), United Kingdom Employment Tribunal, December 18, 2019. ↩︎
  77. See Ijeoma Oluo, “The Heart of Whiteness: Ijeoma Oluo Interviews Rachel Dolezal, the White Woman Who Identifies as Black,” The Stranger, April 19, 2017, https://www.thestranger.com/features/2017/04/19/25082450/the-heart-of-whiteness-ijeoma-oluo-interviews-rachel-dolezal-the-white-woman-who-identifies-as-black (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  78. Richard Spencer, “Black Like Her,” Radix Journal, June 18, 2015, https://radixjournal.com/2015/06/2015-6-18-rachel-dolezal-and-the-quest-for-identity/ (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  79. Guardian Staff, “Jessica Krug: White Professor Who Pretended to be Black Resigns From University Post,” The Guardian, September 10, 2020), https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/09/jessica-krug-professor-resigns-george-washington (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  80. See Martina Navratilova, “The Rules on Trans Athletes Reward Cheats and Punish the Innocent,” The Times (London), February 17, 2019, https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-rules-on-trans-athletes-reward-cheats-and-punish-the-innocent-klsrq6h3x (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  81. Gillian R. Brassil and Jeré Longman, “Who Should Compete in Women’s Sports? There Are ‘Two Almost Irreconcilable Positions,’” New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/18/sports/transgender-athletes-womens-sports-idaho.html (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  82. Andrea Waddell, Logic in Context: Some Considerations Concerning the Philosophy, Sociology and History of Logic (Master’s Thesis, University of Sussex: 2006), 2; OrnaVerum, Andrea Joanna Waddell (1980–2009), http://www.ornaverum.org/family/waddell-andrea.html (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  83. Andrea Waddell, “Race and Science,” Philosophy Now, February/March 2006, https://philosophynow.org/issues/54/Letters (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  84. Andrea Waddell, “The Answer Is: Me!” Philosophy Today November/December 2008, https://philosophynow.org/issues/70/Who_Is_The_Best_Philosopher (accessed January 15, 2021. ↩︎
  85. Get Reading, “Andrea Waddell ‘Strangled by Her Client,’” May 12, 2010, https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/local-news/andrea-waddell-strangled-client-4226743 (accessed January 15, 2021. ↩︎
  86. Alison Cridland, “£37,000 Found at Murdered Prostitute’s Brighton Flat,” The Argus May 14, 2010, https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/8164339.37000-found-at-murdered-prostitutes-brighton-flat/ (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  87. Metro, “Neil McMillan Jailed For 22 Years For Andrea Waddell Murder,” June 4, 2010, https://metro.co.uk/2010/06/04/neil-mcmillan-jailed-for-22-years-for-murdering-transgender-prostitute-356623/?ito=cbshare (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  88. Get Reading, “Andrea Waddell Murderer Sentenced For Rape,” November 22, 2010, https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/local-news/andrea-waddell-murderer-sentenced-rape-4220359 (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  89. Laura Miller, “Family tribute to brave Andrea Waddell,” Get Reading, June 9, 2010, https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/local-news/family-tribute-brave-andrea-waddell-4225690 (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  90. Laura Miller, “We Will Never Stop Loving Andrea Waddell,” Get Reading, October 21, 2009, https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/local-news/never-stop-loving-andrea-waddell-4233931 (accessed January 15, 2021). ↩︎
  91. Samantha Schmidt, John Wagner, and Teo Armus, “Biden Selects Transgender Doctor Rachel Levine as Assistant Health Secretary,” January 19, 2021, https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/01/19/rachel-levine-transgender-biden-hhs-pick/ (accessed January 25, 2021). ↩︎

 

1 Comment on Born Again

Gilmore Girls: An American Tragedy

“This whole thing is dead to me, anyway. It died with Richard.” – Emily Gilmore, Fall. Was the death of Richard Gilmore the death of White America? It’s not that…

This whole thing is dead to me, anyway. It died with Richard.” – Emily Gilmore, Fall.

Was the death of Richard Gilmore the death of White America?

It’s not that the Gilmore Girls revival is less White than the original show; it’s that it’s more honest. The original Gilmore Girls was a White liberal utopia: a single mother raising her young daughter in an idyllic, wacky, all-White village in Connecticut (except for some Koreans and one disdainfully snobbish mulatto Frenchman—we’ll come back to him). Known for its snappy dialogue and charming absurdity, it was a difficult show not to like—anecdotally speaking, I know almost as many men as women who quietly enjoyed Gilmore Girls, usually introduced to it by their daughters or girlfriends.

But of course, the original Gilmore Girls was a lie. In the real world, a sixteen-year-old pregnant rich girl who ran away from home wouldn’t stumble upon a Brigadoon-esque village and grow up to become a successful businesswoman while her genius daughter/BFF goes to the equivalent of Choate and then Yale. In the real world, women who make as many bad decisions as Lorelai Gilmore does aren’t happy, nor are they seemingly rewarded for all of them. But the world of Gilmore Girls was a world set apart, a frozen episode that looked like early 2000’s America on the surface but really hearkened back to a more idyllic time.

I went into the revival expecting more of the same. In the final episode of the original series, we’re left with a Lorelai who has finally gotten back together with Luke the diner owner, and a Rory who has turned down a marriage proposal from her long-term boyfriend Logan Huntzberger, in order to pursue a career in journalism. This latter decision was one of the more signal-y moments in Gilmore Girls history: the girl-power ending where she proved she didn’t need no man! I predicted a revival that showed a plucky reporterette, fully satisfied with her career; a script that covered over the reality of culture that tells women they don’t need marriage, of the sick society in which we live where ‘empowered’ women slowly eat themselves to death after returning from their desk job every evening, alone except for a cat or two.

But I was wrong. The Gilmore Girls revival, wittingly or otherwise, reveals the rot of American society—especially in comparison with the original. The difference is so striking that I have to believe it was not entirely intentional on the part of the show creator; rather, it is indicative of a distinct change in social mood that has taken place between when the show ended, in 2007, and today.

The new Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life takes place over the course of a year, broken into four 90-minute episodes: Winter, Spring, Summer, and Fall. (Obligatory disclaimer: I am going to spoil the ending.)

In the original show, there was very little political propaganda. This was one of the most appealing things about it. Lorelai made the occasional George Bush joke, sometimes mocked her wealthy WASP parents for being Republicans, and Rory had a Planned Parenthood poster in her dorm room, but that was basically it. (Of course, the original premise of the show was pro-life, so they had to balance it out somehow). In general, this was incredibly refreshing compared to the constant political signaling in network television shows at the time, and compared to what’s on television now it’s like a different world. But the reboot is a different story. Suddenly, the town of Stars Hollow is engaged in gender activism, with earnest plans to put on a gay pride parade that never materializes due to a lack of homosexual town residents. (Hard to believe given the sudden prominence given to homosexual townsfolk.)

But far more striking is the change in the character of Michel Gerard. Michel, an overbearing, impeccably-dressed Frenchman with a thick accent and a penchant for Celine Dion, is a White-presenting mulatto who works at Lorelai’s inn, The Dragonfly. The original character of Michel was infamously sexually ambiguous; he of course fit a certain gay stereotype, was a little too close to his mother, etc. Nevertheless, there were occasional references made in passing to dating women, and never any made to male liaisons. Within the first 20 minutes of the reboot, in the first scene involving his character, Michel is discoursing scornfully about his male partner Frederick’s desire to adopt children. Why the dramatic change?

The answer is pretty simple: the original Gilmore Girls was a break from reality, while the reboot is almost unbearable in its reality. The past 8 years have been dramatic in their psychological effect on American society, and it is reflected here. But it’s more than that, in the world of the show. The mirror has crack’d from side-to-side; Richard Gilmore is dead. And with the patriarchal Gilmore gone, the order of things begins to break down, especially for the three female Gilmores.

Emily

You don’t move or change ever. There’s a picture of you in the attic that Dorian Grey is consulting lawyers about.” – Lorelai to Emily, “Spring.”

The change in Emily is the most dramatic over the course of these four episodes. Unlike the two younger Gilmore girls, Emily is marble-constant, an American matriarch to make Tocqueville proud. As she points out to her unwed daughter Lorelai, who has been “roommates” with Luke the diner owner for 8 years, she, Emily, was married to the same man for fifty years. Her loss at his death is incomprehensible to someone like Lorelai. Ever her husband’s champion, after Lorelai makes a characteristically embarrassing scene at her father’s funeral, Emily chides her thus: “Your father was a great man, a pillar of the community, a man amongst men. And you dishonored him today like this in his own house.” None of the other males in this world come close to Richard Gilmore. The implication runs throughout the show: we shall never see his like again.

Much like the unappreciated WASP patriarchs who held America together for so long, but who also oversaw its slow doom, Richard died having paid for his illegitimate granddaughter’s education at his alma mater, Yale, where she learned—what, exactly? Richard died without having to seriously confront the fantasy he built around Rory, Yale, and ultimately, America itself.

Over the course of the year, Emily is in a tailspin. “I don’t know how to do this,” she says to Lorelai at one point. “Do what?” “Live my life.” It is a jarring thing to watch: Emily Gilmore, the woman who knew every customary form, the woman of exquisite taste, who could never bear to let anyone see her falter: spiraling.

Even her beloved Daughters of the American Revolution chapter holds no joys for her now. (This is where I think the show breaks continuity with the original character, but for the sake of argument, we may chalk it up to grief.) The DAR, of course, represents another aspect of the collapse of the American regime; we may recall that it was one of the only national organizations that fought the 1965 Immigration Act tooth and nail, alongside the American Legion. And if there is one thing Emily devoted her life to, besides her family, it was the DAR. Finally, in an outburst at a DAR meeting, Emily says the most un-Emily line of them all: “I can’t spend any more time and energy on artifice and bullshit.” This betrays more about the script-writer than about Emily, for Emily Gilmore before this would never have really considered her work for the DAR to be artifice: the seemingly frivolous work of choosing curtains and tablecloths and china patterns was an expression of an attempt to hold a fraying society together. As Emily says before she walks out the DAR doors, “This whole thing is dead to me anyway. It died with Richard.” Without Richard Gilmore, there’s no point in trying to save America anymore.

Lorelai

You never do anything unless it’s exactly what you want to do. You never have. You go through life like a natural disaster knocking down everything and everyone in your path.” – Emily to Lorelai, “Winter.”

Fact check: True.

Lorelai is as flighty and selfish as ever, so there isn’t much new ground to cover here. She and Luke have lived together since the end of the series, never married, and apparently never even discussed having children, so it suddenly becomes an issue now. With Lorelai nearing the age of fifty, she can’t have children, and so surrogacy becomes a plot device that goes nowhere (but allows for some great scenes with the inimitable Paris Gellar, who breathed life into the whole depressing mess). Between the surrogacy drama and going to therapy with her mother, Lorelai works herself up into a real midlife crisis, deciding to go and hike the Pacific Crest Trail a la the book and movie Wild. Granted, I know nothing about either, but while the whole adventure seemed out of character—until she doesn’t actually go through with it—there was a certain pathos to the conversations she had with other women seeking solace in the wilderness. As the lonely ladies sit around a fire drinking boxed wine, one of them says, “I’m so glad I’m doing this. I almost did ‘Eat Pray Love,’ but my miles were blacked out. So here I am.” She later adds: “God, I hope this hike works. I need a new life so badly.”

Lorelai realizes that she doesn’t actually need a new life, and goes home to Luke having discovered that all she wants is to get married to him, leading to one of my favorite lines of the show: “I’ve gotta tell ya, before this thing goes on, the only way out is in a body bag.”

As infuriating as Lorelai is, she finally grows up enough to marry the man she loves. That’s something.

Rory

You’re glowing! You must be in love.” – Emily to Rory, “Winter.”

But Rory isn’t in love.

She’s not in love with her boyfriend Paul, whom she has dated for two years and whose existence she regularly forgets. (The callous treatment of forgettable Paul is supposed to be funny, but comes off as cruel.) She’s not in love with her work. She doesn’t even seem to be in love with her lover, Logan Huntzberger, who, it turns out, she has been having an extended sexual relationship with, we can assume for many years. Logan is engaged to a French heiress, but Rory stays with him whenever she’s in London, which seems to be quite often. In the series finale Rory turned down his offer of a diamond ring and a life together—apparently only to exchange it for the life of a mistress, a high-class call girl. This is why it is almost impossible to have any sympathy for the girl when Logan tells her that his fiancé is finally moving in, and that they’ll have to conduct their liasons in a hotel in the future. It suddenly dawns on Rory that she is, indeed, the other woman—and that rather than romantic, her life looks tawdry.

Lacking sympathy for Rory is the popular thing to do in reviews of the reboot, but for the wrong reasons. Sure, it’s true that Rory comes across as a spoiled child who has never been called to account for her poor choices. And yeah, her career isn’t going well. But it seems to me that that’s not because she’s arrogant or entitled: it’s because her heart just isn’t in it anymore. Even when she steels herself to get something done and goes out into Manhattan to interview people for a ridiculous story, instead of successfully completing her task we are treated to the cringiest scene of the entire show, when she returns to tell her mother that she’s had her first one-night stand with a man in a Wookie costume. (Yes, at this point she’s still supposedly dating Paul and sleeping with Logan.) She expresses no horror at her own disloyalty, but only at her choice of partner.

So who, or what, does Rory love?

She expresses a sincere nostalgic love for her ex-boyfriend Dean when she runs into him in the grocery store. And she drops everything to save the Stars Hollow Gazette from extinction, even taking over as editor—a truly thankless task.

It’s clear that Rory is in love with her childhood. Stars Hollow, her first boyfriend, and her mother are all emblems of this. Other reviewers see this as a failing; I do not. There’s nothing wrong with loving a place and trying to make it better, even sacrificing more prestigious dreams in order to do so. In some ways, Rory makes peace with this over the course of the episodes. She finally makes a clean break with Logan; she begins writing a book about the story of her relationship with her mother; and of course, in the shocking final scene, she tells her mother, “I’m pregnant.” While the show creator, Amy Sherman-Palladino, has suggested that Rory might have an abortion, the reviewer at Vox was horrified that Rory might actually think of keeping the child:

“Is this really what Rory wanted for herself? Or is she too deeply wedded to the mythos of Stars Hollow to know what her own desires are at this point?

The narrative’s cheerful, almost totally uncritical sublimation of millennial women’s individual agency to the cause of more babies is utterly enraging. To accept this plot as a natural conclusion to the show means either rewriting Rory herself into a passive noncommittal bore, or twisting Stars Hollow itself into something unrecognizable: a distorted version of American life where individual dreams and goals are repressed and subsumed into the larger collective. Stars Hollow, in this view, becomes a pro-life argument for the need to continue the legacy of Stars Hollow at any cost — even if it means dismantling the dreams of one of Stars Hollow’s finest.

It’s an abysmal, bittersweet way to part with a beloved fictional town. Rory will have the illusion of happiness, surrounded by community and family. But if 2016 has taught us anything, it’s that false comfort won’t make America great again, and it definitely won’t make Rory Gilmore great again.”

You see, the real tragedy would be having a community and a family, and thinking of yourself as happy. The horror!

Conclusion

The transformation of the town and its characters shows us that nothing is free of politics after the era of Obama, not even Stars Hollow.

Emily Gilmore is never really going to recover, because her world is gone.

Lorelai is getting married but isn’t going to have a child, while Rory may have a child, but isn’t getting married. It’s unclear whether or not she’ll have her baby, but either way, it won’t be raised with a father, just as Rory wasn’t raised with one. It’s a fatherless world. No fathers, no kings, no Richard Gilmores.

And yet the show isn’t really capable of pretending that everything is fine. The darkness shines through the charming humor, which isn’t as charming as it used to be. The gods left the earth a long time ago, but this seems to be a world entirely bereft of men. The result isn’t a feminist fantasy: it’s just sad.

1 Comment on Gilmore Girls: An American Tragedy

Monsters’ Ball

The series finale of HBO’s highly rated vampire soap opera, True Blood, concluded with an ostensive picture of Southern Family Values. The show flash forwards several years and the protagonist, the blonde Southern Belle Sookie Stackhouse is pregnant, and her baby daddy—though we do not know see his face—is presumably her husband and appears to be White. Her brother Jason, an incorrigible ladies man, is happily married to a blonde he met a few episodes earlier, and they have a few blond children.

The series finale of HBO’s highly rated vampire soap opera, True Blood, concluded with an ostensive picture of Southern Family Values. The show flash forwards several years and the protagonist, the blonde Southern Belle Sookie Stackhouse is pregnant, and her baby daddy—though we do not know see his face—is presumably her husband and appears to be White. Her brother Jason, an incorrigible ladies man, is happily married to a blonde he met a few episodes earlier, and they have a few blond children.

They are hosting a neighborhood dinner outside the family’s ancestral antebellum estate, and Sookie serves her friends and family a home-cooked meal at a picnic table, underneath a Weeping Willow and illuminated by lanterns and the stars. 

As Sookie is part fairy, Jason and his wife are the only couple of the opposite sex and same race and species. I may have missed one or two, but the couples include an interracial shape-shifter/human with two mulatto kids; a vampire/human (both children of intolerant parents); a witch/human; fairy/human; and, my favorite, Lafayette—a gay, Black, semi-transgendered witch and his White, vampire boyfriend. 

A vampire-human wedding dominates much of the episode, with one character noting that the State of Louisiana bans such weddings. He asks how anyone could deny their love, despite some minor problems: the vampire bride lost control of her urges and killed her groom’s three daughters; the couple cannot reproduce; and the groom will age while the bride maintains eternal youth. 

The penultimate scene preceding this display of domestic bliss shows two vampires enslaving and torturing Sarah Newlin, a blonde Christian evangelical leader who has led various anti-vampire crusades. (Viewers are expected to view this scene with schadenfreude rather than pity.)

While conservatives love to hate this show, I have not seen any reaction to the final episode. It may come, but I doubt the final scene will inspire their ire. I looked over the anti-True Blood articles in the two main anti-liberal Hollywood websites—the Media Research Center and Breitbart’s Big Hollywood—to see their complaints: sex and violence, jokes about Republicans and Ted Cruz, hate criminals wearing Obama masks (would they be less upset if they wore Sarah Palin masks?), and other kvetching.

Breitbart.com ran eight separate stories (12345678) on an episode in which vampires and the Yakuza attack a fundraiser for Ted Cruz and a character used the portmanteau “Republicunt.” The True Blood producers had asked Sarah Palin to guest star in the episode, which she turned down. She told Breitbart, in full self-parody mode, 

Nice try HBO. I’d put any mama grizzly in America against a vampire any day; for only one of them actually exists. The left wants to talk about a ‘war on women’? Keep engaging in your misogynist attacks on women you disagree with and we’ll see who wins your self-inflicted war in the court of decent public opinion.

Breitbart and the Media Research Center are correct in one sense: no doubt, True Blood‘s writers and producers vote predominantly for Democrats, and the show takes cheap shots at Republicans and Christians. But such things are superficial and dispensable to the essence series. And characteristically, conservative critics ignore, or are unable to understand, the more fundamental and insidious ways in which Hollywood engages in culture distortion. 

True Blood’s premise is that scientists have synthesized human blood into the brand “True Blood”; since vampires no longer need to prey on innocent victims, they are able to “come out of the coffin” and acknowledge their existence to humans. As the show continues, other supernatural beings, including witches, shapeshifters, werewolves, fairies, and even a Maenad, are revealed.             

The opening credits feature signs with phrase like “God Hates Fangs” (get it, like “god hates fags”), alongside images of police beating civil rights activists and KKK cross-burnings. The aforementioned Sarah Newlin, along with her husband, the Rev. Steve Newlin (who turns out to be a closeted homosexual), Republican Congressman David Finch (also a closeted homosexual), and Republican Governor Truman Burrell (not a closeted homosexual, but his wife cheated on him with a vampire) all promote various anti-vampire positions ranging from opposing the “vampire rights amendment” to putting vampires in concentration camps to experimenting on them before committing mass genocide.

Though the show portrays hateful Christians negatively, it is not entirely anti-Christian. In one episode in Season 6, Sarah Newlin attempts to massacre a group of vampires in a warehouse by opening the roof and letting the sun in. She tells herself that God wants her to do it. Yet in the same episode, a Black minister gives a sermon about a recently deceased White character. He praises his devotion to God and says that he understands that he violated Christian gospel, because he knew “he was telling the truth.”

The message is clear: Christians are good when they promote love and understanding, even if it involves ignoring the Bible; they are bad when they promote hate.  

What should we make of this? Charlene Harris, the author of the show’s source material, The Southern Vampire Mysteries, welcomed the idea that the show promoted gay rights, stating,

When I began framing how I was going to represent the vampires, it suddenly occurred to me that it would be interesting if they were a minority that was trying to get equal rights.

Despite debates about vampire marriage, “coming out of the coffin,” “God hates fangs,” and Harris’s explicit statements, True Blood’s producer Alan Ball (who is gay) insisted that this was not the case. According to Ball,

To look at these vampires on the show as metaphors for gays and lesbians is so simple and so easy, that it’s kind of lazy. . . . If you get really serious about it, well, then the show could be seen to be very homophobic because vampires are dangerous: They kill, they’re amoral.

Even the most noble and good vampires have to restrain their urge to kill humans—and they always slip up. Moreover, while the vampires are publicly demanding equal rights, they have their own secret government and code. When Bill Compton, the most compassionate vampire in the first few seasons of the show kills a vampire who was going to kill a human, he is punished because vampires are never allowed to view a human’s life as equal to that of a vampire’s. The same vampire council that publicly promotes “equal rights” has its own mantra that state, “Humans exist to serve us. That is their only value.” At later points in the series, he plots to destroy the true blood factories to force vampires to feed on humans. 

BuzzFeed’s Louis Pietzman noticed the problem.

On True Blood, the larger fears about vampires—that they’re out to kill, corrupt, and ultimately destroy human society—are entirely accurate. The struggle for vampire rights is not the noble fight of the civil rights movement, because it’s not simply about letting vampires live their lives in peace alongside humans: Vampire rights means that innocent people are going to die.

Additionally, many of the vampires do not have politically correct backgrounds to make them ideal victims. Sookie’s love interest, Bill, was a slave-owning Confederate soldier before he was turned, and fan favorite Eric Northman was a Viking before becoming a vampire and served in the SS during World War II.

Yet Pietzman and Ball do not realize the other reason why a civil rights allegory fails. In the words of the Vampire King of Mississippi, Russell Edgington, “Why would we seek equal rights? You are not our equals.” By almost every standard, they are superior to humans, and they discuss this amongst themselves. They can fly; they can hypnotize or “glamour” people; they are faster and more seductive; they have eternal life, can survive almost any injury; and their blood serves as a cure-all drug and powerful psychedelic. Edgington tells Northman, “Adolf was right; there is a Master Race . . . it’s just not the human race.”

Similarly, the vampire movie series Underworld treats vampires as evil Southern racists who enslaved and then later oppressed werewolves. (The first movie was about how the daughter of the head vampire needed to mate with a werewolf to save civilization.) While propaganda, it was at least plausible.

In today’s political culture, only the less capable need “civil rights.” Once America lifted legal and social restrictions on Jews, they managed to excel (in fact, they even excelled with these restrictions). For all intensive purposes, Jewish “civil rights” are about punishing criticism (or noticing) of Jewish power. While Asians will often try to gain special privileges, Asian civil rights groups do little more than complain about Stephen Colbert’s “Ching-Chong Ding-Dong Foundation for Sensitivity to Orientals or Whatever.”

While Asians and Jews may not be as übermenschy as Eric Northman, they have some things going for them, which makes granting them “civil rights” unnecessary. Blacks and Hispanics, in contrast, need “civil rights” in order to achive success as a group at all. 

For a supernatural analogy to the beneficiaries of “civil rights,” the zombie show The Walking Dead is a better example.  Zombies, or “walkers,” have few instincts beyond killing and eating brains, and destroying everything in their path. In small numbers, they are easily dealt with, but when they gather in herds, they destroy everything in their path.

In the series, there are only two characters who have had any allusions that walkers can be saved or treated as anything other than a scourge that must be eliminated. 

In the second season of the show, the protagonists happen upon a rural farm in Georgia. As the apocalypse arrives, the farmer, Hershel Greene, looks to the Biblical story of Jesus’ raising of Lazarus as a way of understanding the chaos. He claims that people are overreacting and considers the zombie problem as something similar to AIDS—walkers can be saved! The protagonists learn that he puts zombies in a barn and feeds them live chickens, hoping for a cure. The notion is obviously inane, and Hershel eventually comes to his senses. But examples of the human willingness to wish or pray away existential threats get much worse. In the fourth season, an 11-year-old girl named Lizzie insists that zombies are just different and can be their friends. She feeds them dead rats and rabbits. She tries to play “tag” with them. She even threatens to kill her adoptive mother-figure, Carol, after she kills a walker. Refusing to believe that the walkers are bad, Lizzie stabs her sister so that she might return undead and harmless to prove the goodness of walkers to Carol.

Carol and Tyrese (the show is fully integrated) discuss the situation. In a different time, they would try to find Lizzie a therapist; but during a zombie apocalypse, they can’t tolerate psychopathic altruism. They kill the child.

It’s hard not to view scenes like this as expressing something about the racial realities of our time: the sentimental, naive, and caring nature of White people, which can be beneficial in certain contexts, disastrous in others.

True Blood might have beeen the ultimate program for postmodern American liberals: on the surface, the show was about “civil rights” and post-White self-righteousness; underneath, it allowed fans to indulge in the fantasy of being part of a sexually liberated, superior elite.

The Walking Dead seems to express something quite different: that it’s time to rebuild communities and put childish things aside.

No Comments on Monsters’ Ball

Satire as News

PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH (U.S.A.) VOTES THAT JESUS CHRIST “MAY HAVE BEEN GAY AND TRANSGENDERED”

Editor’s Note: This was originally published by the race realist satire blog Diversity Chronicle. The site has managed to troll major media in the past and is an interesting venture in seeing how ridiculous our society has become that these stories are now believable news stories.

PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH (U.S.A.) VOTES THAT JESUS CHRIST “MAY HAVE BEEN GAY AND TRANSGENDERED”

The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), in a decision that has enraged fundamentalists and those on the radical and extreme right, has voted to recognize that Jesus Christ “may have been gay and transgendered.” This decision has provoked some extremists to accuse the Presbyterian Church of blasphemy and even apostasy. The Presbyterian Church reports receiving hundreds of angry letters of homophobic hate-mail since the decision, expressing hateful, bigoted, retrograde and ignorant views against the LGBT community. Previously, the church voted to ordain openly gay clergy and to allow ministers to officiate at gay weddings, rightly earning praise from progressives.

In another decision that is only controversial among hateful and intolerant bigots, the Presbyterians have decided to begin teaching children of all ages about homosexuality and the transgendered. Experts agree that it is important to reach children at the earliest ages in order to inculcate a spirit of tolerance for alternative lifestyles. Children need to understand that all sexual orientations and lifestyles, as well as all sexual acts, are equal and morally equivalent under all circumstances. No orientation or type of sexual act is better than any other – all are equal!

Statistics from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, and other groups, showing that homosexuals are more likely to contract AIDS or other STDs, can have no basis in fact. They are quite obviously the result of a shockingly pervasive institutional homophobia. There can be no other rational explanation. In another decision, praised by progressives, condoms will be distributed at every Sunday school class. The church has decided to give out new glow-in-the-dark condoms in an effort to get children and teens more interested in practicing safe sex.

Children will be taught reinterpreted Bible stories, which include positive LGBT role-models. Based on a literal reading of some biblical verses, like 2 Samuel 1:26, it is now widely accepted that King David, the ancient Israelite hero, was a proud homosexual. The verse reads “I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.” Another verse even includes a kiss between David and Jonathan! “And as soon as the lad was gone, David arose out of a place toward the south, and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed himself three times: and they kissed one another, and wept one with another, until David exceeded.” (1 Samuel 20:41)

We even read that Jonathan stripped himself of his clothes before David! 1 Samuel 18:3-4 says “Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul. And Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was upon him, and gave it to David, and his garments, even to his sword, and to his bow, and to his girdle.” Although most scholars agree that the Torah does prohibit homosexuality rather explicitly (Leviticus 20:13) the Old Testament teaches that, where love is concerned, even God must bow to human feelings and abrogate His law! This might sound like God has changed His mind, which might disturb some fundamentalists, but the Bible cites other examples of this. God regretted that He had made man at one point (Genesis 6:6-7), and He regretted flooding the earth and vowed never to do it again. (Genesis 9:10-11)

LGBT and Liberation Theology Pastor Douglas Calvert observed that “There is actually a great deal of evidence that Jesus Christ was not heterosexual. According to tradition he had very long hair. He was very effeminate and soft spoken. He never married. He had no children, and he never expressed a romantic interest in the opposite sex. He did hang out with twelve guys though, and travelled with them all the time. When they were alone with nothing else to do, did they experiment with each other? Did they sleep together, or engage in orgies? We may never know for certain, but the answer is most definitely that they probably did.”

Paul Oestreicher, an Anglican chaplain at the university of Sussex, agrees. His article “Was Jesus gay? Probably” can be read here. More and more mainline protestant denominations are becoming open to the idea that Jesus Christ, whom they regard as the Son of God, and the third person of the Trinity, may have been gay. Instead of finding this as a source of shame or disconcertion, Christians should be proud and loudly proclaim the fact that Jesus Christ was gay! They should march through the streets advertising it with banners and shouting it through megaphones, loudly proclaiming “We are proud God is gay!”

Although most other prominent religious figures were married, or were polygamous, Jesus Christ never married. Many male pagan deities had wives or several wives and concubines as well. Shiva, the Hindu deity, had at least eight wives and countless concubines according to tradition. Despite Jewish tradition upholding marriage, Christ never married, nor did he own any slave girls. Curiously, the chief founder of Christianity, who sought to propagate it after Christ’s death, the Apostle Paul, also never married. Perhaps Christianity was the first world religion accepting of homosexuality.

Moses, Muhammad, and even the Buddha married and had offspring. Is it possible instead that Christ was not homosexual but perhaps was impotent? Is it possible that he had no sexual drive? Was he a sexually repressed heterosexual, who merely avoided women? Perhaps he was socially awkward with women? While these things cannot be ruled out, they seem unlikely. Some critics point to verses seemingly extolling the virtues of a eunuch’s life. (Mathew 19:12) Those verses however only serve to further reinforce the fact that Christ despised and abhorred the very idea of heterosexual sex!

Feminist Professor Claudia Jackson noted that “Jesus Christ was an early feminist; he understood that any sexual activity between a man and a woman was always rape. It is rape even if a woman expressly asked a man to have sexual relations with her. Men have always enjoyed a position of superiority over women. Thus the relationships between the sexes have always been unequal. Therefore heterosexual sexual activity always represents an indecent assault upon women.”

The Gospel of John refers to the gay lover of Jesus Christ “and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved…” (John 20:2) Before his death by crucifixion the Bible tells us, in John 19:26-27 “When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.” Clearly Jesus was saying something like “Mom, I’ve married a man. We are gay lovers. So, he is your son-in-law. He should live with you now, and take care of you.” This could not be more clear.

Some fundamentalist opponents of homosexuality cite verses like Leviticus 20:13 “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” There are several possible answers to this, besides the one mentioned earlier. The New Testament clearly teaches that God’s law was nailed to the cross and abolished on the basis of Christ’s sacrificial death. Thus God’s laws in the Old Testament are no longer binding for Christians. (Colossians 2:14) If one is Jewish, one could perhaps argue God was once homophobic but is no longer. God has reformed Himself and become more tolerant. Another retort might be that this verse, incompatible as it is with God’s love, was never inspired by God to begin with and should be dismissed as not truly of divine origin.

The particular explanation that one adopts is not important as long as we understand that homophobia is an ugly crime that we must never accept. We cannot countenance it under any circumstances. We must never allow bigotry to cloak itself in the garments of religiosity or spirituality! A homophobic religion is not worthy of tolerance, but only of hatred and contempt! To persecute such a sick and dangerous cult would not be intolerant, but virtuous and vitally necessary! Intolerance warrants no tolerance and tolerating intolerance is arguably the greatest evil of our time.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 is also used by homophobes and haters to attack the LGBT community. The verses read “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.”

Although abusers of themselves with mankind does explicitly refer to homosexual activity, and that is even more apparent in many other translations, these verses too could be rejected as incompatible with God’s love. Progressive Jews and Christians see the Bible as an evolving document. It must change and our interpretations of it must change with the times so that it remains relevant in every generation. To do otherwise would be to make ourselves prisoners beholden to an ancient literary work. Books are written by people, not by the hand of God onto stone! Good and evil or right and wrong are social constructs, evolving and changing over time.

Let us not forget, the Bible also calls shellfish unclean. Shall we all change our diets because of something that primitive nomadic, unwashed, lice-infested, neck bearded and barely literate peoples wrote several thousand years ago? Remember, these are people who owned slaves, sold their own daughters into slavery and murdered their family members and neighbours. Why? For worshipping the wrong supernatural sky buddies or picking up sticks on the wrong day. Hell, even saying that Asherah was Yahweh’s girlfriend was enough to warrant death for an Israelite! They were all, clearly, very far from perfect.

As Progressive Christians understand it, the Bible is the inspired word of God. However, it must evolve and be interpreted in light of present circumstances and conditions. It must not be rigid, unchanging, or seen as somehow inerrant. Likewise, Martin Luther King Jr., Ghandi, and Nelson Mandela were inspired by God. The Bible must not be seen as an exclusive or even primary source of truth in life. To do so would be to worship a book, to fall into the sin of bibliolatry. God is love, and therefore love and its daughters, tolerance and pluralism, and not the Bible should ultimately guide us. The Bible is an important literary work, but it only has value to the extent that it affirms humanist virtues.

Although religious fundamentalist homophobes like to claim Jesus Christ was a right-wing Christian who hated gays, the truth is far from that. Jesus opposed public prayer, and prayer in school. Jesus wanted to keep prayer in the closet and out of the public sphere “But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.” (Matthew 6:6 KJV.) Jesus said to keep prayer, and not homosexuality, in the closet, contrary to what so many bigoted and intolerant fundies proclaim!

We know that Jesus was a trained carpenter by Joseph the husband of Mary. It seems likely that along with building homes and furniture, Jesus offered decorating tips and ideas to clients. In his business, he would have had ample opportunity to discuss and explore interior decorating. No less an authority than Elton John noted that Jesus would have backed gay marriage and was gay himself.

In “The Secret Gospel of Mark” Jesus teaches a youth – who was wearing only a linen cloth over his naked body – the “Mystery of the Kingdom of God.” Obviously, Jesus was initiating him into his first homosexual activity! There can clearly be no other reasonable explanation. The Christian Church rejected this gospel as apocryphal, because of homophobia and intolerance!

Jesus Christ was a strong advocate of economic levelling and redistribution. He once told a rich man “And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” (Matthew 19:24) He predicted a world where the poor would one day rule and hold all property in common, while the rich one percent would come last, as punishment for their crimes. “So the last shall be first, and the first last…” (Matthew 20:16)

Jesus even drove the capitalists out of the Temple and forbade them from selling their wares there. (John 2:14-16) Jesus was also a renowned peace activist. (Matthew 5:9) Jesus said we are to be judged based on how we treat the least of his brethren. “And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” (Matthew 25:40) A rich man asks Jesus what he must do to gain eternal life. “Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.” (Matthew 19:21)

Clearly Jesus was a homosexual and a progressive who favoured economic levelling, banning public prayer, and who strongly denounced the rich. The guy was a radical Jewish liberal as the Bible shows, persecuted and hated by the conservatives of his time! Those conservative leaders ultimately instigated his murder, so great was their hatred of him! It is ironic that conservatives and right-wingers claim to follow his teachings. They do so by systematically ignoring or distorting most of them!

It’s time for progressives to take Jesus back. We should not allow the radical and extreme right to hold the memory of one of our own hostage! Let us reclaim Jesus, who no doubt, if he were alive today, would proudly march with us under a rainbow flag in an LGBT parade denouncing injustice, inequality and intolerance! At LGBT parades across the nation and around the world this year, the Christian LGBT community will march with banners proudly proclaiming “God is Gay!” in his memory!

No Comments on Satire as News

The Hard Road for Putin

While there are many unanswered questions about the disaster and the dishonesty and hysteria of Western propaganda goes without saying, the objective political reality remains the same. The narrative has already solidified in the West–and Putin is to blame. 

The glee with which the Washington foreign policy establishment greeted the crash of flight MH-17 is matched only by their silence about the continuing slaughter in Eastern Ukraine. Not only did they get to move the Central American invasion off the front page, the media and politicians got a chance to play their favorite sport of bear-baiting. While there are many unanswered questions about the disaster and the dishonesty and hysteria of Western propaganda goes without saying, the objective political reality remains the same. The narrative has already solidified in the West–and Putin is to blame.

Only a few weeks after being regarded by friend and foe as a master geopolitical strategist, Vladimir Putin is suddenly faced with a far more hostile Europe. In his attempt to pin the blame for the crash on Ukraine, President Putin also casually conceded that the area was Ukrainian territory. Perhaps this was his objective all along, as he has not been especially enthusiastic about aiding the “Novorossia” separatists. However, if the end result of the Ukrainian crisis is the tenuous seizure of Crimea (unrecognized by the rest of the world), the reduction of Russian influence in Ukraine and Europe, and the defeat of pro-Russian forces in the east, Putin will appear weak for the first time.

Russia is also under increasing economic attack designed to break the regime. “Capital is a coward” as they say, and the hallmark of American foreign and domestic policy is to harness corruption and degeneracy to further the country’s own ends. Russian billionaires are already feeling pressure and are being confronted with a choice of turning on Putin or jeopardizing their economic relations in the West.

Ironically, pressure on Putin is intensifying at the very moment he is acquiescing to the West’s wishes. He has held back from invading Ukraine. Russian nationalists are no longer enjoying access to the media, and even Alexander Dugin’s star has faded within officialdom. However, even as Putin is becoming more “pragmatic,” the pressure for sanctions is increasing.

Part of Putin’s problem is that he has been too clever by half. Throughout the crisis, Russia has maintained that Ukraine is being run by “fascists” and “Nazis.” While it’s true the only overt “Nazis” that seem to be fighting in the area are fighting for Ukraine, the nationalists seem to have little power within the current Ukrainian government and are mostly being used for cannon fodder.

Unfortunately, outside Galicia, Russia’s only real friends in the West are on the right. From Nigel Farage and Marine Le Pen in Europe to Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan in the United States, Putin only gets a fair hearing from what can roughly be called the Dissident Right in the West. Social democrats and neoconservatives are too busy raging against him as a “tyrant” because he doesn’t allow enough gay pride parades. Occasionally, this even leads to what can only be called coded appeals for pre-emptive war against one of the greatest powers in the world–what Steve Sailer called “World War G.”

Since the beginning of his time in office, Vladimir Putin’s number one goal has been to prevent a State Department/Soros funded color coded “revolution” on the streets of Moscow. For that reason, he has imposed restrictions on foreign “activist” organizations backed by foreign money. Even his supposed crackdown on homosexuals is a ban on homosexual “activism,” not private sexual behavior. Unlike the nations of the West, Putin’s Russia has a government that actually governs, as opposed to serving as a jobs program for various minorities.

However, in today’s world, even a mildly conservative “sovereign democracy” is enough to inspire the fanatical rage of the Washington governing class and its pet media. The American media resorted to outright falsity when portraying the conflict in South Ossetia years ago. More recently, when Russia hosted the Winter Olympics, Western newspapers were filled with taunts and stories portraying the country as a kind of Third World disaster out of Borat. Strangely, the mass riots and collapsing infrastructure of World Cup host Brazil went all but unmentioned.  When Pussy Riot disrupted a mass with an obscenity filled protest, the American Secretary of State posed with them for a picture, and National Review’s John O’Sullivan called them “virtuous” and “religious.” The liberal American media is far more hostile towards Putin’s Russia than they were to the Soviet Union, and conservatives seem excited to fight a politically correct enemy rather than more hapless brown people.

While Putin himself is usually sure footed in his responses, Russia’s larger public relations effort often seems hapless and confused. Russia Today, supposedly designed as a counter to the American media, usually appears like a kind of grab bag of left-libertarian features that wouldn’t seem out of place on Democracy Now. Though there is the occasional conservative guest who would be cut from the American mainstream media, the network keeps inviting guests who are almost guaranteed to be hostile. For example, RT invited on Jamie Kirchick—someone whose entire identity, ideology, and outlook on foreign relations revolves entirely on his predilection for sodomy—who promptly made a precious little spectacle of himself. RT also has a problem with its anchors quitting in order to receive the worshipful applause of the American press.

There is nothing Russia can do that will win over the Western press and the American government short of Putin resigning and Gazprom cutting a reparations check to GLAAD. None of the propaganda targeted at Western liberals seems to be taking. Russia is also being forced into an untenable financial position unless it caves unilaterally on all Ukrainian issues. Putin cannot do this without losing domestic support and risking Russia’s international position.

The alternative is to attack–and for Russia to support the only people inclined to support them, Traditionalists and conservatives. The West will not allow Russia to be a “normal” country while Putin is in power and while it insists on relatively conservative social stances. Therefore, Russia needs to take the cultural war into the heart of the West, where restive populations are already looking for an excuse to revolt against their political class over mass immigration, Islamization, political cor
rectness, and incompetence in foreign and domestic policy.

Let Washington, DC choke on it when Russia starts “Radio Free Amerika” to broadcast every day about how American corporations are helping the government spy on its citizens. Let RT start sending its reporters to the border to get some video of the MS-13 members the American government insists on calling “children.” Let’s see how the Huffington Post reacts to American audiences being introduced to Alexander Dugin. And let’s see what the reception will be if the People’s State of Donetsk makes like the Ukrainian forces and starts accepting foreign volunteers.

The strategic advantage has shifted to the West and stagnation is death for Russia. If the West is going to treat the Third Rome like a rogue state no matter what it does, it might as well act like one.

No Comments on The Hard Road for Putin

A Reflection on Freedom

Americans are told that they must forfeit their freedoms, the same ones the terrorists supposedly wish to destroy, in order be kept safe from the terrorists that the U.S. openly funds and arms. This state of affairs is telling both about oligarch-run Washington, which cynically creates both the problem and then offers a “solution”, laughing all the way to the bank, and the American people, who have become the proverbial frog in the slowly boiling pot.

Originally published at Soul of the East

The Fourth of July holiday (decreasingly referred to as Independence Day) is an opportunity for countless Americans to have a day off to gorge themselves on food and beer, watch fireworks, and utter a few superficial platitudes about freedom. Minimal thought is given to these assumed freedoms, and even less to the founding myth that lays behind them. As long as homosexuals can “marry,” everyone can fornicate in the manner of barnyard animals, and Wal-Mart remains stocked with cheap Chinese-made trinkets, the masses are content to believe they are free.

That this Independence Day takes place in the growing shadow of the violently rising “Caliphate” (an offshoot of al-Qaeda) in Syria and Iraq passes without notice by the proletariat, who would rather be entertained with televised sports. One can hardly fault them for this; the intricacies of Middle Eastern sectarian politics are in and of themselves irrelevant to their lives.

What is actually ominous is the genesis of this self-proclaimed Caliphate. The Caliphate and the resurgent jihadist movement that preceded it have been cited by the U.S. government as an immediate terrorist threat to the “Homeland”. Indeed, the “terrorist threat” has been continuously used by the elites to perpetuate and expand the surveillance state and peddle for more war in the Middle East, with the ever-lovable former Vice President Dick Cheney spouting that if America fails to reinvade Iraq, then the United States would suffer an attack at the hands of terrorists to dwarf the 9-11 operation of 2001. Thus our ruling elites assure us that we need more domestic control and more foreign interventions to keep us safe, what the late Gore Vidal termed perpetual war for perpetual peace.

That the same terrorists who now supposedly threaten our lives and our “freedom” have been sponsored and armed by the American government shows the level of willful ignorance that most of our citizenry is happy to live with.

Americans are told that they must forfeit their freedoms, the same ones the terrorists supposedly wish to destroy, in order be kept safe from the terrorists that the U.S. openly funds and arms. This state of affairs is telling both about oligarch-run Washington, which cynically creates both the problem and then offers a “solution”, laughing all the way to the bank, and the American people, who have become the proverbial frog in the slowly boiling pot.

For a people whose common perception of freedom is that it consists of self-gratification, such a program of elite manipulation is not only expected, but perhaps even deserved. But manipulative, technocratic elites and passive, subservient populations are not the final word. And while America’s Independence Day may be more myth than reality, there is indeed a true, spiritual freedom to be sought out and achieved.

The twentieth century Russian philosopher Nicholas Berdyaev proclaimedsuch a freedom. A freedom, in his words, that “presupposes the existence of truth, of meaning, of God.” He knew that “Truth and meaning liberate, and liberation leads to truth and meaning.” And that true freedom “must also be love, and love must be free.”

Unless and until Americans forsake mindless consumerism, nihilistic self-gratification, and allowing the corporate media to do their thinking for them, they will never attain to the true freedom spoken of by Berdyaev. Americans must realize that their true enemies are neither manufactured terrorists nor a revived Russia, but their own amoral, decadent elites, and even more so their own complacency and sloth.

Yet there is always hope that the people will awake from their spiritual slumber. May we lay claim to a true spiritual freedom and nobility that will shake the thrones of the parasitic elites and lead to the creation of a healthy, godly society.

No Comments on A Reflection on Freedom

Everyone a Harlot

Ego-inflating rhetoric is everywhere. At work, at school , and at the mall, Americans expect everyone to tell ‘em how special, talented and important they are. In our inverted world, the weak are somehow strong, everyone who survives a hangnail is “brave,” and every bean-counter who works for the Department of Defense is a goddamn hero.

Originally published July 2012 for Alternative-Right

Ego-inflating rhetoric is everywhere. At work, at school , and at the mall, Americans expect everyone to tell ‘em how special, talented and important they are. In our inverted world, the weak are somehow strong, everyone who survives a hangnail is “brave,” and every bean-counter who works for the Department of Defense is a goddamn hero.

At GloboCorp, the human resources department tries to convince every John and Juanita that they are absolutely essential to the success of the organization. Everyone’s creative talents are valued, and everyone from the janitor to the CEO is capable of making tremendous positive contributions. In his recent book about the value of work, Matthew B. Crawford argued that modern corporations devalue meaningful achievement when they pander to us and speak as though everyone were some sort of Einstein.

Americans like to be told that they are brilliant and brave, but as a people these aren’t our highest values anymore. Who can name five legitimate, recent war heroes? The hoi polloi don’t care too much about who is smart, either. They only care about science when they want to lose weight, win an argument on the Internet, or find out how the world is going to end. If you can name ten guys doing hard science right now, you’re probably a scientist.

Most people know they aren’t Einsteins, and they really don’t care. They have a more pressing concern.

What they’re really asking themselves is, “Am I hot, or not?”

Beautiful people are the brightest beacons in our floating world. Attractive models and actors get far more praise and attention than Medal of Honor recipients. People love technology, but they use it to keep up with the Kardasians. They pack into gyms, but strength and fitness are by-products of their desire to be desired. A six-pack has a higher value than a powerful bench press or a heavy squat. No one cares how much Tatum Channing or Brad Pitt lifts, or how fast they can run, or what they can build, or how many men they could defeat in combat. They’re admired for being desirable.

It used to be that only young women worried excessively about being desired. In traditional patriarchal societies, a woman who no one wants as a wife becomes a burden on her parents. An unwanted woman could never become a mother or run a household. She remained forever a dependent daughter or an independent, lonely spinster. For women of marriageable age, attractiveness had a very high value, and while the importance of attractiveness decreases with age, most men would still rather have a pretty wife than an ugly one. Whether by habit or by nature, many women tend to enjoy painting and adorning themselves to appear youthful, fertile, feminine and appealing.

However, the woman who cares the most about being desired is the harlot, because her survival depends on her ability to lure men into her loins.

Some will point to male ornamentation as a counter-example, but the motivation behind male embellishment has traditionally been different. When men decorated themselves, they did it to appear more fearsome or to communicate status. Samurai wore rouge, and like many finer points of samurai grooming, they did it so that their enemies would respect them as virile opponents even after they were dead. They didn’t tart themselves up to get laid. They did it to gain the respect of men.

Last weekend, a movie about male strippers made $39.2 million dollars at the box office. America’s come a long way since Flashdance.

In The Way of Men, I used Bonobos and Chimpanzees to compare the female-oriented society to the male-oriented society. People aren’t exactly the same as apes, but I think Chimps and Bonobos make revealing metaphors for where we’ve been, and where we seem to be headed.

Bonobos live luxuriously, with access to as much food as they need. Female coalitions check male aggression, and males rarely form tight-knit groups. Males don’t know who their fathers are, only their mothers. Sex is, as a bar whore once said to a pal of mine, “like shaking hands.” Homosexuality is commonplace because sex is a social activity, and everyone has sex with everyone. It’s not about reproduction; sex is about mutual masturbation and having a good time. Sex is a major part of bonobo life. Bonobos are said to be peaceful, and while that may not be completely true, they’re definitely matrilineal and exceptionally horny.

Chimpanzees form patriarchal hunting groups. The males stick together, and the females end up moving from group to group. Sex is a reproductive activity. Homosexuality is rare. Males dominate females and the males at the top of the male hierarchy control the group.

America is fast becoming a “Bonobo Masturbation Society,” devoted to pleasure and organized primarily to serve the interests of females. More and more men are raised by single mothers, and males are discouraged from organizing without female supervision. Sex is social, and the majority of the hard, dangerous work that men used to do is either done by machines, idiot-proofed, or outsourced to countries where life is cheap. Women and dishonorable men micromanage male aggression with endless laws and lawsuits, and bad boys who can’t pay big lawyers are drop-kicked into a multi-billion dollar prison industry that boasts the highest incarceration rate in the world.

In our Bonobo Masturbation Society, fucking is one of the only things men are encouraged to do that actually makes them feel like men.

Throughout the Alt-Right, several writers have criticized “pick-up artist” culture and “game.”

Because just about the only manly thing that most men are allowed to do is bang, I am more sympathetic. I see what many call game as a kind of gateway masculinity. Game is essentially assertiveness training for a generation of young men who spent most of their lives playing “mother may I?”

Manliness is like a talent. Some males are more gifted than others, but like any talent, masculinity has to be pushed and developed to amount to anything impressive. Boys who were raised by single moms or overprotective parents and put through the public school feminist brain-washing system were never tried or trained by groups of hard men. You can’t hand a hen-pecked boy a high school diploma and expect him to spit like Clint Eastwood.

When they talk about game, men in the Manosphere are shoveling through the bullshit that the system tells boys about girls. This is work that needs to be done. If average young guys believe the official malarkey they are told about sex and relationships, they’ll be used and abused by entitled American girls for the rest of their lives. And, as they unpack feminist myths about the sexes, I’ve seen a lot of those guys start to wonder what it really means to be men. This is an important conversation. However, it almost seems like a safer route in today’s cultural climate to make chasing poon a long-term lifestyle choice. That’s where the positive mean slides toward a negative extreme.

Andy Nowicki wrote that if men really wanted to undermine the matriarchy, they would stop fucking. He may have his own (possibly religious) reasons for saying so, but I think he has a point.

Our feminist, globalist handlers would love nothing more than to keep young men — the most dangerous and potentially revolutionary group in any civilization – completely distracted by tang. And while it may feel like asserting dominance (in conveniently the most harmless way possible), if everything you do is designed to make you more appealing to women, you’re an eager vibrator. When your muscle is just for show, when everything you do is to make yourself more desirable, you’re playing the female role. When your worth as a man depends on how many women you can lure to your loins, you’re just a gigolo.

As Hunter S. Thompson noted, sex is the most fun for amateurs. It’s great when you’re young, pretty, naïve and carefree — but “old whores don’t do much giggling.”

Mark Simpson had a lot of this figured out when he coined the word “metrosexual” way back in 1994. The metrosexual is not necessarily gay or effeminate in the flamboyant sense of the word — that’s just the way people picked up the word. Simpson’s idea of the metrosexual is a “mirror man” whose highest narcissistic concerns are pleasure-seeking and being regarded as “desirable.” He may be in love with himself, but that, too, is a shallow kind of love. He cares more about how he looks and how well he fucks than what he has achieved or how well he is respected. It’s a harlot’s vanity.

Hugh Hefner was far ahead of his time. It was homosexual men who pioneered the bonobo lifestyle en masse. Before today’s PUAs were in pre-school, homos were doing it for the numbers, looking for validation, basing their self-worth on how many and how hot. Homosexual men rejected traditional male roles and expectations, and channeled all of their masculine aggression into sex for the sake of sex. Their idea of masculinity became masturbatory — a pumped up Tom of Finland caricature of masculine form without function or honor or virtue. Homosexual men, because they were men, set the cultural stage for objectifying men the way that men have always objectified women.

As pilot bonobos, the homos discovered the downsides of harlotry. An experienced player was bound to acquire a handful of STDs, and AIDS practically wiped out an entire generation of “sexually liberated” men. For many, there are also psychological costs. Being desired is a drug, and it’s addictive. When it’s your highest value, it becomes your identity. One of the problems — and this has always been a curse to women — is that sexual attractiveness is linked to the mating instinct, and it peaks in the young. Men mature more flatteringly than women, but most men who trade on their sex appeal won’t relax into the confident, secure, middle-aged manhood of their forefathers. Like homos and movie stars, I wonder how many of today’s players will chase steroids and sex drugs and eventually convince themselves that maybe that Kenny Rogers face lift will look better on them than it does on him. (It won’t, fellas. You’ll still look like an old lesbian who can’t blink.) There’s something particularly desperate, sad and undignified about a man of a certain age who spends too much time looking for sexual validation.

What’s worse is that straight men aren’t in the market for men, they’re in the market for women, so biology puts them at a major disadvantage. Game strategist Heartiste recently posted about an online dating experience where together, the two best looking guys managed to get a total of 50 messages from women, while the most attractive woman got over 536 messages from men in the same time period. That playing field will never be close to equal, but game is gaining popularity because men see that disparity and want to increase their odds.

Good-looking men with some game may be able to keep at it for most of their lives, and they’ll end up with some good stories. A small minority of men have always been libertines, and some men are probably particularly well suited to it. Some will have regrets, and some won’t.

The problem isn’t what happens to a few players, but what we become as a society when everyone wants to be a player. Libertinism used to be a form of rebellion, but increasingly, it’s part of the program. In a society where sex and attractiveness are the highest values, what happens to the other two-thirds of the curve?

The flesh won’t be democratized. Attractiveness isn’t any more evenly distributed than strength, size, or IQ. The world is full of fat, ugly people. People can improve their lot with diet and exercise and grooming — and they should — but you can only put so much lipstick on a pig. Some men and women just aren’t that great looking. A lot of people are actually pretty repulsive. A few should probably avoid daylight altogether, because they frighten small children.

Women have always been aware of the cruel elitism of beauty’s natural hierarchy. In societies where other virtues had higher value, they could focus on piety or simply being good mothers. When women were “sexually liberated,” some feminists (usually the fat, ugly ones) thought they could rely on social conditioning to give us all permanent beer goggles and make every bloated hag as desirable as Heather Locklear. If only Barbie had realistic proportions, or we were forced to watch more morbidly obese people on television, then fewer tears would tumble into buckets of ice cream. They keep pushing for “fat acceptance” and keep telling us that “big is beautiful.” When that doesn’t work, they barrage us with bad clichés and try to convince us that beauty is either in the eye of the beholder, or “on the inside.” We might patronize them, or try to be more sensitive, but pretending everyone is equally beautiful is just as absurd and untrue as pretending everyone is an Einstein.

No one wants a Barbie doll with cankles, and the de-objectification of women is at odds with the Zeitgeist of our oversexed Bonobo Masturbation Society. Andrea Dworkin lost, and more teenage girls than ever are watching hardcore porn to learn how to twist, stroke and swallow like the pros. I go to the gym and I see young guys who aren’t there to lift or get big. They’re following routines to “cut up” and build a body “for the ladies.” Those ladies are tanning, getting boob jobs, and trying to look like strippers. A friend who teaches at a high school in California said they had to cancel Halloween dress-up days because the kids didn’t want to be scary or cute anymore. Boys and girls alike used the holiday as an excuse to come to school as close to naked as possible.

People used to have decent aspirations. They wanted to have families. They wanted to do good work. They wanted to be good citizens, good Christians, good people. Now everyone wants to be a player and a porn star. Everyone wants to be the kind of monkey that all of the other monkeys wants to rub up against.

We call this matrilineal hump-fest “progress,” and seek our moral redemption in recycling.

Sex may be natural, and it sure is fun, but
it’s just a part of life. A society that over-emphasizes sex to the point where it seems like the only thing in life that means anything is grotesque and degraded, and for most people it delivers more emptiness than ecstasy.

In healthy patriarchies, men push themselves to earn the respect and admiration of other men. They work to prove their strength, courage and competence to each other. Men pride themselves on their reputation for mastery of their bodies, their actions, and their environment. They want to be known for what they can do, not just how well or who they can screw. And they sure as hell don’t waste their time trying to figure out what they can do to bedazzle bimbos.

Hell, in some places, when a man is ready to take a wife, he just picks one andkidnaps her. Men used to get married and get on with their lives. It seems like a healthier life path to me, and I’ve previewed what the other side has to offer.

Recently, I watched Restrepo, a documentary about soldiers fighting in Afghanistan. There was this scene in it where the Americans had to negotiate with local tribal elders. The elders were a bunch of dead serious-looking old dudes and their long beards were dyed bright red with henna.

Our tribal “allies” in the graveyard of empires have their problems. They shit in their hands and rape little boys. Their customs leave room for improvement.

However, as I watched their grave eyes, I wondered if any of these men had spent much time wondering, “Am I hot, or not?”

No Comments on Everyone a Harlot

The Evil of the Telescreen

The telescreen can never be turned off; only turned down. 

The telescreen can never be turned off; only turned down.

Fate found me in a government building sans a book or a cellphone.  A television blared from the center of the room, commanding all attention.  For the first time in many years, I watched regular television programs, marooned in a state waiting room, surrounded by strangers.

Like many others, I have a television that is only used for DVD’s or the inevitable Netflix account, giving me a certain amount of freedom as to what I want to see.  As I get most entertainment and news from the Internet, I never quite realized how bad the “normal” and “apolitical culture” has become.

The first show was an episode of “House” in which the eponymous doctor attempts to help a marriage counselor with a mysterious illness.  The male counselor is suffering from low testosterone among other problems, and House puts him on a dose of the male hormone while they attempt to figure out the source of his illness.

Initially, the testosterone makes the patient feel better, act more decisively, and feel more sexually attracted to his wife.  However, he starts making decisions without her and demanding his wife respect him as the “Man of the House” (the title of the episode).  The wife is shocked by this behavior, wondering where her compliant, submissive husband went.  Watching a video of one of her husband’s earlier business seminars, she is disgusted by the way her husband used to preach a creed of take no prisoners capitalism.  “I never would have gone out” with a man like that, she sniffs.  In the end, the patient is saved – but before he is discharged, he asks for the testosterone to be lowered.  He admits it makes him feel better – but making his wife happy is more important.

The next show was NCIS, starring heroic law enforcement officers working for the Department of the Navy.  Two of the male protagonists in this episode were married to the same woman, and the plot now centers on her third husband.  There is a terrorism plot against the Joint Chiefs of Staff who are all going to a football game (insert your joke here.)  When the plot is predictably foiled, the dying terrorist tells the law enforcement agents, “You don’t even know what you’re defending.”  It is revealed that the terrorist–an employee of the Homeland Security Department–was sponsored by someone in the military industrial complex, presumably to prevent defense cuts. Thus, as always, the real terrorists are those who promote fear of “the other.”

There is a Narrative.  It is never fully defined but we all know what it is.  Heterosexual white males are holding everybody down.  Racist forces are numerous, powerful, violent, and everywhere.  Hate crimes are rampant, homosexuals are brutally oppressed, and every wife in the country puts on make up in the morning to hide the black eye she got from her husband.

The defining characteristic of the Age of Obama is not anything the President did or any historical event overseas.  It is that Obama seemed to open a door to the anticulture of the egalitarian Left to fully take over the mass media.  It seems genuinely incredible that there was a time when parents used to protest things like sexual content or obscenity on television.  More than that, it is only in the recent past there has been a shift were the “default” culture is socially egalitarian, explicitly anti-Christian, and explicitly anti-white.  It is not media bias that is the program – it is the moral vision presented by sitcoms, talk shows, and the daytime pap consumed by your average White Americans.

This propaganda is all the more insidious because it is diffuse.  Despite the extreme concentration of the American mass media, most Americans cannot recognize propaganda as propaganda unless it specifically comes from the government.  More than that, unless it comes with militaristic trappings and the aesthetics of fascism, most Americans will not see social conditioning as sinister or even intentional.  It will be simply be interpreted as freedom in action.  Unlike in They Live, there isn’t just one television signal we can blow up to reveal the horrible truth.

A sign of successful propaganda is that the intended target can’t remember where he heard it, but he swears it is true.   This is easy to accomplish when degeneracy serves as a kind of background noise for the entire society.  Millions of half-formed impressions, snippets of conversation, and barely remembered storylines will far outweigh any coherent argument or even cogent slogan in defense of positive values.  The prevalence and uniformity of the media is such that for a huge segment of the population, “creating awareness” and “education” are nothing but a tremendous waste of time.

But there is a bright side.  It also means that “Come the Revolution” (as the Left used to say), most people will believe whatever they are told to believe.  It means that even when public opinion is nominally against the Dissident Right, a vast swath is simply unthinking allegiance to whatever they vaguely remember from Oprah that morning.  And it means that culture is a creation, not a source, of power.  It means that victory is not impossible.

This is nothing but a silver lining for the dispossessed Dissident Right and the European peoples they fight for.  But just try to watch some TV for fifteen minutes – and after that, I’ll take any glimmer of hope I can get.

No Comments on The Evil of the Telescreen

STIHIE: Gay Love Travels in the Name of Consumerism

Marriott is going all out for its new LGBT marketing campaign #Love Travels to show that even international hotel chains care about promoting the new morality.

Marriott is going all out for its new LGBT marketing campaign #Love Travels to show that even international hotel chains care about promoting the new morality.

We’re just going to let this article on the campaign speak for itself:

The social, print, out-of-home and digital effort — themed #LoveTravels — focuses on self-identity, pride, love of travel, sense of home and comfort, and Marriott properties as the place to experience all of it.

The effort involves a partnership with photographer Braden Summers, and features his portraits both of well-known gay and transgender Americans and regular real-life couples.

In the former category are Jason Collins, professional basketball player who came out last year, thus becoming the first out pro athlete in one of the four major sports; Geena Rocero, a transgender Filipina fashion model and social advocate who made waves revealing her birth gender and speaking out at events like TED; and Talisha Padgett-Matthews, a Marriott associate. The photos also feature several premiere Marriott hotel properties in New York and Miami.

“We wanted to make a bold statement,” says Kristine Friend, senior director, segment marketing at Marriott International. “We are tripling the investment. In the past, for example, we hadn’t done any mobile or tablet advertising, and we also hadn’t had this degree of print or display advertising. And we’re doing a ton of out-of-home.”

Friend tells Marketing Daily that the program, running through Nov. 30 with digital running through year’s end, reflects what’s happening demographically and socially.

“We are increasing our commitment to reflect what the world looks like,” she says. “We wanted to do something different to illustrate a wider sense of belonging.”

No Comments on STIHIE: Gay Love Travels in the Name of Consumerism

Like The Roman: Remembering Dominique Venner One Year Later

On May 21st, 2013, Domininque Venner entered the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris and took his life in a statement of defiance towards the malignant spirit of his age–turning the final act of his existence into a call for all people with the blood of Europe flowing through their veins to arise from their stupor and reclaim their heritage.

On May 21st, 2013, Dominique Venner entered the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris and took his life in a statement of defiance towards the malignant spirit of his age–turning the final act of his existence into a call for all people with the blood of Europe to arise from their stupor and reclaim their heritage.

The anniversary of his voluntary death reminds us to keep his memory alive by continuing on with our duty to preserve the noble heritage of our people.

Here is some of Venner’s final words that summarize why he chose this action and the message he tried to impart to those who would witness it (courtesy of Counter-Currents):

While many men are slaves of their lives, my gesture embodies an ethic of will. I give myself over to death to awaken slumbering consciences. I rebel against fate. I protest against poisons of the soul and the desires of invasive individuals to destroy the anchors of our identity, including the family, the intimate basis of our multi-millennial civilization. While I defend the identity of all peoples in their homes, I also rebel against the crime of the replacement of our people.

The dominant discourse cannot leave behind its toxic ambiguities, and Europeans must bear the consequences. Lacking an identitarian religion to moor us, we share a common memory going back to Homer, a repository of all the values on which our future rebirth will be founded once we break with the metaphysics of the unlimited, the baleful source of all modern excesses.

No Comments on Like The Roman: Remembering Dominique Venner One Year Later

Type on the field below and hit Enter/Return to search