Timothy Birdnow

Just a few thoughts on this trans business - and the whole LGBTQ thing, and our societal decline.

We live in the Age of Science. Science is the study of the material world and how it works. This is a different branch of Philosophy, which used to be the study of everything including how the material world works, but science split off of it some time ago. We used to live in an age of Faith where we studies things not seen and philosophy was a tool to better understand things so our faith would be stronger, and then when we split science and philosophy we left philosophy in the position of studying that which cannot be seen only, making it a competitor to faith. But it is a poor competitor because you, uh, cannot SEE what it is you are trying to understand so have no real idea of the shape and form. In the age of faith Divine revelation gave us that, and we used philosophy to reason from there. Now philosophy is an other-worldly practice that more and more resembles flights of fancy than actual reasoning. But it was not always so and in fact it has had powerful influence on our world up until the 20th century and even after - Existentialism was a mid-40's invention, for insttance) by setting the stage of how academia thought, which the media dispersed into the general public.

The American Revolution was profoundly influenced by the some of the Enlightenment philosophers like John Locke and Edmund Burke or Baron de Montesquieu. Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin can also be considered philosophers in that same camp. On the other hand the French revolution was heavily influenced by others, such as Jean Jacques Rousseau (the father of socialism) Denis Diderot, Voltaire and other French 'philosophe's'. The American was more individualistic and aimed at restricting a government which the colonists simply wanted to leave them alone, the French was socialistic from a people who had been bled dry by their government and wanted to take the wealth of the upper class. Different peoples, different motivations, and very different results.

At any rate philosophy was and is highly impactful. Even today, although we pray to the god of Science it is still the philosophy that is generated out of science that dominates our thinking - and the science often is there to buttress the current philosophy. Which takes us to our modern world where men are girls and women are men and we have all the attending confusion and chaos. Science tells us that homosexuality is increasing in society, and so too is transgenderism and they are aren't wrong. We know that testosterone levels are dropping What is the precipitously in the Western world and science has no explanation for that.

Among U.S. adults, 0.3% identify as transgender. Among youth aged 13 to 17 in the U.S., 3.3% (about 724,000 youth) identify as transgendered. Why is there such a huge disparity between young and old in this regard? Why so many more young people? (I doubt this particular stat - I suspect it's fewer - but it was the first handy one I could find. See here for more on the subject.

Well, for starters, the media has been pushing this (and by media I don't just mean journalists, I mean all media - movies, music, etc.)and it is now approaved by teachers and others to "accept who you are". When children see they are going to get societal approval for something they will do it oftentimes and this is no different. Being trans is "cool" or seems so to them as everyone is telling them they are really girls in boys bodies anyway.

Of course this "accept who you are" came first from the homosexual movement and "Pride". When I was a child homosexuality was something whispered about. It was taboo, a thing nobody wanted to be accused of and which was an insult by other children to call you that. But the homosexual community was clever, co-opting the word gay (which meant lighteharted and happy) and adopted the rainbow flag (who doesn't love a rainbow?) and couched their movement in the language of civil rights. It worked and the trans movement was an outgrowth of it (even though most gay people I know think trans are just odd). They are in a perpetual struggle to advance, even after having won the war, and so keep pushing. I don't think they know where the goal-line is or what victory entails anymore; it's just about he struggle, a struggle that will destroy America and Western Civilization. It's now a quest for vengeance.

So what came first, the chicken or the egg? Did transgenderism follow the success of the gay movement or does it come from the same emotional and intellectual roots? And how does this tie in with the declining testosterone levels?

Science has no answers to this and nobody is really researching it because it endangers their funding. Is the profound changes in sexual morality we witnessed since the seventies tied in with it? The sexual revolution started with the pill, but it had advocates since at least the 19th century (the free love movement) and has slowly been percolating through society. The Roaring Twenties, for instance, saw a huge decline in modesty among women in particular.

How does all this hang together? Science breaks things down into isolated pieces and we often don't understand the big picture; it's one of the problems with science as our sole guide.

This is where philosophy should enter. But philosophy went off the rrails some time ago and now debates the lint in their collective navels while the pressing issues they should be dealing with are left to others who aren't or can't do it.

Things do not arise out of a vacuum and morality existed for very specific purposes. So too did the sexual role models that modern thinkers decry as "patriarchal" and "societal constructs". They are neither; they are rather the imposition of natural law expressed as social norms of conduct. Gay people so often say "this is who I am " and "this is how God made me" and we accept that argument oftentimes yet we ignore the fact that the socio-moral codes we used to practice come equally from that appeal to natural law. We made distinctions between men and women. Some women didn't like that and thus feminism was born, which is a rebellion against Nature and Nature's God in the intersts of "equity" and "fairness" but what does that mean? Just because you CAN drive eastbound in the westbound lane doesn't mean there won't be consequences.

For a hundred some-odd years we've had rising feminism and endless negative pressure against masculinity. Is it any wonder testosterone levels are dropping? Is it any wonder we have a rising number of young people who hate their own sex, when they are being told it's "toxic" to be male? Is it any wonder women look increasingly masculine when they reject their God-given femininity and ask to compete against men (whom they then demand be handicapped)?

I am convinced through philosophy these things are all linked,but have no science to back it up. Nobody is doing such science. We don't know the mechanisms that are causing this. Oh, we know some of them - societal pressure, for instance. But what drives those who drive that societal pressure? Certainly much of it is rooted in bad philosophy. The wars of the late 19th century and then the two World Wars led to bitter disillusionment with Western thinking and beliefs, and many adopted Oriental philosophies, such as Buddhism. Others adopted Scientism, a religious belief in science. None of this meshes with our culture and many of these people seek to destroy our culture to "save " it. But what has that wrought? A Western world full of demons haunting our cities. We have trannie mass shooters. We have an explosion of new social diseases. We have mental illnesses exploding. Are these not all rooted in the same fundamental error?

I believe so. I think all of this is linked.

Why are gangs so attractive to our modern poor? In bygone days it was because it was one of the few opportunities that were available to the poor, but now we have so many govenrment programs that offer a hand up and a way out yet gangbangers are considered cool even by suburban white kids. Why? Because they still have some testosterone. It's being horribly misused, but it is what it is. The young see them and think they would rather be such men, with passion and the stones to rebel. Suburban children are raised like veal, sitting indoors lest their parents melt down at not seeing them. Gangbangers offer a sense of freedom to these kids.

How does that tie in with falling testosterone levels? I am fairly sure it does too. Of course there was a movement by parents with the guidance of educators and social scientists to make their kids into pampered pets rather than children, and to keep them from running about and exploring. Crime didn't help that any; parents wanted to protect their children from predators. So they took all the freedom away from children and taught them to be very, very obedient. Well, the kids are being obedient. They listen to their insane teachers who are telling them things like they are really girls in boys bodies and shaming them for being boys. The end result is a rise in transgenderism and homosexuality.

This is all hypothetical of course and scientists should do honest research to find the roots of all this. They are not doing so, and that because of funding in no small part and the control of the Left over academia.

At any rate this requires philosophers to start the ball rolling and not just some dipwad with a blog like me. We need a real conversation about it and we need real research. So much of the violence and despair we see in our modern times comes ultimately from our war on masculinity and our dropping testosterone levels. This needs to be reversed.

The gay community in particular will howl at this as an attack on them. But does a gay person really WANT children to be gay? They always speak about how much they themselves suffered from it; they should want there to be very few gay people, the fewer the better. Yet most seem to hold the opposite view. Why? Well, there is comfort in numbers, of course. And obviously if there are no gay people coming up their numbers will fall and so will their influence, not to mention their pond will dry up where sex partners are concerned. But if they truly love their fellow man (and not just want a quick boink) they would want them to be straight, or they are just hypocrites and sadists.

This is even more true of trans.

we have not even identified this as a problem in our society; how do you fix a problem when you refuse to admit it is one? The first thing alcoholics are told is to admit their problem. We refuse to admit it IS a problem and refuse to look at the extent or the costs of that problem.

at any rate I believe much of our current problem is moral and spiritual and stems from bad thinking, bad philosophy. The Marquis de Sade, for instance, is remembered mainly for enjoying beating people (and our society is heading that way - remember Fifty Shades of Gray"?) but he actually was a very influential philosopher who promoted free-wheeling sexuality. He argued sex should be like any other biological drive - you do it when you feel like it. He hated marriage and he hated morality. He was wildly popular in his day, and this really is the era of de Sade. Read what Erik Kuehnelt-Leddihn thought about the matter; Kuehnelt Leddihn's work exposed the influence of de Sade and how that translated into modern thought. In many ways de Sade was the father of our modern era.

Great; our father was a guy who got off on beating naked women - and being beaten by them himself.

The sexual revolution is as much tied up with the problems of mass shootings and transsexuals as anything else, and that was the love child of de Sade.

We need to understand exactly how we got here if we are to fix things. We then must turn to Faith, as it is faith that will allow us to restore what was lost. We lost it because we stopped believing in the God of our fathers and stopped believing the Bible. That is why the Scopes Monkey Trial is so important to secularists and why the whole Darwin debate gets so ugly; they have to discredit the Bible and the morality from which it flowed. When someone argues about Darwin they are arguing about the most fundamental problems in our society.

At any rate I know this wasn't short but I felt it was important. Hope everyone enjoyed it.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:24 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 2215 words, total size 13 kb.