An inconvenient question.

An inconvenient question. A Washington Post article by Josh Rogin describes one man’s tragic descent into the “transgender” self delusion and has this lead in: “The conservative national security community in Washington is not known for its enlightened thinking on gender identity.“ He said that because the person in question had been a male national security analysts at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI).

A Freeper comments:

enlightened thinking on gender identity

I thought part of "enlightenment" had to do with accepting the evidence provided by hypothesis testing and reproducible results, rather than believing in things as true because you wish it to be so.

In that sense (you know, the English language sense), who's "enlightened" with regard to gender "identity"?^[1]

This reminds me of some graffito in the New York subway during the initial wave of AIDS in America: “Gay is sad.” This poor person is not homosexual but under the rubric of “Giselle Donnelly can finally be herself” "she" can enjoy a new lifestyle where a party invitation requests (since normal people will be invited) “no fetish attire, please.” Does “transitioning” necessarily involve entry into a community where “fetish attire” is part of the scene? BDSM is in there as part of the picture as well. How is that something to be celebrated?

I have no desire to harm this person and include her name only because “she” has herself chosen a very public announcement of her “change.” God bless people with different inner wiring and if they want to tell themselves and each other that it’s all good, then normal people need not add to their difficulties.

One is entitled to take note of the self delusion, however, and refuse to be a part of the requirement for obsequious pandering. Good manners are sufficient to handle interactions with this person, as the AEI management demonstrates. Self delusion, however, is a problem of national dimension and we are not required to affirm every new absurd wrinkle.

Sadly, the entire public life of America is anchored in make believe. Objecting to the reduction of whites from a 90% majority to something like a 77% majority – with whites proceeding to “majority minority” status, SHMG – merits one the accusation that one is a “white supremacist.” Observing decades of general black academic failure, social breakdown, urban destruction, and through-the-roof criminality, a white person dares not ascribe this to genetic differences or debased culture. No. The magic phrases relating to causation one must use are only “white privilege,” “white racism” and “legacy of slavery.” End of story.

Deranged females are held up as the highest expression of womanhood. Illegal immigrants are treated like the Second Coming and American citizens are expected to foot the bill for their illegal entry and its consequences. Black incarceration rates are a problem of “the prison system.” The MSM can be owned by six, and only six, megacorporations and that is a robust free press and not a violation of the anti-trust laws. Rational efforts to purge voter rolls and ensure proper counting of votes are “vote suppression” and the center trembles at the thought of gainsaying that. AntiFa thuggery is not a criminal offense but the legitimate exercise of First Amendment freedoms.

Our fantasy is your reality.

The Supreme Court can make law and turn the Constitution on its head by enabling the grotesque federal government we have – a sick joke of a government compared to what was intended by the plain language of the Constitution of 1789. Five votes on the Supreme Court git’s ‘er duhhnnn. Never mind the requirements of Art. V.

The U.S. can engage in aggressive and unconstitutional war against Syria and that’s “legal” and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is an “animal” for allegedly killing or injuring a few thousands of Syrian civilians in jihadi area with gas. Emphasis on the word “allegedly.” But . . . it’s perfectly fine, even noble, for the U.S. to lead the anti-Assad coalition that has massacred over 500,000 Syrian civilians. Maybe it’s not a “massacre” if you just kill a few hundred here and there and the numbers just add up over time. A new twist to the meaning of “the new math.”

Well, onward into the life of total fairy tale. If you thought total war was bad, just wait.

Notes
^[1] Comment by Jim Noble on "Giselle Donnelly can finally be herself." Posted by 4Runner, Free Republic, 10/13/18.

UPDATE (without comment) :

Women’s March organizers are moving away from the iconic “pussyhat” because it may be offensive to trans women who don’t have female genitalia.

"Women’s March Ditching Pussyhats Cuz of 'Men.'" By Steve MacDonald, Granite Ggrok, 1/11/18.