I went and looked at the original article. This isn't just pushing the "right" of kids to transition. It's also marketing suicide as just one more decision, one more transition. Especially disturbing because I have read Martine Rothblatt. Get deep enough into doctrine and you'll find people who don't believe death is binary either, who believe they can transcend death through consciousness uploads.
Here's the original:
"We all know what awaits us with age, and yet it is all but impossible for any of us to fathom the transitions our selves will undergo over time. Each of those transitions is a kind of little death — the end of one way of being and the birth of another. It is no surprise that the more unexpected the transition, the more deeply unsettling it is.
We are all hurtling, inevitably, toward that one last transition, across the one true binary, the one between life and death. And that binary is the true source of all our regrets, and our joy, too. Regret exists because we all get just one life."
Here's my interpretation of those paragraphs:
Every transition is practice for the final transition that is the true source of all joy. That final transition is the end to all regret. Transitioning from life to death eventually comes for all of us, and anyone should be able to consent to that final transition at any time. Death may be unsettling for some people, but it is necessary for our true selves to be born.
Here's my conclusion:
This is a suicide cult that is deliberately marketing suicide to children. The leadership KNOWS that "affirmative care" increases suicide rates. To them, that's not a bug, it's a feature.
They turned off comments? Cowards! And it’s not only right wingers who decry the trans crap! Lots of lefties do as well...as far as I’m concerned this is not an issue of politics but rather of truth over blatant lies! And also of authoritarian takeover of our institutions!
Quickly, before reading other comments that may say the same thing... wonderful! Please do send this letter to that Polgreen person. She so deserves an earful and the sarcasm in your letter would be pretty effective, I think. You go, Dr. Burgo! Glad to know you're on the side of protecting children from trans ideology.
I just read Lydia Polgreen’s essay on gender, which she conveniently uses interchangeably with sex.She correctly states that hair and eye color are inherited, but leaves out the fact that sex is also inherited! Probably because that would make her whole house of cards fall down. The comparisons between race , ( she is biracial) and sex( which she constantly equates with gender) is illogical to say the least. Though race is inherited she herself proves that one can be biracial or even of several racial mixtures. This is supposed to prove the existence of many different sexes , which she calls genders?Logic is definitely not her strong point. Maybe that why she flunked math?
She cites all kinds of example of kids getting plastic surgery and nobody complaining, but when girls get their breasts amputated, people are upset! Gee, I wonder why? my question is why such claptrap is published at all! So the satire is well deserved ! People like this need to be confronted ....The best weapon against absurdity is absurdity!
Woops, this satire almost got me! The trans cult makes it hard to distinguish satire from trans crap ! Which shows how far the insanity has infected a lot of us!Who is this Lydia Polygren anyway....sounds like a made up name!
I must be defective or living a sheltered existence, because neither I nor anyone I know has experienced sex as a "life history stage." Thank heavens for that! Perhaps the problem is that I haven't read enough of the right philosophers of science.
I agree with you mostly, except that Lydia could have educated herself. She was actually at the Genspect conference!
If she had made an effort to listen to and engage with the speakers, she may have learned about other perspectives on this. What a missed opportunity; what a shame.
I can't imagine being completely sold on nearly all if not all trans thought and talking points, then go to Genspect conference. I haven't read this NYT article I keep seeing referenced, but it sounds like she short circuited. Are readers actually saying she doesn't make sense? That is good if so.
Yes, the readers really came down on her and the column. The column is difficult to read because it’s so distorted, as this piece says.
The Genspect conference offered facts - about biology, about the lack of any kind of screening or safeguarding around gender treatment, about the lasting physical and mental harms of surgery and hormones and ideology.
I think that if you can’t deal with the facts, you retreat to a kind of 10,000-foot view so you can philosophize about life choices and parents and regrets. I think that’s what Lydia did.
Exactly! She doesn’t make sense and uses false arguments! I just read it. She wrote that she failed math...if you can’t think logically , then . I understand why.
Someone foolishly invited James Lindsay, too, to speak at Genspect's Denver conference. Jesse Singal and his co-host Katie Herzog discussed Linsdsay's contribution to the conference in a recent podcast:
Blocked and Reported
Episode 191: A Man in a Dress in a Pile-On. 18 November 2023.
“This week on Blocked and Reported, Jesse and Katie discuss the furor over a self-described autogynephile who wore a dress to a gender conference. Also, Zoomers discover 9/11.”
(40:00) Jesse: And most regrettably, from where I sit, they invited James Lindsay to give a talk on the Marxification of gender.
Katie: Yeah, James Lindsay. That jumped out at me, and it strikes me that if you want to be taken seriously outside of your bubble, James Lindsay is not the person to invite to speak at your conference, especially on this issue. Like if your conference is about how to have impossible conversations, maybe invite him. But if your conference is about gender, maybe not.
Jesse: Yeah. I mean, from my point of view, someone like Lindsay just tips you in the direction away from legitimate science and discourse, of which there was plenty at this conference, and into demagoguery. James Linsday is not a serious voice on sex and gender. His talk made very little sense. He just has these, like . . . his theories are very superficial and often misguided, in my view. And he’s a huge prick online, a massive asshole, which does not help anyone. Which most people associated with Genspect are not.
(43:05) Katie: Actually, I do want to get a little bit more into [James Linsday’s] talk, if you don’t mind. Did he seem crazy, the way he was speaking, the way he does on Twitter? Because he comes across on Twitter like a giant, flaming, fucking asshole.
Jesse: He was more charismatic and less crazy-seeming than I thought, and more polished. There had been one TV appearance that he’d done in the past that was just a train wreck.
Katie: He didn’t just recite a bunch of citations?
Jessie: Well, no. He dropped a lot of names. And I haven’t rewatched it since I saw it. He makes all these claims trying to link everything to Marxism and a lot of what he’s saying is what ideologues in general do: accepting different standards of evidence, trying to change the subject . . . He has, like, this grand theory. Yascha Mounk’s book talks about how a lot of this stuff [i.e., post-structuralist ideologies] isn’t Marxism. It’s post-modern, it’s a rejection of these grand theories. I don’t think he really latches onto the nuances of what’s going on or how much of this is human nature and ideology in general. He claims to be an expert on all these different thinkers. I don’t think he is.
What did David Sedaris say? The AAP has already been sued! Isabelle Ayala, autistic child was persuaded as were her parents that she be “affirmed”...or else
I really enjoyed this :) I'm betting Lydia would miss some of (all of) the humor here.
Hilarous satire! We really do need to laugh at this insanity! Its the only way you keep outselves sane.
We also need to fight this politically , by voting out those who support this evil.
Perfect!
Brilliant!
I went and looked at the original article. This isn't just pushing the "right" of kids to transition. It's also marketing suicide as just one more decision, one more transition. Especially disturbing because I have read Martine Rothblatt. Get deep enough into doctrine and you'll find people who don't believe death is binary either, who believe they can transcend death through consciousness uploads.
Here's the original:
"We all know what awaits us with age, and yet it is all but impossible for any of us to fathom the transitions our selves will undergo over time. Each of those transitions is a kind of little death — the end of one way of being and the birth of another. It is no surprise that the more unexpected the transition, the more deeply unsettling it is.
We are all hurtling, inevitably, toward that one last transition, across the one true binary, the one between life and death. And that binary is the true source of all our regrets, and our joy, too. Regret exists because we all get just one life."
Here's my interpretation of those paragraphs:
Every transition is practice for the final transition that is the true source of all joy. That final transition is the end to all regret. Transitioning from life to death eventually comes for all of us, and anyone should be able to consent to that final transition at any time. Death may be unsettling for some people, but it is necessary for our true selves to be born.
Here's my conclusion:
This is a suicide cult that is deliberately marketing suicide to children. The leadership KNOWS that "affirmative care" increases suicide rates. To them, that's not a bug, it's a feature.
Genius. You might also have thanked her handlers at the NYT for turning off those pesky comments from benighted readers.
Grrr...they’ve done that to me before with a couple of articles. Most recently a food article with Priya Krishna and embedded mention of anal sex https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/17/dining/psyllium-husks.html
They turned off comments? Cowards! And it’s not only right wingers who decry the trans crap! Lots of lefties do as well...as far as I’m concerned this is not an issue of politics but rather of truth over blatant lies! And also of authoritarian takeover of our institutions!
Quickly, before reading other comments that may say the same thing... wonderful! Please do send this letter to that Polgreen person. She so deserves an earful and the sarcasm in your letter would be pretty effective, I think. You go, Dr. Burgo! Glad to know you're on the side of protecting children from trans ideology.
I doubt that the satire would make one iota of difference to Lydia... cult “ thinkers” hardly ever change their minds !
You made me curious about the article...
"...there is a small category of people who were born in the wrong bodies, and those individuals are entitled to express their identities"
Born in the wrong body... As if God made a mistake :(
If you read it, you’ll surely notice that none of her arguments are in any way convincing ... they are lacking in logic throughout.
i agree....it's just propaganda :(
I just read Lydia Polgreen’s essay on gender, which she conveniently uses interchangeably with sex.She correctly states that hair and eye color are inherited, but leaves out the fact that sex is also inherited! Probably because that would make her whole house of cards fall down. The comparisons between race , ( she is biracial) and sex( which she constantly equates with gender) is illogical to say the least. Though race is inherited she herself proves that one can be biracial or even of several racial mixtures. This is supposed to prove the existence of many different sexes , which she calls genders?Logic is definitely not her strong point. Maybe that why she flunked math?
She cites all kinds of example of kids getting plastic surgery and nobody complaining, but when girls get their breasts amputated, people are upset! Gee, I wonder why? my question is why such claptrap is published at all! So the satire is well deserved ! People like this need to be confronted ....The best weapon against absurdity is absurdity!
"Bravo for a job well done! Or would you prefer Brava?"
Pfft! Everyone knows it's Bravx!
Woops, this satire almost got me! The trans cult makes it hard to distinguish satire from trans crap ! Which shows how far the insanity has infected a lot of us!Who is this Lydia Polygren anyway....sounds like a made up name!
Great article!! Thank you!
I must be defective or living a sheltered existence, because neither I nor anyone I know has experienced sex as a "life history stage." Thank heavens for that! Perhaps the problem is that I haven't read enough of the right philosophers of science.
Why do you deny the binary of sex from conception? No human is or was ever sexless.
I agree with you mostly, except that Lydia could have educated herself. She was actually at the Genspect conference!
If she had made an effort to listen to and engage with the speakers, she may have learned about other perspectives on this. What a missed opportunity; what a shame.
I can't imagine being completely sold on nearly all if not all trans thought and talking points, then go to Genspect conference. I haven't read this NYT article I keep seeing referenced, but it sounds like she short circuited. Are readers actually saying she doesn't make sense? That is good if so.
Yes, the readers really came down on her and the column. The column is difficult to read because it’s so distorted, as this piece says.
The Genspect conference offered facts - about biology, about the lack of any kind of screening or safeguarding around gender treatment, about the lasting physical and mental harms of surgery and hormones and ideology.
I think that if you can’t deal with the facts, you retreat to a kind of 10,000-foot view so you can philosophize about life choices and parents and regrets. I think that’s what Lydia did.
I'm glad they came down. I virtually attended the Genspect conference, I appreciated the vast majority of it
1. Evolution is heterosexual.
2. The Jewish god is a fraud.
3. Monogamy is a tenet of religion.
4. Religious faggots are insane.
Yes, please post a link to the Forbes article, if you can. I think I missed that one.
I want the Forbes article too please
Copy and paste the link to the Forbes article
Exactly! She doesn’t make sense and uses false arguments! I just read it. She wrote that she failed math...if you can’t think logically , then . I understand why.
That is very interesting about math. I do sometimes think that this whole issue is like an algebraic or geometric formula.
Someone foolishly invited James Lindsay, too, to speak at Genspect's Denver conference. Jesse Singal and his co-host Katie Herzog discussed Linsdsay's contribution to the conference in a recent podcast:
Blocked and Reported
Episode 191: A Man in a Dress in a Pile-On. 18 November 2023.
https://www.blockedandreported.org/p/episode-191-a-man-in-a-dress-in-a#details
“This week on Blocked and Reported, Jesse and Katie discuss the furor over a self-described autogynephile who wore a dress to a gender conference. Also, Zoomers discover 9/11.”
(40:00) Jesse: And most regrettably, from where I sit, they invited James Lindsay to give a talk on the Marxification of gender.
Katie: Yeah, James Lindsay. That jumped out at me, and it strikes me that if you want to be taken seriously outside of your bubble, James Lindsay is not the person to invite to speak at your conference, especially on this issue. Like if your conference is about how to have impossible conversations, maybe invite him. But if your conference is about gender, maybe not.
Jesse: Yeah. I mean, from my point of view, someone like Lindsay just tips you in the direction away from legitimate science and discourse, of which there was plenty at this conference, and into demagoguery. James Linsday is not a serious voice on sex and gender. His talk made very little sense. He just has these, like . . . his theories are very superficial and often misguided, in my view. And he’s a huge prick online, a massive asshole, which does not help anyone. Which most people associated with Genspect are not.
(43:05) Katie: Actually, I do want to get a little bit more into [James Linsday’s] talk, if you don’t mind. Did he seem crazy, the way he was speaking, the way he does on Twitter? Because he comes across on Twitter like a giant, flaming, fucking asshole.
Jesse: He was more charismatic and less crazy-seeming than I thought, and more polished. There had been one TV appearance that he’d done in the past that was just a train wreck.
Katie: He didn’t just recite a bunch of citations?
Jessie: Well, no. He dropped a lot of names. And I haven’t rewatched it since I saw it. He makes all these claims trying to link everything to Marxism and a lot of what he’s saying is what ideologues in general do: accepting different standards of evidence, trying to change the subject . . . He has, like, this grand theory. Yascha Mounk’s book talks about how a lot of this stuff [i.e., post-structuralist ideologies] isn’t Marxism. It’s post-modern, it’s a rejection of these grand theories. I don’t think he really latches onto the nuances of what’s going on or how much of this is human nature and ideology in general. He claims to be an expert on all these different thinkers. I don’t think he is.
What did David Sedaris say? The AAP has already been sued! Isabelle Ayala, autistic child was persuaded as were her parents that she be “affirmed”...or else
What does David Sedaris say on this?