Paul McHugh, professor and psychiatrist at Johns Hopkins University, has condemned the act of allowing children to transition from one gender to another. McHugh told the College Fix that there will likely be long-term negative implications for those children who are permitted to engage in such medical treatments. “I think their mental problems, often depression, discouragement, are the things that need treatment,” he said. “I’m not positive about this. It’s a hypothesis, but it is a very plausible hypothesis, and it would explain why many of the people who go on to have treatment of their body discover they are just as depressed, discouraged, and live just as problematic lives as they did before because they did not address the primary problem.” I have been saying the same thing since the transgender-gender dysphoria mess appeared. How paradoxical is it, that postmodern western cultures, which turn every sin or failure of moral courage, into a psychological syndrome, turn gender confusion, which really is psychological, into a pseudoscience, with surgery the solution? I do take issue with his use of the term, “transition”, as in one gender to another. Hormones and surgery don’t transition, they merely change the outward appearance. A man and a woman are the sex they are in every cell. Altering the outward appearance doesn’t change that reality.
McHugh said that he is not optimistic about children “transitioning” at young ages, especially when coupled with hormone treatment therapies. “They’re going to be in the hands of doctors for the rest of their lives, many of them are going to be sterilized and not able to have their own children, and many will regret this,” he explained. “Can you imagine having a life where you need to seek doctors all the time, for everything, just to live?” he asked. “Getting your hormones checked, getting everything checked. That is something doctors should like to spare people of.” McHugh went on to point out a correlation between how people feel about transgenderism and how they look at eugenics. Did eugenics ever become this political and public?
Out Magazine blares the headline, “This Lesbian Penguin Couple Is Raising a ‘Genderless’ Chick.” The Sea Life London Aquarium has announced that a penguin chick raised by two female birds will not be assigned a gender-based name. Same-sex couple Rocky and Marama have raised the chick, now four months old, after its birth mother was overwhelmed by multiple eggs. The two adoptive parents have been together for about five years. Marama, the older of the two, has been more protective of the chick, while Rocky has been eagerly adventuring, showing it around the aquarium.
In a statement, the aquarium calls the newborn the first in its history “not to be characterized as male or female.” As juveniles, male and female penguins are treated identically by Sea Life, and so this one will not be assigned a gendered name or color-coded tag before displaying relevant behaviors. This is also true of the wild, where penguins do not adopt gendered names or dress in gendered colors. Those are conventions used only by humans. “It is completely natural for penguins to develop genderless identities as they grow into mature adults,” General Manager Graham McGrath adds in the press release. Earlier this month, two male penguins in Berlin hatched an egg, but sadly it was not fertilized and there was no chick for them to raise. The gender-neutral chick in London will presumably mature along one of two physiological paths and may eventually engage in breeding. But until then, it will be allowed to grow up as it naturally would in the wild — without any baggage of human gender imposed.
Let’s examine the underlined words and phrases in those two paragraphs, to better understand the presuppositions or confusion underlying the article. “Will not be assigned a gender-based name” and “not to be characterized as male or female” By whom, the penguins? I doubt the penguins even answer or respond to their assigned names Rocky and Marama. Obviously, it’s the aquarium staff that does the assigning. What exactly do they intend to accomplish by not assigning a name? The birds don’t care, they don’t even know they have names, and since the headline blares they are “lesbians”, thus presumably female, they’ve already struck a blow against the LGBTQ cause, by calling one of them Rocky, a male-gendered name. I guess Rocky’s the butch, and Marama the fem, or, if the staff married them already, the husband and wife. Then the writers slip by introducing the term “relevant behaviors”, which means either male or female behaviors. Isn’t this gender roles? But I thought such ideas were anachronistic. At any rate, Rocky is “eagerly” showing the chick around. Pardon me, how does one know that a penguin is eager, do their expressions change? How does a penguin “show” the chick, carry it under a flipper?
Then there’s the issue of penguins not “adopting gendered names or dress in gendered colors.” Are we still talking about birds, which as far as I know, neither adopt any kind of name nor dress in any fashion other than their natural tuxedo? Or have we entered an alternate universe where penguins develop “identities” and “carry around baggage because some human imposed a gender on them?” Alas, unlike humans who, according to the more extreme transgender activists, can somehow get pregnant without a uterus or fertilization, the two German male penguins could hatch an egg (not lay one, but rather try to get a laid egg to hatch), but couldn’t figure out how to fertilize it. Hint boys: You need to fertilize the egg while it’s in the female, thus you need a female.
I hope that by now, you realize that Out Magazine is not your typical, mainstream publication, but rather one of the flagship
ragsmags of the LGBTQ juggernaut. This is the only article I have read in this mag, and only because it was linked to another that was mocking it. It just occurred to me to wonder, how do the editors know that Rocky and Marama are lesbians? Can’t a couple of girls co-parent without being sex objects? Seems misogynistic if you ask me…..not that there’s anything wrong with that (if you’re not a Seinfeld fan, don’t ask me to explain).