Gender Science - God’s Good Creation

April 13, 2022June 11, 2022

Defining Woman

Did you ever think we would get to the place in our culture where we thought it necessary to ask political and judicial leaders to define the word Woman?

It’s happening in the US. And in Great Britain. In the US the questions are being asked mostly by conservatives. In Great Britain, long time Labour supporters (self declared socialists) are asking the same question of their political leaders.

Here are two videos documenting the facts.

First Video

The Judge can’t answer the question for two reasons. The first reason she gives: ”I’m not a biologist.” The second reason is because she says this issue might come up before her in a supreme court case. As it might.

I give her a pass on the second reason. Unfortunately, this will likely come up before the Supreme Court at some point. That’s how irrational public policy has become in the 21st century.

But, her first reason (she had to know this question was going to be asked) indicated that she truly did not know the answer. Why?

Because she is not a biologist.

This is an example of what I call credentialism. Ya gotta be an expert before you can speak about anything. But surely if any question would seem to be within the general knowledge of ordinary Dick and Jane’s out there, the uncredentialed hoi polloi, as it were, surely the question about what is a ”man” or ”woman” would be one of them. Wouldn’t it?

I mean, does it take a lot of expertise, or scientific trial and error to figure this one out?

Regular, unprofessional, dare I say, common, folk have apparently known the difference between a man and a woman for some time now. The species continues to reproduce, does it not? Even among the most “unenlightened” among us. That would seem to be a good indicator of some knowledge of the difference between male and female among the uncredentialed. Yet, a woman who would seek to be one of the most powerful women on the planet can’t answer that question.

If two men have a sexual relationship. Or two women. This has never produced children. It can’t. Surely the uneducated have noticed. And acted accordingly. I mean, if they intend to have children and allow the species to continue. This would seem to be a basic human instinct.

Woman = adult human female.

Unfortunately, this basic human understanding evades British leaders as well.

Yvette Cooper refused three times to offer a definition of what a woman is, saying she was not going to go down a 'rabbit hole' — Yvette Cooper, Labour Party Shadow Home Secretary refused three times to offer a definition of what a woman is, saying she was not going to go down a ‘rabbit hole’

Anneliese Dodds, Labour's equalities spokesman, said the meaning of the word depended on 'context' — Annelised Dodds, Labour’s equalities spokesman, said the meaning of the word depended on ‘context’

Second Video

We really have gone down a Lewis Carroll rabbit hole. Western Politicians are pedaling fantastical nonsense.

The inestimable J.K. Rowling weighs in

This is what a woman who owns a dictionary and a backbone looks like. @joannaccherry pic.twitter.com/djBuD1QiBF
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) March 8, 2022

Questions:

Can I answer the question: ”Is it raining?” If I am not a meteorologist?
Can I answer the question: ”Is it a dog?” If I am not a veterinarian?
Can I answer the question: ”Is it a female dog?” If I don’t identify as a female veterinarian?
If you can’t define ”woman” how will you be able to protect ”women’s rights?”

If anyone needs a Primer on the question of what is a Man or Woman, please read my “What is Sex” post.

Essentially, we tell the difference based on reproductive capacities.

Again, this is not about loving confused people. But you are not loving someone if you affirm their false perception of who they are. Simply attaching ”marginalized” to a person or group is not enough to decide the matter, and shutdown debate. There is much more at stake here than someone’s feelings.

Matt Walsh is known for stumping transgender activists by asking them to define what a woman is. The author appeared on an episode of “Dr. Phil” in January and asked LGBT activists Ethan and Addison just that, tripping up the activist:

“What is a woman? Can you tell me what a woman is?” Walsh queried.
“No, I can’t,” Ethan admitted, “because it’s not for me to say. Womanhood looks different for everybody.”
Speaking to Addison, Walsh stated, “You stood up here and said, ‘Trans women are women.’ What is a woman?”
“Womanhood is … something that I cannot define,” Addison said.
“But you used the word,” Walsh pushed back. “So what did you mean when you said, ‘Trans women are women’?”
“I do not define what a woman is because I do not identity as a woman,” Addison responded. “Womanhood is something that is an umbrella term.”
“That describes what?” Walsh interjected.
“People who identify as a woman,” Addison said.
Walsh, again, pressed, “Identify as what?”
“A woman,” Addison said. “What is that?” Walsh pressed.
“To each their own,” Addison said, adding that “each person” is “going to have a different relationship with their own gender identity and define it differently. So, trans women are women.”
“You won’t even tell me what the word means though, so that’s the problem,” Walsh responded.

Speaking philosophically, you’ve just witnessed radical individualism on display. According to these advocates, individuals are entirely self-defining and autonomous. Their perceived ”reality” is purely subjective, with no unimaginative boundaries. Any genetic contribution made by someone’s male and female parents doesn’t matter. Neither does God’s contribution.

The radical individualist says: ”I can be whatever I want to be!”

No, actually, you cannot.

If you think you are a bird and can fly. You cannot.

If you imagine you are a penis-having, testicle-carrying, person-with-prostate, woman. You are not.

Come down off the ledge you’ve been encouraged to leap from. Plenty of people want to help you.

Speaking theologically, and as a Christian I must, there are two components to God’s created reality. Call them the invisible world and the visible world. Or to shrink it down to a more personal level, Mind/Soul & Body. The goal of any Therapist, Christian or otherwise, is reintegration of Mind & Body. Not a fictitious, perhaps technology assisted, separation of the two.

Please see my post “Collaborating with Madness” for more details.

That post quoted Paul McHugh, former Chair of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Medical School and psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital:

I have witnessed a great deal of damage from sex-reassignment. The children transformed from their male constitution into female roles suffered prolonged distress and misery as they sensed their natural attitudes. Their parents usually lived with guilt over their decisions—second-guessing themselves and somewhat ashamed of the fabrication, both surgical and social, they had imposed on their sons. As for the adults who came to us claiming to have discovered their “true” sexual identity and to have heard about sex-change operations, we psychiatrists have been distracted from studying the causes and natures of their mental misdirections by preparing them for surgery and for a life in the other sex. We have wasted scientific and technical resources and damaged our professional credibility by collaborating with madness rather than trying to study, cure, and ultimately prevent it.

To see how far this kind of madness can go, read my post Species Fluidity? Transpups?

+++

As a Classic Christian I encourage everyone to “Embrace, Don’t Affirm.”

Individuals with a Gender Identity Disorder (Gender-Dysphoria) need Truth-filled Love. Please read this post for more details.

March 8, 2022June 11, 2022

The Pro-Pedophile Inventor of “Gender”

A follow up post from my last one. And another article from the pro-woman, pro-child safeguarding news site, REDUXX. [Read the whole thing! The usual link disclaimer applies. ¹]

I’ve known about John Money of Johns Hopkins University for some time now. Money is one of Freud and Kinsey’s leading successors.

Money, a sexologist and psychologist is considered the first to use the terms “gender identity” and “gender role.” In his clinical research Money described the “internal experience of sexuality” and the “social expectations of male and female behavior” respectively.

Money was on record as a hater of Judeo-Christian “repressive religious structures…[and their] anti-masturbatory, anti-sexual fervor.”

Here’s what he had to say about Pedophilia.

“If I were to see the case of a boy aged ten or eleven who’s intensely erotically attracted toward a man in his twenties or thirties, if the relationship is totally mutual, and the bonding is genuinely totally mutual, then I would not call it pathological in any way.”

Follow this link to a United States Court of Appeals Amicus Brief where Money’s accepting-affirming attitude toward pedophiliacs is documented in court.

The whole brief illuminates the history of our current cultural crisis, a crisis that creates a thick wall of separation between biological sex & gender. And pulls down any suggestion of a Male/Female binary by promoting the concept of “gender-fluidity.” The leading lights promoting this crisis assert in so many words that “inner conviction” trumps biological reality.

As a Christian, I’m compelled to say, this disintegration of human personhood with its body-denying philosophy will not end well. God our Creator will not be mocked.

Read the brief. If you have the time.

If not. Scroll down to page 15 of the Amicus Brief and you will see the following footnote “55”.

In an interview published in Paidika, an international journal for those advocating for pedophilia, Dr. Money said that adult sex with children is normal and often beneficial and said, “regarding paedophilia [sic] that I would never report anybody.” An Interview with John Money, PAIDIKA: THE JOURNAL OF PAEDOPHILIA 12 (Spring 1991).

When Money says he wouldn’t “report anybody” he means report to the police any patient engaged in an unlawful but consensual adult-child sexual relationship.

More details about Money’s legacy at REDUXX. [You should read the whole thing.]

As a culture, if we think biology is irrelevant, in this case puberty, and that only internal desires matter, then how can we say Dr. Money is wrong?

Today’s stigma-free ethic toward gender-fluidity affirms a child’s desire to “transition” at decreasingly younger ages. So as to become their “authentic self” sooner. A self free from the “dictates” of biology and the unwanted changes of puberty. (Pharmaceutical puberty blockers to the rescue!) Many top flight professionals in a variety of disciplines coach us to acknowledge and promote those “authenticating” body-denying desires.

For now, we draw the ethical line at pedophilia. For now.

I know that the vast majority of those who promote our current cultural crisis would never imagine crossing the ethical line just mentioned. But, for me, their body-denying logic leads in that direction.

Is this the world we want to live in? We better come up with some answers quick. Things are moving swiftly.

March 8, 2022June 11, 2022

Destigmatize Pedophilia?

This one is a must see. From the Feminist News and Child Safeguarding site REDUXX we learn of a published paper in the American Psychological Association’s peer reviewed Journal of Stigma and Health. The findings of the study? Destigmatize pedophilia.

The paper is titled Journalism and Pedophilia: Background on the Media Coverage of a Stigmatized Minority.

The researchers write that…

“society can and should create a social environment in which minor-attracted persons can accept their sexual interest without fear of disadvantages.”

Because those “sexual interests” are immutable, so we are told, the best course of action will accept pedophilia as a “sexual preference” and call pedophiles “minor-attracted people.” This will avoid unjustified “negative [and] punitive attitudes.”

If not, those negative social attitudes will add…

“to the development of a sexual preference disorder (which is a sexual preference for children accompanied by psychological distress and/or risk for direct and indirect sexual behavior against children) and increases their risk of becoming offenders.

Which is to say pedophiles, sorry, minor-attracted persons, may become child sex abusers if society continues to stigmatize their sexual preference.

Got it?

How about we try this instead.

For non-offending pedophiles who are interested in being healed instead of being accepted we point them toward a long series of therapy sessions with both a trained therapist and a Rabbi, Priest, or Pastor who will lovingly, prayerfully, assist them in changing their unconscionable sexual preference for little boys or little girls.

Some might call this “conversion therapy.” I call it loving your neighbors. Old and young.

As a culture, if we think biology is irrelevant, in this case puberty, and that only internal desires matter, then how can we say these academics are wrong?

Today’s stigma-free ethic toward gender-fluidity affirms a child’s desire to “transition” at decreasingly younger ages. So as to become their “authentic self” sooner. A self free from the ”dictates” of biology. And the unwanted changes of puberty. (Pharmaceutical puberty blockers to the rescue!) Many top flight professionals in a variety of disciplines coach us to acknowledge and promote those “authenticating” body-denying desires.

For now, we still draw the ethical line at pedophilia. For now.

Is this the world we want to live in? We better come up with some answers quick. Things are moving swiftly.

I’m a Classic Christian and regard Gender Ideology as anti-creational to the core. This blog is about “God’s Good Creation.” That’s why I’m writing about Gender Ideology. And “speaking up” as I’m confident Jesus would.

"Have you not read that the one who made them at the beginning 'made them male and female.'" [Matt 19:4]