Missing the Point on the “Transgender” Bathroom Wars

SellwynThumbby Selwyn Duke6/16/16
“You fundamentally can’t change sex…. Transsexualism was invented by psychiatrists,” said former “transsexual” Alan Finch in 2004. This is a truth; however, it has not stopped the advocates of an invented status from trying to change society. And if conservatives want to preserve sanity, they need to change their arguments.

Recent times have seen a growing number of leftist bathroom dictates, such as the unconstitutional Obama administration directive instructing schools to allow students to use the opposite sex’s facilities if they so desire. In response, conservatives have stated that the real problem is not having a made-up-sex-status (MUSS) man using women’s bathrooms, but that sexual predators will use an I’m-really-a-woman ruse to indulge their perversion. This is a valid argument — one that should be made.  Nonetheless, it is not the main problem with the MUSS agenda.

The above conservative argument is sometimes delivered when leftists point out that (some) MUSS people have been using the opposite sex’s facilities for decades without anyone even knowing. And this is true. It also gets at the real point.

To wit: this has nothing to do with men masquerading as women so effectively that they can use a women’s bathroom while raising nary an eyebrow. Such men obviously don’t need a law to gain access to the girl’s room.

This is about socially reengineering society — about changing hearts and minds — by legitimizing made-up sexual statuses.

Please make sure you’ve fully digested the above line before continuing.

Obviously, no man, no matter how well he does the RuPaul thing, should use women’s facilities. But we’re not going to administer a genetic test at the restroom door. If a guy in a dress enters and exits and no one is any the wiser, it’s out of sight, out of mind.

But putting this issue in plain sight serves to influence minds. Then it becomes a matter of saying, “Hey, kids, this is acceptable. This is real. This is okay.” And, of course, the MUSS agenda explicitly involves not only instructing schoolchildren that they must be accepting of MUSS people, but that they should be open to the possibility they might be MUSSed up themselves. “Be yourself, kid!”

This is evil. It’s stupid, too, as the it’s-always-been-done argument could be used to justify anything. Why trouble over teaching tolerance for bestiality? I mean, people have been engaging in it for eons — and civilization is still here. There isn’t one sin — or, as some like to now call it, “lifestyle choice” — that hasn’t “always been done.” But that’s what closets are for. And using casuistry to make the once-closeted catch on will make civilization catch its death.

Unfortunately, the once-closeted is now exalted while the ethereal is closeted. Today we hear that “faith is a private matter,” a profoundly silly statement, while private matters are made public. If one’s faith is a lie, he should dispense with it; if it is the Truth, which is universal, there then is nothing private about it. And as we confuse the public with the private, Christianity is expelled from the public sphere and now even the private one, with businessmen told they can’t live their own faith in their own business.

And that’s what happens when closets aren’t used for the right things.


Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com • (455 views)

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Missing the Point on the “Transgender” Bathroom Wars

  1. Timothy Lane says:

    I noted several years ago that liberals detest innocence. This applies to sexual innocence as well as criminal innocence. It’s part of their preference for the abnormal, the depraved, and the degenerate.

  2. FredB says:

    How about a policy of “Don’t ask, don’t tell, and don’t show?”

  3. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    This is about socially reengineering society — about changing hearts and minds — by legitimizing made-up sexual statuses.

    This is undeniably true. So why would someone want to do that? And don’t tell me “fairness, “compassion,” or “sensitivity.” Those are just excuses used to fool the rubes and useful idiots who buy into this stuff rather than fight it. And, after all, since most now have, in one degree or another, been adopted into the Left’s cult-of-sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll (party all day, all the time…work is for losers), you reach that magic meaning of “non-judgmentalism” which has nothing to do with appropriate tolerance but with not wanting to saw off the branch that one is already sitting on.

    So, given the two-tier system we must acknowledge (America-hating Marxists at the top, useful idiots at the bottom who willingly buy their deceptive marketing), what is in it for the leaders at the top? I can only surmise:

    1) The total overthrow of any moral code derived from the Bible

    2) A deep personal hatred for normalcy.

    3) A wish to spread one’s personal pain to others.

    Why still? Why these things? Again, I surmise that the Cult of the Left is actually a Cult of Children Forever Acting Out Against Their Parents.

    There is a very good reason that the Left and the Democrat Party idolizes youth. It’s because it is during youth (often around the age of 15-18) that youth rebels against their parents and authority. Some of this is necessary or else little Johnny or Janie would never leave the nest.

    But the Left has glorified this rebellion and prolonged it. This raging at authority is completely unproductive because the delusion is that no authority is necessary (other than a personal will to power…and identity, as we see). Christianity, the Constitution, and reality (including the reality of the two, and only two, sexes) are the prime authorities that must be overturned at all cost. They are the answer to The Wild One question of: “Hey, Johnny, what are you rebelling against?”

    Ironically, the true rebel in our society is the adult who understands principles such as:

    + restraint

    + making trade-offs (you can’t have everything just because you can think of it)

    + self-control

    + standards rather than just emotion

    + Honor, respect, decency, diligence, trustworthiness, patience, forgiveness, courage, humility, integrity, I could go on.

    So, putting away childish things will never, ever happen in regards to the Left. They live on childish things…destructively childish things. Including men dressing up like a woman and playing pretend. Anything to escape adulthood.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      An excellent analysis. It’s certainly interesting that the people who support a police state hate anyone (other than themselves) in authority. Marc Scott Zicree demonstrated this attitude repeatedly in his comments on various episodes in his Twilight Zone Companion. (Rod Serling himself, a more traditional liberal, was too willing to accept the necessity for authorities.)

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        Thanks. And this is why Pajama Boy is the symbol of the Democrat voter, not the Marlboro Man. I’m not the one making this stuff up. It’s easy enough to use our intellect and fashion any thread of thought. But I do think one thread that ties the Left together (at least the modern Left) is the infantilization of its dogma.

        As Dennis Prager says, it is in human nature to want to be taken care of. To me, it’s obvious that there are only two sexes, male and female. Science say so as well. (Isn’t that “settled science”?) And I”m not saying that there isn’t same-sex attraction. But we humans come with attractions for all kinds of things, many of which are not good for us.

        Whatever the case may be, one way to avoid taking on the duties of a man (or a woman) is to just avoid those roles altogether. And that, at heart, is what I think all this gender bending is about. Nobody wants to say it because its considered impolite these days not to indulge everyone’s perversion or inclination (at least in regards to sexual liberalism).

        It’s much easier to dress up like a clown and pretend at something else, especially if it alleviates you from the burden of adulthood. You can instead be a victim and play pretend with your life because, unlike the standard sex roles of man and woman, the various manufactured genders come with no requirements other than to share your freakishness early and often (and blindly supporting groups that want to kill you).

  4. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    I think the pope must be getting mixed up about things. He appears to have got something right for a change.

    http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/08/04/pope-francis-describes-transgenderism-annihilation-man/

    Is calling transgenderism, (a ridiculous word for a ridiculous idea), the annihilation of man too disparaging? Does it not show enough respect for these deviants? And if there ever was a proper application of the word deviant, it is in this case.

    I have a friend whose niece is “transgender”. Apparently, the girl (who thinks she is a man) has some severe mental issues aside from “transgenderism”. I would think that such is the case in most instances of “transgenderism”.

    These people need help, not encouragement to maintain their psychosis.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      I noticed that, and was truly amazed. It’s the first time I can recall that the Peron pope didn’t play to the avant-garde left.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        I expect him to eventually cave. He is, after all, sort of the Donald Trump of Catholics. He’s a populist, at heart. I can’t see him standing firm on this. Wait for the official communiqué to follow from the Vatican that says, “What the Pope really meant was…”

        But it’s nice while it lasts.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      You can be defined by who your enemies are. And, by god, if the queer Nazis hate him, I could warm a little bit to this Pope.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *