Translate

Tuesday, 23 August 2016

Who is pushing gender dysphoria and why?

The 18 year old son of a friend had committed suicide after suffering from gender dysphoria. His parents were actually supportive of him, but that did not help, because he basically looked like a man and even played rugby. I curse the BBC for their campaign to normalise gender dysphoria.

Many of us wish we were cleverer, richer, more beautiful, desirable and influential than we actually are, and in a higher social class too, no doubt, and possibly a different race. But we can't all get what we want.

My position remains that anyone who wants to mutilate their sex organs and sterilise themselves in order to be happier as a member of the opposite sex is in fact mentally ill.

Mental illness I would define as being irrational and obsessed.

It is obviously irrational to suppose that we would be happier as a member of the opposite sex after we have sterilised ourselves.

For one thing we wouldn't look right and people would think we are obviously weird. This means we are not going to get much sex, or any sex from any decent person who might want to have a long term relationship with us.

This would only make us more mentally ill if we were already mentally ill to begin with.

While people are understandably ashamed of being mentally ill, mental illness is curable, especially if it is the usual kind of mental illness suffered in adolescence.

We all know teenagers kill themselves at the drop of a hat, over failed exams in the East, over being dumped in the West, or over something we as adults find unbelievably trivial. This is probably because as teenagers we suffer from growing pains and cannot imagine ourselves getting over whatever calamity we think we have suffered. As well-adjusted adults, we know we have been there and got all the T-shirts of being dumped, disappointed, bereaved, betrayed, rejected and sacked.
I repeat: mental illness is curable, but knowing that you can never be a beautiful woman because you are a man is not.

The only cure for gender dysphoria is transition, apparently.

The old fashioned way to deal with these things was for the father to tell the son to pull himself together, or else. He might even tell his son that it is actually a privilege to be a man though it is harder to be a man than a woman, because a man has to act, while a woman merely to desist, and keep herself looking half way decent while she is constraining the natural exuberance of her nature.
The 21st century way of dealing with gender dysphoria is to let these pre-pubescents have hormone treatment before they are adult so they will be able to hide their maleness better.

The best way of parenting when our adolescent children threaten to commit suicide because you made them miss an episode of their favourite TV programme must surely be to tell them menacingly that they ain't seen nothing yet about the things in life that might just upset them.

I suppose if you as a parent were disapproving and hostile, you would get blamed for the suicide.
If you were accommodating towards your son transitioning, you would get more sympathy at the funeral. This is PC Britain after all.

QUESTIONS

1. Imagine your son will commit suicide whether or not you are supportive of having his gender dysphoria being cured by transition. With the benefit of this hindsight, how would you be towards him?

a) Supportive of his desire for transition
b) Disapproving and hostile towards his proposed transition

Please also give reasons.

2. On a scale of 0 to 100, how wicked is it to encourage vulnerable adolescent males into thinking that gender dysphoria resulting in transitioning is in any way desirable?

3. Should the position you take on gender dysphoria depend entirely on how the hypothetical mourners at your son's hypothetical funeral think of you in PC Britain?

4. Isn't there a medically ethical position to take on these matters with the public interest in mind?

5. Should the government really be encouraging adolescents who say they are suffering from gender dysphoria to transition when most of them are frankly mad, silly and barely know their minds from one year to the next?

6. Why is the government not discouraging this industry?

7. Cui bono?

Saturday, 13 August 2016

Taking the sting out of that wife-beating verse in the Koran

The verse atheist liberal feminists hate most in the Koran concerns a husband's rights over his wife, if he maintains her:

004.034
YUSUFALI: Men are the protectors and maintainers of women,because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).

PICKTHAL: Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.

SHAKIR: Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.

You would have thought a reasonably intelligent woman could easily avoid being beaten if she heeded all the prior warnings she would get from her husband before she got her beating.

An employee gets a verbal warning, a written warning and then a final warning before being sacked by his employer.

A recalcitrant wife also gets two warnings over a longish period of time before she gets beaten. How long would it take a husband to formally admonish his wife? If he takes it up to the next level ie does not have sex with her and makes her sleep in the spare room or the sofa, then clearly she has not modified her behaviour.

There should be a Matrimonial Disputes Tribunal for the admonition to be first registered, to see that both parties to the dispute are taking this matrimonial dispute seriously.

I don't see why we cannot have a Matrimonial Disputes website for these admonitions to be registered online and for the wife to have a right of reply if she does not think the husbandly admonition justified or reasonable.

If the recalcitrant wife does not mend her behaviour, he can just give her a slap on the wrist and record the fact with the Matrimonial Disputes Tribunal that he has "beaten" her.

If she still does not mend her behaviour, he can proceed to divorce her under the rules of fault-based divorce.

That would sound fair enough to me. (Contrary to rumours that I am really a white man pretending to be a female and foreigner, I am in fact female and not white. I just think, talk and write like a man because that is how I would like things to be if I were a man and felt compelled to marry and have legitimate offspring and in so doing invest in the future of his society, nation and civilisation.)

Claire Khaw takes the sting out of that wife-beating verse in the Koran

The verse atheist liberal feminists hate most in the Koran concerns a husband's rights over his wife, if he maintains her:

004.034
YUSUFALI: Men are the protectors and maintainers of women,because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).

PICKTHAL: Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.

SHAKIR: Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.

You would have thought a reasonably intelligent woman could easily avoid being beaten if she heeded all the prior warnings she would get from her husband before she got her beating.

An employee gets a verbal warning, a written warning and then a final warning before being sacked by his employer.

A recalcitrant wife also gets two warnings over a longish period of time before she gets beaten. How long would it take a husband to formally admonish his wife? If he takes it up to the next level ie does not have sex with her and makes her sleep in the spare room or the sofa, then clearly she has not modified her behaviour.

There should be a Matrimonial Disputes Tribunal for the admonition to be first registered, to see that both parties to the dispute are taking this matrimonial dispute seriously.

I don't see why we cannot have a Matrimonial Disputes website for these admonitions to be registered online and for the wife to have a right of reply if she does not think the husbandly admonition justified or reasonable.

If the recalcitrant wife does not mend her behaviour, he can just give her a slap on the wrist and record the fact with the Matrimonial Disputes Tribunal that he has "beaten" her.

If she still does not mend her behaviour, he can proceed to divorce her under the rules of fault-based divorce.

That would sound fair enough to me. (Contrary to rumours that I am really a white man pretending to be a female and foreigner, I am in fact female and not white. I just think, talk and write like a man because that is how I would like things to be if I were a man and felt compelled to marry and have legitimate offspring and in so doing invest in the future of his society, nation and civilisation.)

Friday, 12 August 2016

Whose moustache is best?

What is capable of challenging the current political orthodoxy?

Radical Islam is a reaction to PC Liberalism.

If we don't like PC Liberalism, what is the alternative?

Conservatism or Nationalism? But neither are developed ideologies, because there is no definitive manual for either.

This means neither Conservatism nor Nationalism is strong enough to defeat PC Liberalism.

Communism has been tried and failed.

Christianity is kaput and Judaism is too hard.

One you have eliminated the impossible, what's left, however improbable, must be the answer.

Wednesday, 10 August 2016

The badges of identity


  1. Country of Birth
  2. Country of Residence
  3. Language spoken
  4. Religion/Politics
  5. Class
  6. Gender
  7. Age
  8. Marital status and whether a parent
  9. Sexuality
  10. Race (NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH NATIONALITY)
  11. Nationality (NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH RACE)


People who confuse race with nationality tend to be not the brightest or best educated of people and have trouble understanding abstract ideas.

Race is something about yourself you cannot change (unless you are Michael Jackson and prepared to have cosmetic surgery.

Nationality is something you can acquire or lose, like your passport(s). Some people have more than one, someone people don't even have one.

Let us all pray for Trump, even if we don't really believe in God

Although I was aware of the controversy the Democrats had tried to whip up last night after Trump's speech last night about Hillary Clinton taking away Second Amendment rights, the way it was reported by The Today Programme this morning http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07n3c43 - that Trump had incited his supporters to assassinate Clinton and any of the judges she might appoint as POTUS - chilled my blood.

The entire West should hang its head in shame at the way its media has collectively treated Trump, truth and logic.

As Orwell said, "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." Both Trump and I are revolutionaries for being guided by truth, logic and the idea of promoting the national interest.

Let us pray for Trump - even if we doubt God's existence - that good will triumph over evil, and truth stand clear from error [Koran 2:256]. Trump is only one man, and his enemies the neocons, neoliberals and globalists control the military industrial complex as well as the entire Western media, including the BBC. It will focus our aspiration to be led by a brave and sane man rather than a woman who is the puppet of special interest groups who control the military industrial complex of the West. You don't have to be American to support Trump, just a citizen of its vassal states appalled by its insane policy of starting WW3 by trying everyone's patience.

https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=world%20prayer%20group%20for%20donald%20trump%20%20atheists%20welcome