By Nathan Barton
A friend who publishes a weekly column addresses several items this week, including the insane behavior of public schools and governments regarding the sex of students Russian government officials stating that Russia is “preparing for war,” and the impact of Hallowe’en on children.
All of these are issues of interest for lovers of liberty. They are all potentially scary. So, welcome to our Halloween article!
Schools and “gender” – Despite both religious and scientific evidence to the contrary, the former Bruce Jenner and a large contingent of educators and the Media elite are pushing the memes that it is “preposterous” and “unscientific” to link gender to sex at birth, Certain Hollywood types are pushing the propaganda that gender is nothing more than a “social construct.” Recently, a couple of teachers in Florida are being taken to task by their superiors because they refuse to allow a female student to shower with male students.
Is it not amazing that the government and schools give us more and more reasons to keep as many children as possible out of government-run, tax-funded schools?
It is more accurate to call it government-RUINED, theft-FUNDED schools. Even if you do not agree with me that ALL taxes are theft, when the taxes are collected for supposedly ONE purpose (teaching children) and used for another (corrupting or propagandizing and therefore abusing children), is not “theft” an appropriate description?
I realize that many parents are completely incapable of teaching their children how to read, write, and do even basic arithmetic. But the government schools are failing to do this more and more often – this should come as no surprise, since the teachers and faculty are (at least “officially”) unable to tell the difference between boys and girls. That sort of stupidity pollutes the entire education process and system. When you couple that with all the other indoctrination/propaganda/lies/myths that the educrats promote, it is no wonder that children are abused.
Indeed, when you trace it back, it is easy to see why many modern parents are incapable of teaching their children anything. They themselves were not taught much, if anything.
What can be done? Churches COULD step up, and start teaching children (AND their parents) the basics of how to read – starting with the Bible, of course. And how to write and act in a moral, ethical way: therein is the need for math and other things. So could voluntary associations – elders working together, for instance. Other voluntary groups – Kiwanis and Lions and such could help intellectually as well as physically. The many good teachers trapped in the government system could begin working (basically underground) outside of school time to teach the truth. Give up on GRTF schools, please.
Russia Scared, or FedGov Scared? With nuclear non-proliferation and arms reduction agreements being voided, first by the FedGov and then by Russia, there is fear that a new arms race will ensue and Russian cruise missiles will be built and target the Fifty States.
This fear is the kind we see in hoplophobes and hoploclasts, and it is bogus.
Since the US has withdrawn from the treaty, Russia is no longer limited, and neither is the FedGov. Many Americans have long advocated (from bitter experience) that the best way to prevent war is to be PREPARED for war. So Amis and the Russians agree, right? With honest, clear communications in both ways, Russia is no more likely to throw cruise missiles and ICBMs at the Fifty States than the USAF and USN is likely to throw them at Russia.
Is this not something else we can “thank” Obummer and Clinton for? Their insane treatment of Russia (and the continued panic of Democrats over how supposedly Russia stole the election of 2016 for Trump) is paying dividends in supporting inherent Russian paranoia. And the deep state (in alliance with those two and so many others such as Reid, Pelosi, etc.) seem to be dictating the Trump administration’s responses and actions in dealing with Russia. Fear is a tool of government.
Seems to me freedom and live-and-let-live makes sense: no different than two neighbors that have problems with each other. Don’t disarm – just keep your guns at home and go out and talk to each other peaceably and with a willingness to resolve the issues in calmness. Avoid taking aggressive action against each other, but be prepared to defend yourself. Being at peace with each other does NOT require disarming, whether it is private people OR nations.
Hallowe’en and children – My correspondent doesn’t like Hallowe’en. Not for the usual “gasp, a pagan holiday!” response we hear so much. Rather, she wants us to think about what we are teaching and exposing children to: scenes of horror that cause fear even in adults. It is a good point: we don’t let children grow up until they are in their 20s, yet we intentionally expose them to things that terrify even adults.
Hallowe’en, like much else in modern society, has changed a lot in the last 40 or so years. Like so much else, Halloween’s observance has become a disgusting mixture of human immorality – much different than what was common in the 1950s and 1960s. Dressing up as “Casper the Friendly Ghost” or Roy Rogers or a fireman is far different than the modern, Friday the Thirteenth, Freddy Kruger, Nightmare on Elm Street type haunted-houses and such we have today. Parents have liberty to choose what to teach and expose their children to, but do we not need more self-responsibility for what we do to our children? Liberty is not suitable for people who refuse to accept responsibility for their own actions, and that includes their role in childraising.
Like educating them in general, parents must take control of what society and especially what outside agencies (government, churches, and more) do to (“for”) their children. Otherwise, they (and society) reap the consequences of their failure to do so.
Your friend wrote: “Despite both religious and scientific evidence to the contrary, the former Bruce Jenner and a large contingent of educators and the Media elite are pushing the memes that it is ‘preposterous’ and ‘unscientific’ to link gender to sex at birth, Certain Hollywood types are pushing the propaganda that gender is nothing more than a ‘social construct.’”
Not having links or references provided, I’m not sure precisely what this person is referring to, but I doubt that this is a universal push. In the case of intersex people (who used to be called hermaphrodites), the old custom of assigning a sex based solely on anatomy at birth (and performing surgery at a young age to make genitalia conform more to a specific sex) has been found not helpful for many people. Their gender identities—that is, their mental idea of what sex they are—aren’t always in line with what the anatomy appears to be. So, in situations like that, it is better to wait until a child is old enough to communicate their thoughts and feelings before trying to categorize them. Transpeople can be harder to address, since the disconnect for them is between their sex as determined by genes & anatomy, and their gender identity—what their mind tells them about what sex they are.
It used to be that “sex” and “gender” had specific and different meanings, especially in scientific literature. Sex was the biological construct, referring to the genetic determination (although even there, it isn’t a simple dichotomy: XXY, XXXY (and more), and XYY variants have been found) and reproductive anatomy, including external genitalia; gender referred to personal and social constructs related to sex, sexual roles, etc. In addition to gender identity described above, we develop ideas about gender roles based on our sex; these can differ a lot across cultures and change over time. I imagine that even some scientists might be arguing that gender is a strongly social construct, but there’s good evidence that it isn’t only social.
But really, none of this is new; I learned a lot of this in the 1980s while at university.
Also, is your friend meaning to imply that social constructs are somehow inferior to biological constructs? That would be … very interesting.
Sunni, it is indeed an incredibly complex subject, and many of us have been taught completely different views – by non-religious and religious sources alike. I do believe that she thinks that biological constructs are superior to social constructs, as being less subject to change. Trying not to speak for her, since I’ll have to ask, I assume that is because the biological situation is “given by God,” and not subject to human opinions as we assume social constructs are. And it may be that she is also assuming that variants as you mention which are known to exist are anomalies. Similar to someone being born without a foot, with too many fingers, or cojoined with their twin. Except for that last, the mental impact (how they view themselves) is probably much less than the variants you are pointing out. Yet government does not force all of society and the human environment to make accommodation for such variations on the human body.
Which raises an interesting question. Because there are some people born with six fingers, why does government not require that ALL gloves be made with six fingers – or even that a certain percentage of gloves be so made? And why do FBI fingerprint forms have space for only 10 fingers?
“I do believe that she thinks that biological constructs are superior to social constructs, as being less subject to change.”
Neuroscience has pretty much put that idea down. Biological constructs can be heavily influenced by social or environmental ones.
“And it may be that she is also assuming that variants as you mention which are known to exist are anomalies.”
That is true; they are statistical anomalies. Does it therefore follow that there need be no allowance for their unique needs?
“Which raises an interesting question. Because there are some people born with six fingers, why does government not require that ALL gloves be made with six fingers – or even that a certain percentage of gloves be so made? And why do FBI fingerprint forms have space for only 10 fingers?”
That isn’t a parallel comparison at all. A person’s sexual/gender identity is a very large part of their sense of self—who they are, how they fit into society and their culture, and how they are expected to behave with respect to others (and not just in terms of romantic/sexually driven behavior). Having an extra digit, or missing one, doesn’t normally impact one’s sense of self nearly as deeply. And more important, these individuals generally don’t get the same kind of disgusted reactions and shunning that people who don’t fit neatly into the binary sex/gender categories some people insist on have to deal with on a regular basis.