I just came across a recent interview of Abigail. It is an excellent summary of the hypothesis of her book: the recent explosion of girls identifying as Transgender is because ofsocial contagion. This is must see for those concerned about this issue. Please check it out below.
For more than a year, I’ve been thinking that Online Porn is a key reason why so many young girls identify as “boys” in the Western world. If you think your Smartphone toting 12 year old son or daughter are not watching some of the most revolting sexual images you can imagine, then you are deluding yourself. Boys are learning at a very young age how to objectify and denigrate women. Porn is stunting healthy sexual development. You don’t need a professional psychiatrist to tell you this. If they are not getting porn on their phone because you think you have “locked it down” (dream on!) then they are watching porn on the Smartphone of a friend. And many young girls are saying to themselves, if this is what it means to be a woman, get me outta here! I think Online Porn is a reason why some of our girls are checking out other options. It helps to explain the explosive growth of adolescent onset gender-dysphoria among our girls.
There are other forces at play as well. Deep depression. Personal trauma. Anxiety. Autism. But these co-morbidities are rarely analyzed before “fast-tracking” youths to transition.
Also I think something else is in play. Girls from middle and upper middle class backgrounds are constantly being told they are the victims of Patriarchy and that men get all the breaks in our 21st century western world. Plus, they are being told that if they are white then they are members of the oppressor class. (The vast majority of teens claiming to be Trans or non-binary are white girls from middle & upper middle class “progressive” families.) So coming out as Trans or Non-binary lends social credibility to their existence. It’s very socially rewarding. All they need to give up is “a pound of flesh.” And perhaps future fertility (though this is hardly mentioned). But they will receive praise and affirmation for their new-found “authentic” selves. This is where the influence of social media looms large.
***
The interviewer John Anderson and Abigail discuss Porn as well as the overall “affirming” environment that is “grooming” our girls and boys down the path toward exotic identity expressions. Unfortunately, unlike a tattoo or non-conforming hair and clothing styles, many of these expressions require medical intervention. We are witnessing the medicalization of identity. And our doctors, our technologists, our pharmaceutical representatives, who have mostly brought great good to our culture, must be asked some very demanding conflict of interest questions. We need to hold them accountable.
Because our children matter more than their bottom line.
Planned Parenthood’s new Cross-Sex Hormone revenue stream is not purely about “liberation.” In some of our states a 16 year old girl can walk into Planned Parenthood and without a note from a therapist or her mother can receive doses of testosterone 40 times the natural female level. I’m investigating “the money trail” argument and will be blogging about this soon.
But first this important interview.
***
The interviewer John Anderson served as Deputy Prime Minister of Australia for 6 years between 1999 and 2005 under John Howard. I recommend you “turn on” the CC (Closed Captioning) since he has an Australian accent that may be a little hard to understand for some of you, especially those with hearing loss <grin.>.
***
STANDARD LINK DISCLAIMER footnote:1 Links from this blog to online resources don’t necessarily mean I support everything found on these sites. But as adults we should embrace viewpoint diversity. And make alliances where we can.
***
Again, Shrier’s book Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters is a must read. She’s a fine and careful writer. And as she says in the interview above, the amount of vitriol sent her way for writing such a thoughtful book is shameful and also indicative of the fight ahead. But our children are worth that fight. Civil Society is worth that fight.
Of course, for my Christian Brothers and Sisters, we must fight the way Jesus fought. Silencing, deplatforming, cancelling, shouting down our ideological opponents is not Christian. We must listen to what they have to say. And then speak the Truth as we understand it. Unfortunately, the more I study this issue and the forces in play, I’m led to the conclusion that the Gender Ideologues are not terribly interested in dialogue or viewpoint diversity. For them, this is a massive Power Play.
If you disagree with them, as I do. You need to learn and take a stand. I hope to help you in that effort.
Full disclosure. I recently became an Amazon Affiliate. So I will receive a very small percentage of the sale of any books I recommend on my blog. Just so you know.
***
If you haven’t already added your email to my list, do so and I’ll let you know when the blog is updated.
Isabella Malbin was an Art School graduate and like most graduates in that field she had to work at finding work. After many odd, unfulfilling jobs she thought helping women in the birth process would be rewarding and would fit her personality. So she started the certification process in New York State thinking she could work in a hospital, birthing center, or a clinic as a birthing assistant.
Below is a long form interview of her by Benjamin Boyce on his podcast, “The Boyce of Reason.” He calls his interviews “calmversations.” Something we desperately need in today’s insult Twitterverse, where the snarky often vulgar putdown is the preeminent form of communication.
I’m going to preview the parts that I found most compelling and on point. But do support Benjamin’s efforts by checking out his channel and watching the interview yourself. Also don’t skip the ads. (Unless it’s a 30 minute one!). He gets paid a meager stipend for his production efforts if you “watch” the ads. The full video interview is below so you can verify I didn’t jerk thangs out of context.
NOTABLE QUOTABLES {my comments are in brackets}
Isabella: (10:31) “You know, I had heard about this Postpartum Doula thing…so in 2016 I signed up for a birth and Postpartum Doula1A support person, usually female, who may not have medical or midwifery training, who provides emotional assistance to a mother or pregnant couple before, during or after childbirth. training….At the time I couldn’t find training that was just Postpartum {she was not interested in the birth part of the training but the combined training was all that was being offered.} I really wasn’t even interested in birth, other than the fact that I had heard there was injustice happening within obstetric birth and that was women were being violated and that c-sections were on the rise and I had an awareness that there was something wrong but I didn’t think that was going to be my lane.
{Isabella is a self-described Radical Feminist who believes the medical/pharmaceutical industry is abusing women by pushing unnecessary medical interventions (c-sections) opioids and, surprisingly for a Feminist, also by pushing synthetic hormonal birth control.}
(11:45) There was a cultural competency segment of the training which was that we no longer use the words “woman” and “mother.” We say “birthing people,” “birthing person,” “chest feeder” and then later I was introduced to “menstruating human” and “uterus haver.” And all those things. And so this was in Brooklyn and New York City…
The term “birthing people” implies that women are not the only humans that give birth. “Birthing people” makes space for someone to say “I’m a man and I give birth.” Which is just factually inaccurate. Men don’t give birth. In the “birthing person” space, with language ideology, women are being asked to play pretend. Right? To pretend that that’s a woman, to make a sacrifice for someone else’s comfort of their kind of dysphoria, right, making space for their dysphoria, right? Their belief that they are stuck in the wrong body, that they have some congenital defect, which is just healthy breast tissue, you know, so things like that.
…not only is this factually untrue but it gives power to our oppressor class to say that men give birth, right?{I told you she was a Radical Feminist!} So it’s ironic because all these women who are in this birth Doula training are there because they want to change the world, they want to make things better for women specifically in birth. We are only in this position because natural birth and um traditional midwifery was systematically taken away from women. Women didn’t get together and say hey this birth thing, men and technology they just know how to do it better.
To say that this thing that only women have the capacity to do is now something that men can claim is totally bonkers.
(21:13) we were instructed {in her Doula training} to not use the words natural birth. I really see that as part of the pharmaceutical industry to like want to normalize c-sections so what once started out as caesarean awareness month which was like education to kind of like share what caesareans were and how they worked has become a whole really romantic glossy for women to like “shout their caesareans” “this is birth too!” I think it came from a place of not wanted to shame and not wanting to judge…
{Isabella talks about how pervasive the ideology was in her training and why she hesitated initially to push back…fear of being called a bigot.}
(26:28) How could it be true that my Doula training and the organization itself talks more about trans ideology and inclusivity more than they do about preserving the importance of physiologic birth and protecting women and children? You know it is so bizarre and it took me a few years to kind of wrap my head around that because I had such a, you know, before I really got clarity over what was happening on like a larger scale and what was happening with uh just the market of sex reassignment surgery and that and the money stuff. I just, I didn’t go there for so long because part of me thought that there was this small oppressed sad population that needed my protection and if I were to utter the words “woman” and “mother” I would jeopardize their safety, I would jeopardize their well-being and, and nobody wants to be the bigot, you know nobody wants to be that person, and so yeah.
(31:12). So the friends I was teaching with were affirming trans ideology, they were affirming women to take synthetic hormones, if they identified as trans, like no questions asked, and like to even question a woman who had cut off her breasts and taken testosterone for years then having a baby, to question what the effects of that long-term testosterone would be on the child was like “no, no, no, that’s not your business, you don’t go there. That’s not something you ask a question about.”
Ben: (33:30) California just recently is attempting to redefine breast tissue as abnormal if this mental condition called gender-dysphoria declares it as abnormal. This one condition, gender dysphoria, is given the right to redefine what reality is, what normality is. It is given a completely different status than any other psychological distress or mental condition and even we probably couldn’t even call it a mental condition because it’s so sacred and it’s redefining the world. It’s very odd that this one thing has so much power.
Isabella: Yeah, when I saw this I was horrified. I think the language was like congenital defect.
Ben: Yes, a breast is a congenital defect because of gender dysphoria.
Isabella: (35:55). When I started to bubble up things about my discomfort with the ideology, people would say to me, friends would say to me, well you don’t know because you’ve never experienced that. And I would say well, it’s interesting you’d say that because I remember as a teenage girl fantasizing what it would be like to slice off my inner thighs, so I could have a thigh gap. And of course my mom would say well that’s ridiculous you’re never, you’re not going to get liposuction, you’re 14 years old. Imagine the damage that could have been done to me had my mom said, you know what, you know if I had threatened to harm myself if she wouldn’t let me, if I were to use suicide as a kind of manipulation technique? Same for anorexia….If I were to beg my mom to call me fat when I was like 85 pounds that would have been really damaging. That wasn’t my experience, the anorexia part, but certainly the desire to modify my body surgically is not something specific to trans identified women….That gender dysphoria thing is something that, or body dysmorphia experience is something that you know a lot of my friends went through and had. What we didn’t have was someone affirming us saying you know what, you’re right, your body is wrong.
Ben: Is there some part of pubescence for women that’s uh, it’s a very narrow passage and wanting to escape the body or disgust with the body or a persistent desire to flee the body is a part of that passage and coming to peace with that is traditionally, up until medical ability to fiddle around with that, is a part of becoming mature, a part of becoming a woman, and becoming embodied and I guess in a way dealing not only with the social consequences but the reality of the situation of being a woman and wanting to flee that as a part of pubescence and coming of age. And in our attempt to give people the most convenient life possible, the most easy life possible we’re starting to fiddle around with something that’s essential to the process of becoming mature.
Isabella: (1:02:44). I think there’s something about just not being able to deny the truth of birth. There’s no pretending…I always say there’s no room for apathy in birth. You really, it’s something that is so grounding and so sobering and the idea that such a point of truth of humanity that one would be asked to lie or pretend really astounds me and to deny that that process, or to include men in that process even linguistically is totally weird. It’s weird.
It’s straight up abusive to take these like young (I was 24 when I did my Doula training) these really eager young women who want to do good who want to serve women and to kind of indoctrinate them in this way to say like “you won’t have a client base unless you agree to the new lexicon”. You know which was what was like implicit in the whole training.
Isabella: (1:07:19) Again this narrative, it’s just the disenfranchised, oppressed, you know, absolutely gender non-conforming people are targeted right and attacked, I mean Buck Angel says you know that she was brutalized as a butch lesbian, dragged in the streets, then she now passes as a man in some respects. We can hold the truth that gender non-conforming people are targeted and brutalized…but that isn’t justification to then move into this whole twisted mental gymnastics ideology where men and women are like interchangeable.
{She next tried to get training in what used to be called Natural Family Planning but has been rebranded in the last few decades as the “Fertility Awareness Method.” Most of the research behind FAM is by the Catholic Church (though not this training), plus, I’m pretty sure Isabella is not Catholic or religious for that matter. But, as a Radical Feminist opposed to Big Pharma, and the medicalization of identity, she is very much in favor of natural processes instead of synthetically enhanced ones that, in her view, damage women. But she got kicked out of this training too. Here’s the story:}
Isabella: (1:18:15) I got kicked out of the FAM training. I was already a radical feminist. I emailed the head of the program and was like “hey this is what I’m about, let me know if you erase women, if you do I’d like to know now”. And she was like, oh no, no, I hold space for everyone and that should have been my red flag, but it was a two year teacher training that I had been looking forward to, I had actually applied the year before and not gotten in and so it was the long journey of “oh my god it’s starting and wonderful I’m going to get all this knowledge and you know deepen my knowledge and whatnot for sharing this natural family planning method with all these women.”
(1:19:07). I kept using the word woman and mother, um, the first module was the gender unicorn, uh total indoctrination of trans ideology.
Ben: So in the beginning before you get to the facts you have to adopt this ideology. It’s put right in the front of reproductive health of females. They have to adopt trans ideology before they can get to the reality of woman. In program after program. Pretty astounding.
Isabella: And this woman who is the head of this program would constantly self-censor. She’d be like “women, oh gosh, I’m so sorry everyone I’m really working on it and I’m getting better.” But um and then she would say to me privately, “I really resonate with some of the things that you’re sharing like, I also worry about little boys being castrated”. You know and then totally would collude to the mob. You know it got worse and worse and we would have private talks and I’m not kidding, I would be giving a presentation on my assignment and be saying “woman” “women” and this was all virtual training so I could see the women on the screens just being like visibly upset and so this kind of all led up to there was a lot of tension brewing and women were writing her saying that they didn’t feel safe in the program because of my critique of the gender unicorn and my stance and I wasn’t alone, I had an ally in the group and then a silent ally so…
Ben: It’s so weird, like I’m sorry to distract…the terminology “I don’t’ feel safe” for someone having a different…this ideology is so threatening and its so frail at the same time. It’s just a nest of contradictions.
Isabella: And manipulation, ridiculous you know I had this thought too, have these women never experienced real violence that they can’t distinguish between someone who is 5’1”, 110 pounds, like five states away, in a virtual space, thinking that I’m unsafe and could like harm them. In what reality? I mean kudos to them for having never experienced real violence but that’s like crazy shit.
(1:21:34). So the teacher was very much like trying to be the peacemaker and like trying to find a win for all. So, she decided to schedule a gender forum in which she said she was hiring a moderator, no I’m sorry she said an expert.
Ben: which means an ideologue, a demagogue that comes in and lays down the law. Am I incorrect?
Isabella: You are spot on. She was a trans rights ally. As soon as I started to speak women started to cry. They started to shake. The one woman in the program who went by she/her and he/him, said “it’s really hard for me to be here” and she was the one shaking and crying and then the expert challenged me to a role play. And I accepted. So during this role play, she was a man who identifies as a woman asking to be included in my women’s circle and so it basically was: “But Isabella you know I would really appreciate it if you would let me into your circle, you know, I really you know I’m working through a lot right now and I could really use the community and support.” ….At one point then she started to get really jazzed up and was like “I want to kill myself” and I basically just said “Your mental health is not my responsibility. This is a group for women and I’m really sorry to hear you’re going through a hard time and I have empathy for that and I am not giving you permission to come into this space”. And then it was just over. Like dead silence. It was the end of the call. I got an email right after, you’re out of the program. Sorry we couldn’t make it work. I wrote her an earful.
Ben: We only want women who will be penetrated at the will of people who cry in the right way. Wow.
Okay. That’s it for now. Take time and watch the whole video. Isabella does not claim to be a Christian. And perhaps she could have handled these moments more sensitively. But watch the video and form your own opinion. I think she is a caring person. She is just frustrated at being asked to affirm a falsehood.
Also, let’s not miss the important cultural shift clearly on display. My research in the past year confirms this kind of training is happening all over the western world. And the intimidation tactics are increasing. Professional licensing and reputation is on the chopping block if you don’t fall in line with gender ideology.
Unless you are willing to disappear mother for “birthing person,” “chest feeder” “menstruating human” or “uterus haver” you may no longer be welcomed as a health care provider in the Western World.
Is this the world we want to live in?
***
LINK DISCLAIMER footnote:2 Links from this blog to online resources don’t necessarily mean I support everything found on these sites. But as adults we should embrace viewpoint diversity. And make alliances where we can.
***
If you haven’t already added your email to my list, do so and I’ll let you know when the blog is updated.
Okay. I promised to update you on the attempts to change the way we speak about and understand motherhood. The disappearance of “mother” is the next rhetorical trick in the attempt to restructure society. If you reached the end of the interview with Dalea in my last post, you heard what she thinks of the latest radical linguistic ploy. As you’ll see in these next few posts, the restructuring effort is far reaching. And some self-described Radical Feminists are not happy about it. You go girls! Welcome to the team.
***
Perhaps while waiting in the grocery store line you’ve spotted the following tabloid headline: “Man gives birth to baby!” And maybe you’ve not given it much thought because of the source. Well, now you should.
Welcome to the tabloid future.
“Men” are giving birth to babies! Progress? Well, not exactly. Uterus and ovary intact biological women are birthing babies. But because this story is about a woman who identifies as a Transgender “man” and has transitioned via testosterone and a double mastectomy (but not full hysterectomy!) you get the head scratching headline “man gives birth.”
Which of course, as we all should know, is a physical impossibility.
Biological men can’t give birth to babies. Or give suck, for that matter.
Also, I have a relevant question. Has anyone considered the possible impact on a baby in utero being birthed by a “man” who for the sake of “his” transition has pumped “his” body with massive levels of testosterone for many years? Will there be any negative long-term consequences for a baby gestating in that environment? Anybody swept up in today’s progressive moment asking that question? I can imagine some saying; “well even if it does, that’s the price you must pay for ‘freedom.’” For “liberation.” The attitude seems to be if there are problems for any products of conception, our Brave New World technologists and ethicists will figure something out. Eventually. (Won’t they?)
But let’s stick with the “mother” question for now. As the decidedly “old fashioned” Dr. Paul McHugh of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine put it in 2016.
The underlying basis of maleness and femaleness is the distinction between the reproductive roles of the sexes; in mammals such as humans, the female gestates offspring and the male impregnates the female. More universally, the male of the species fertilizes the egg cells provided by the female of the species. This conceptual basis for sex roles is binary and stable, and allows us to distinguish males from females on the grounds of their reproductive systems, even when these individuals exhibit behaviors that are not typical of males or females.1“Lawrence S. Mayer, M.B., M.S., Ph.D., and Paul R. McHugh, M.D., “Sexuality and Gender Findings from the Biological, Psychological, and Social Sciences,” Special Report, New Atlantis 50 (Fall 2016): 89.”
But the simplicity of God’s beautiful design doesn’t stop the ideologically driven from confusing our language to fit the desires of this topsy turvy world we now inhabit. Language matters. Which is why those interested in restructuring society want to change the meaning of words, or if possible, erase some words from common usage. Their efforts are well underway. We need to pay attention.
The British high court in 2019 would not confer legal status to a Transgender man (biological woman) who wanted to be known as “the father” of a newborn child. The newborns “father” reasoned that not allowing “him” to be legally recognized as “father” would confuse the child and leave the child “feeling different and odd.”
But somehow telling the child that he was birthed by his “father” would not be confusing?
George Orwell rise up! You have another chapter to write!
Sir Andrew McFarlane, the president of the high court’s family division, said…that “motherhood” denoted pregnancy and birth, regardless of how the individual is seen in the eyes of the law, the Guardian reported.
“There is a material difference between a person’s gender and their status as a parent. Being a ‘mother,’ whilst hitherto always associated with being female, is the status afforded to a person who undergoes the physical and biological process of carrying a pregnancy and giving birth,” McFarlane said.
“It is now medically and legally possible for an individual, whose gender is [recognized] in law as male, to become pregnant and give birth to their child. Whilst that person’s gender is ‘male,’ their parental status, which derives from their biological role in giving birth, is that of ‘mother,’ ” he concluded.
The Trans Activists were not happy with that 2019 high court ruling and may have successfully overturned it in the UK by now. I don’t know.
Does redefining motherhood & fatherhood in this way sound reasonable to you?
***
My next post documents the disappearance of “mother” in our nations hospitals and birthing centers. We’ll hear the testimony of someone trained in the field. Until she was kicked out of the field for standing up to the Gender Ideologues.
Finally to my Christian brothers and sisters. A word of caution and encouragement. We must love people who are confused. But we can’t affirm their confusion, nor the confused language their anti-creational ideology says we must adopt. Today, in the state of California, health care workers can be criminally prosecuted for using the wrong pronoun. I’m sure any prosecution couldn’t withstand constitutional scrutiny. (At least for now.). Perhaps the real purpose of the statute is to drive “uncaring” people out of Health Care in California. But the point is that the power of the State is brought to bear on someone violating a speech code. Ironic, isn’t it? In this age of expressive individualism.
Is this the world we want to live in?
***
If you’ve just found my blog and are intrigued about the issue and want to learn more, I highly recommend a book by Abigail Shrier.
Shrier is a graduate of Columbia College who went on to earn a bachelor of philosophy degree from the University of Oxford and a JD from Yale Law School. Her book Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughterswas named a “best book” by The Economist and The Times of London. [2020, 2021]
***
If you haven’t already added your email to my list, do so and I’ll let you know when the blog is updated.