February 21, 2013

“Students Who Refuse to Affirm Transgender Classmates Face Punishment”

This is more of the left’s social engineering — perfected in “theory” in the academy using specialized jargon and a studied rejection of patriarchal logic — finding its way into public policy, often against the wishes of those compelled to accede:  your gender identity, at least in Massachusetts,  is whatever you say it is, and it is you alone who gets to determine it on any given day.

Liberating, right?  Particularly when the free speech rights of others to reject the at best controversial premise — based as it is on pseudo-social science of the kind mostly promoted by Women’s Studies Departments — is constrained by the promise of severe penalty, rendering the pseudo-social science perforce the controlling authority on sexual/gender science in the Massachusetts public school system.

So, rather than fight this perversion of intellectualism with logic or reason, to which leftist social engineers are immune, and which are themselves merely the aggressive and angry penis-shaped tools of the male oppressor class and gender absolutists/haters, I have a better idea:   Start a Massachusetts “Gender Liberation Month” — which should take place at least three times yearly — wherein every male high school student in the Massachusetts public school system declares himself “female” for that month.  As part of “her” new liberation, s/he will take women’s phys ed class, where s/he will compete aggressively with the other females in the spirit of the sport.  Then, s/he will go piss — and then shower — in the woman’s locker room with the rest of those of her gender.

These same males — who feel female from time to time, and so are female from time to time, according to the prevailing doctrine of the Massachusetts public school system — should prepare these month-long protests at those times when female sports teams are holding tryouts, be it for softball, lacrosse, field hockey, track and field, volleyball, or what have you.

To further extend their willingness to support this idea of gender-mobility — and to increase their chances of receiving government aid and scholarships to Ivy League Schools — these males-cum-females should then declare themselves lesbians, taking full-advantage of their new special protected status, for which they’ll be eligible for all sort of special dispensation from the states.

I don’t offer this idea lightly:  if the left has determined that its anti-foundationalist ideological worldview permits it to ignore male-dominated, propertied Enlightenment logic, then it’s time to address them on their own terms.  Because while they might decry the effort as illegitimate and not in keeping with their intent, the courts, to remain at all consistent (or even maintain the appearance of consistency) will have no choice but to uphold the “rights” of males to act in the very way the Massachusetts school system has said it is permissible to act.

And if the school tries to stop those who take advantage of these newly institutionalized gender guidelines — even if those who do so appear to be making a mockery of the pseudo-social science that underpins those guidelines — then it should be them who the courts punish.

Provided the whole ridiculous thing doesn’t come crashing down the first time a couple of junior females — of the opposite sex — start rubbing each other off in the school shower.

(h/t Darleen)

 

Posted by Jeff G. @ 2:37pm
61 comments | Trackback

Comments (61)

  1. I don’t offer this idea lightly: if the left has determined that its anti-foundationalist ideological worldview permits it to ignore male-dominated, propertied Enlightenment logic, then it’s time to address them on their own terms.

    Mmmmm, this goose sure tastes good. What’s in this sauce?

  2. i never had a transgender classmate my whole life

  3. “Females of the opposite gender.”

    Wow, we really are there as a culture, aren’t we? Da-ooomed.

  4. It is past time to make them live up to their rules. Every student should walk in and declare their own new form of gendered sexuality and demand equal protection from the school administration to include separate bathrooms, sensitivity training for their unique gender for all staff and students, and perhaps even scholarships or administrative positions dedicated to their needs. I think I would choose snowflake as my new gender. After all, we all know how special each of them are.

  5. This is devilishly clever: use the plight of some people afflicted with gender-identity problems to cudgel the rest of us into submission.

    For submission’s sake, that is, not for the sake of the identity-afflicted.

    Why would you think otherwise?

  6. If gender is a matter of choice, surely race must be also, no?

    Because a whole lot of opportunities would open up for me if I just realized my inner black women, I am betting.

  7. This is devilishly clever: use the plight of some people afflicted with gender-identity problems to cudgel the rest of us into submission.

    Clever indeed. I mean, this would also be a perfect time to invoke the old emporer has no clothes bit, but can we even be sure it is the emporer and not the empress?

  8. Will there be an entire episode or two of The Walking Dead devoted exclusively to the point of view of the Walkers, or a Walker, letting the camera present the perceptions of such a being (and the audio the groans of appetitive effort)? That would fit well with these Massachusetts designs on the world.

  9. Greetings:

    So, what you’re saying is that my aunt, even without balls, might have been my uncle ???

  10. Next up, you are a gender-normo-bigot if you refuse sexual advances from the transgender or same gender person, and you will be punished.

  11. Funny thing is, “heteronormative” is held forth as a bad thing, but what’s its opposite?

    Seems to me what they’re replacing it with is “orthonormative.” No?

  12. First it was bad to be white. Now it’s bad to be straight.

    For a bunch of tolerant types, they sure all intolerant.

  13. *are* not all

  14. An enterprising fellow with no plans for graduation could declare himself a dog and insist upon barking in class a means of participation. Who are you to say he’s not a dog just because he’s a bipedal hominid?

    The gay shit was the camel’s nose under the tent – erasure of the sexes was the goal, and (hint, hint) it’s a halfway point to something else.

  15. A wise bloke once said “male and female he made them.”

  16. ” your gender identity, at least in Massachusetts, is whatever you say it is, and it is you alone who gets to determine it on any given day.”

    Does that mean I can self identify as loud-mouthed and opinionated and they can’t do dick all about it?

  17. All of your genders must have progressive political convictions, of course.

  18. And lucky, if you just ignore them long enough – they kill themselves.

    You’re so principled. So outlaw. To stand up to those diabolical transfolks.

  19. Fuck ‘em. They are inconveniencing everyone at the school.

  20. I wouldn’t be the first person to mention the notion that we’d find some motives by tracing the etymology of “gender” to see what’s being done with the language.

    What all of us mean when we use “gender” is what was once simply “sex” (the noun, not the verb). One sexed a chicken, one didn’t gender a chicken.

    Now, if we look up currently accepted definitions we see that “sex” is fixed (with our kind anyways) and biological and “gender” is fluid and kultural. To make these different things synonymous is their goal: intentional confusion over one of the most basic concepts known to life since we moved past asexual reproduction. Gender is not sex and male is not female. A is A. A is not B.

    It might be worth remarking upon the simple empathetic observation that we might be enabling self-harm by telling fucked up dudes that it’s cool to chop off their dicks because we’re enlightened. This feels a bit like handing a drunk a bottle of booze because they seem to be happiest when so indulged. It doesn’t feel broad-minded or open. It feels like complicity.

  21. And lucky, if you just ignore them long enough – they kill themselves.

    You’re so principled. So outlaw. To stand up to those diabolical transfolks.

    I’ll bite.

    1) All the preening and “compassion” in the world won’t make someone with testes and a penis a woman.

    2) It is nothing short of a totalitarian, Orwellian dystopia to make people say that someone with a penis and testes is a woman by use of government force.

    3) Real compassion would direct these people to the nearest qualified
    psychiatrist.

    4) Fuck You.

  22. I’d mentioned before that Justice Ginsberg laid some claim to introducing the substitution of gender for sex out of what I take it was a prudish sense of the effects of the term sex, much like the reaction of that paper the other day bemoaning the negative frisson of panties. Or at least that’s what I recall of her claim. This claim, on the other hand, doesn’t have to be true (given that it’s a self-report from an interested party to the arguments surrounding the introduction of the term, i.e., she may have had concealed motives in mind, and only covers them with a pretense to prudery).

  23. The example in the second paragraph might seem too jokey. To sex a chicken is to determine male from female. With chicks.

  24. That’s awfully Victorian of her, sdferr.

  25. I wanted to have gender tonight but spouse B has a headache.

  26. I wanted to have gender tonight but spouse B has a headache.

    Minitrue ascertains this comment to be proper Newspeak.

  27. Next up, you are a gender-normo-bigot if you refuse sexual advances from the transgender or same gender person, and you will be punished.

    That was in The Wanting Seed by Burgess actually. Speaking of British dystopians, I think we’re moving into Ballard’s High-Rise now.

    They’ve always seemed a bit ahead of us with these literary themes and it might be as simple as their observing socialist hope! and then the never-ending decay first-hand since the end of WWII.

  28. Minitrue ascertains this comment to be proper Newspeak.

    Too bad alphanumericism is out of style. Used to be a Spouse A could expect oral gender, headache or no.

    I mean, do I wear the coveralls, or don’t I?

  29. They’ve always seemed a bit ahead of us with these literary themes and it might be as simple as their observing socialist hope! and then the never-ending decay first-hand since the end of WWII.

    Sadly, they’re not as far ahead of us as they used to be. Damn that Galbraith for going to Cambridge instead of the LSE, anyways!

  30. 1) All the preening and “compassion” in the world won’t make someone with testes and a penis a woman.
    2) It is nothing short of a totalitarian, Orwellian dystopia to make people say that someone with a penis and testes is a woman by use of government force.
    3) Real compassion would direct these people to the nearest qualified
    psychiatrist.
    4) Fuck You.

    1a neither will surgically removing the offending genitalia.

  31. Transgender, engenders naught, though this thread does beget laughter.

  32. oh neat the fascist obamawhores at google now get to handpick hit songs

  33. Who gives a shit about today’s pop music? All of ‘em sound like robot hookers, what with the autotuning.

  34. i love pop music but I try to filter it to where it’s not all about someone else’s agenda my favorite new-ish one is this but mostly i listen to country these days baby you a song you make me wanna and et cetera

    the one I linked is just a nice little song about how sometimes when you smoke too much crack it’s not good

    i listen to it to where smoking crack is like a metaphor for being a deluded stupid-looking obamaslut like this girl J I grew up with

  35. kids today are obamawhoring their futures into ash and shit and it’s very very poignant to see up close

  36. Two guys marrying? “husband and wife”, says the newly-corrected Associated Press Stylebook

    The following entry was added today to the AP Stylebook Online and also will appear in the new print edition and Stylebook Mobile, published in the spring:

    husband, wife Regardless of sexual orientation, husband or wife is acceptable in all references to individuals in any legally recognized marriage. Spouse or partner may be used if requested.

    “The AP has never had a Stylebook entry on the question of the usage of husband and wife,” said AP Senior Managing Editor for U.S. News Mike Oreskes. “All the previous conversation was in the absence of such a formal entry. This lays down clear and simple usage. After reviewing existing practice, we are formalizing ‘husband, wife’ as an entry.”

    So, two males marry. Which one is the wife? Definition of ‘wife’ is that she’s still a female. That’ll have to change too, I suppose.

    My take: two guys marry? Animal husbandry.

  37. your gender identity, at least in Massachusetts, is whatever you say it is, and it is you alone who gets to determine it on any given day.

    Reminds me of this little drama from a couple of years ago.

    From the comments:

    Broadly speaking, a person’s genital arrangements and sexual self-image are none of my business. I do, though, think it’s… interesting that a person with two X chromosomes, breasts, a uterus and no intersex anomalies could find themselves pregnant and in stirrups, undergoing an abortion, and still object emphatically to any assumptions of femaleness or female pronouns. Given the irregularity and surrealism of the situation, the person undergoing the procedure might allow that they are, to say the least, in an area of some dispute. Likewise, those who claim that the self-inflicted inability to bear children is an affront to “reproductive justice” – despite their choosing to have the necessary organs removed in order to be more like the gender that doesn’t bear children – may find cries of public sympathy less deafening than expected.

    To what extent should others comply – or be made to comply – with a person’s unusual self-image? What happens in the abortion scenario above when there’s no physical corroboration of the “male” identity? Whose perspective gets to prevail? I wouldn’t wish to encourage meanness or mistreatment, but I don’t feel it’s up to me to govern how others perceive things.

  38. My ideal Spouse B has the ability to wave hizzerits secondary gender characteristics in my face but not hizzerits primary gender characteristics.

    I’m heteronormative that way.

  39. bh wrote [emphasis mine]:

    Now, if we look up currently accepted definitions we see that “sex” is fixed (with our kind anyways) and biological and “gender” is fluid and kultural. To make these different things synonymous is their goal: intentional confusion over one of the most basic concepts known to life since we moved past asexual reproduction. Gender is not sex and male is not female. A is A. A is not B.

    That’s the goal of the Leftist Masterminds – to sow Chaos in every nook and cranny of Society because it leads to instability. They want Western Culture to crash and smash into pieces so they can build their Heaven On Earth more easily.

    And, because the Culture is so debased and deranged already, they find no shortage of willing and clueless Libertines to use to spread the Chaos.

  40. Make no mistake, this Gender Fascism isn’t about “oh think of the children! why won’t you think of the children!” as the DaleKhunter distraction above would have it.

    this policy isn’t about acceptance — it demands “gender neutral” clothing, that when lining up for class it can’t be done with “girls in one line, boys in the other” and cuts parents’ completely out of the loop that no teacher or other adult may inform them of their own child’s behavior at school if it is “gender” related.

  41. Oh looky! Sandra Fluke wants this kind of policy in the military!

    Referring to what she called “the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning” community, Fluke said lawmakers didn’t go far enough in ending the military’s official but often unenforced ban on homosexuals.

    “We still don’t let trans-folk join the military,” Fluke said February 13. “That needs to change.”

  42. Why does military policy need to change? Why can’t we expect the trans-folk to change?

  43. McGehee

    With Obama, the Left doesn’t have to deal with us icky non-hip, heteronormative hoi polloi, they have the captive military to dictate radical social changes upon. (Having the best military in the world is just not in the Left’s agenda)

    Then demand of legislatures … hey, if the military can do this…!!

  44. Trans-folk. Change.

    Fortunately I keep my feathers numbered for just such an emergency.

  45. dale is a khunt-er

  46. I’d protest this nonsense by pointing out that all of this gender confusion puts a lot of kids at risk (e.g. teenage boy or coach who identifies as female gets to use girls locker room), except this just assists the Left’s quest to destigmatize/redefine pedophilia as simply “minor-attracted” people.
    Men getting to go into the Ladies loo and spy on little girls or rape women? Sure, because we wouldn’t want to hurt his feelings, right?

  47. “Boys”, “Girls”, “None (or all) of the Above”

  48. “(or all) of the Above”

    “Two-Spirit Persons” is what they’re calling them.

  49. Pingback: Masterminds, Libertines, And Thugs « The Camp Of The Saints

  50. Re: All of the above. There was that woman, who declared herself a man (and took hormones), married a woman, but then recently got pregnant and delivered a baby. She/he was heralded by the MSM as the “Pregnant man!” (especially Diane Sawyer who had her/him on her show many times as a guest). Disgusting.

  51. I knew a guy in high school that decided he was really a woman in a man’s body, and then it turned out that s/he was a lesbian in a man’s body.

    So confusing. But I mostly roll with it.

  52. And lucky, if you just ignore them long enough – they kill themselves.

    You’re so principled. So outlaw. To stand up to those diabolical transfolks.

    Ignore them? Likely that’s a crime. They are to be celebrated. They are the best of us. And those who refuse to accept and acknowledge that are haters who must be punished.

    Besides, they are hurting, these maleably-gendered humans, and if you don’t bend to their will, they might kill themselves, and you’ll be to blame. WHY DO YOU WANT TO KILL POOR NOBLE CONFUSED GENDER SHIFTERS?

    Yawn. So fucking predictable.

  53. Not to put too fine a point on it, but the purpose of schooling is to receive an education. It seems to me (but I’m thick that way; not really) that waving one’s transgenderness in the face of ones classmates is disruptive behavior and cause for dismissal.

    Algebra II and Chemistry class aren’t about social engineering. If we truly want more STEM majors in our colleges, we need to back away from the fluffy shit.

  54. I don’t know, I imagine the trans-folk, as generally pretty troubled and angry people, would make terrific soldiers. Can you imagine what the jihadists would do if they realize there was an entire platoon of cross dressers and transgenders shooting at them? They could roll into whatever village blasting show tunes out of the speakers of their pink tank. Hell, I’d be terrified of that, I can’t even imagine what an Afghan warlord would think.

    This is an idea that needs to happen, right now.

  55. An entire regiment of trannies singing Cher would violate the Geneva Conventions.

    For a start.

  56. When do the military trans-types self-segregate into their own bivouacs? Lavender tents and rainbow painted rocks, anyone?

  57. I could see some irony in having a transgender unit responsible for a missile delivery system and raining phallus shaped weapons of death on the enemy.

  58. the negative frisson of panties

    Awesome! If my band ever records an album or something, we’ve got our title.

    I knew a guy in high school that decided he was really a woman in a man’s body, and then it turned out that s/he was a lesbian in a man’s body.

    That’s pretty much par for the course, isn’t it? Tiny sample set (2) and all, but every dude I’ve known who was convinced he was a woman eventually got the operation and became a lesbian. You gotta really hate yourself some penii to choose a life where you’ll never see another one, including your own. Possibly a penis did something terrible to them in their childhood, y’know, like killed their dog or whatever. Who knows, who cares. Freaks.

  59. Besides, they are hurting, these maleably-gendered humans, and if you don’t bend to their will, they might kill themselves, and you’ll be to blame. WHY DO YOU WANT TO KILL POOR NOBLE CONFUSED GENDER SHIFTERS?

    I can’t be the only one who thought of this scene from Blazing Saddles:

    [the Johnsons load their guns and point them at Bart. Bart then points his own pistol at his head]
    Bart: [low voice] Hold it! Next man makes a move, the nigger gets it!
    Olson Johnson: Hold it, men. He’s not bluffing.
    Dr. Sam Johnson: Listen to him, men. He’s just crazy enough to do it!
    Bart: [low voice] Drop it! Or I swear I’ll blow this nigger’s head all over this town!
    Bart: [high-pitched voice] Oh, lo’dy, lo’d, he’s desp’it! Do what he sayyyy, do what he sayyyy!
    [Townspeople drop their guns. Bart jams the gun into his neck and drags himself through the crowd towards the station]
    Harriet Johnson: Isn’t anybody going to help that poor man?
    Dr. Sam Johnson: Hush, Harriet! That’s a sure way to get him killed!
    Bart: [high-pitched voice] Oooh! He’p me, he’p me! Somebody he’p me! He’p me! He’p me! He’p me!
    Bart: [low voice] Shut up!
    [Bart places his hand over his own mouth, then drags himself through the door into his office]
    Bart: Ooh, baby, you are so talented!
    [looks into the camera]
    Bart: And they are so *dumb*!

  60. McGhee wrote:
    An entire regiment of trannies singing Cher would violate the Geneva Conventions.

    For a start.

    Eeenk on a page!

  61. Pingback: How Tolerant Are You - Page 5 - Pelican Parts Technical BBS

Leave a Reply