New York Times: Transgender Childhood Is Not a “Trend”

I can remember the exact moment when “trans” took off.

It was in the wake of the Obergefell decision in the summer of 2015 when Bruce Jenner reintroduced herself to the public as Caitlyn Jenner on the cover of Vanity Fair. I was in Tennessee that day. This was the exact moment when progressives jumped from gay marriage to “trans” which was the next novelty in the culture war. 20,000 different genders were discovered over the last decade and we’re all a bunch of bigots now for “misgendering” people with the wrong made up pronouns.

New York Times:

“There’s a story I know of a young transgender girl from rural Wisconsin, who before the age of 5 made it clear enough to her parents that she was a girl, not a boy, that they changed her name and dressed her in girl’s clothes. When the time came for her to go to school, her parents arranged with school administrators for her to attend as a girl. She used the girls’ bathroom and participated in the girls’ 4-H Club. All in all, she was treated with respect, not bullied or shunned.

Maybe you can picture a girl like that today. But can you picture her in the 1930s?

This girl, whom I call Val in the book I wrote on the history of transgender children, socially transitioned, went to school and participated in extracurricular activities over 80 years ago. And she was hardly alone. In my research, I found stories of other transgender children like Val who were able to transition and go to school despite living in times when their identities weren’t commonly acknowledged. They were not forced into transitioning by adults. And they were certainly not transitioning because it was trendy or socially popular.

The high visibility of transgender youth in this country is quite recent, but transgender children themselves are not.  …”

I can also remember the exact moment when systematic racism became the next novelty and took off like a rocket with progressive activists. It was after George Floyd died last summer. From that point on, “racism” became systematic and “equity” became fashionable and “equality” fell out of fashion

None of this garbage has anything to do with morality. It is bullshit that is conjured into existence by academics and spread through the media. It is a disease of the degenerate professional classes. The Soviets used to call it “bourgeois decadence.” Modernism was banned in the Soviet Union.

I literally blogged the rise of this shit on this website.

“The end of gender is near.

Menswear designers are on a mission to eradicate it. Some are going full bore, wielding lace shirts and floppy, grandma blouses like cultural grenades. Others are taking a stealth approach, quietly chiseling away the boundaries between masculinity and femininity through non-traditional retail, models and silhouettes. …

As with most developments in fashion, the drive toward gender obsolescence did not happen overnight. It began on one runway, on one street corner, in one neighborhood, in one daydream. And these separate sparks converged and began to sweep across the landscape. …”

The Washington Post solemnly told us that the end of gender was approaching in the summer of 2015. We hadn’t yet learned though about the existence of “Latinx” people.

ABC News:

“Facebook introduced dozens of options for users to identify their gender today – and although the social media giant said it would not be releasing a comprehensive list, ABC News has found at least 58 so far.

Previously, users had to identify themselves as male or female. They were also given the option of not answering or keeping their gender private.

User’s can now select a “custom” gender option.

“There’s going to be a lot of people for whom this is going to mean nothing, but for the few it does impact, it means the world,” Facebook software engineer Brielle Harrison told the Associated Press. Harrison, who worked on the project, is in the process of gender transition, from male to female.

Facebook will also allow users to select between three pronouns: “him,” “her” or “their.”

The following are the 58 gender options identified by ABC News …”

There were still only 58 genders in early 2014.

It is true though that the Weimar Republic got there in the 1920s. Modernism and gender fluidity began bubbling up in this country in the work of Gertrude Stein via Otto Weininger who was dismissed as a loon at the time but whose theories are now at the cutting edge of American progressivism.

The following excerpt comes from Robert M. Crunden’s book American Salons: Encounters With European Modernism, 1885-1917:

“Weininger’s book was published in English as Sex and Character in 1906. By 1908 it was a hot topic in the Stein circle, apparently because it stressed the way a complicated individual could transcend time and place, conquering the drives and conflicts that were so tormenting . But the bulk of the book seemed an unlikely path to peace of mind. Admist a parade of pseudo-scientific terms and statistics, the book asserted that “absolute sexual distinctions between all men on the one side and all women on the other do not exist”; and that “male and female, man and woman, must be considered only as types, and that the existing individuals … are mixtures of the types in different proportions.” Women faced one put down after another. They could not appreciate genius; they did not long for immortality; they were without logic; they had neither souls nor egos; they could not be geniuses: “A female genius is a contradiction in terms, for genius is simply intensified, perfectly developed, universally conscious maleness.” The basic point was always to be made in that the desire for timelessness, a craving for value, which is deeply bound up with the desire for power, is completely absent in the woman.” As for Jews, a separate chapter effectively segregated them. They were not a race, a people, or creed, but rather “a tendency of the mind.” Great geniuses were commonly anti-Semitic, even Jewish in origin; they could not escape the conclusion that “Judaism is saturated from femininity.”

From the mind of this Jewish lunatic at the turn of the 20th century sprang the idea of gender fluidity that has now seized control of the Democratic Party. BTW, it is probably worth noting that Otto Weininger shot himself in the chest and committed suicide. He was mentally ill.

Would FDR recognize what the Democratic Party has become? Would Thomas Jefferson or Andrew Jackson identify with the Democratic Party if they were alive today?