Comments on: Today’s reality was yesterday’s satire

By: beefrank

beefrank — Sun, 03 Mar 2013 20:09:02 +0000

Is this the endgame of the ‘vulgar culture’ foisted by progressive ‘anything goes’ ideology and ushered by the pseudo-medical profession of psychiatry? It is the coup-de-grâce against mankind using psychotic chemicals to prevent, suppress and eliminate male behavior. It is also the über-tolerance of sexual perversions, i.e., homosexuality, pedophilia, necrophilia, bestiality and other formerly ‘unspeakable’ acts. Since when does a young child dictate parenting regarding identity? What if they wanted to be a dog, horse or another species? (That would be an historical ‘trans-genetic’ operation a male teenager may want. It would realize the meaning of the simile ‘hung like a…’ but usurp the ‘black male myth’.) Jesting aside, this behavior is worse than a child being isolated by a cult. Gee, is not the ‘LGBT’ movement like the Moonies or Peoples Temple which were popular in the Bay Area during the 70s. To paraphrase what I often heard from my parents, ‘if your children wanted to jump off the Golden Gate Bridge, would you give them a push supported by a psychiatric prescription?’ As Dr. Carson eloquently said at the 2013 National Prayer Breakfast declaring “PC (political correctness) is dangerous..’ because it promotes censoring and ostracizing opposing perspectives by labeling it as ‘hate’. A parent should hate for their child to perverted by ideals that will cause injury to themselves and others. It is one of the reasons we home-school our children. I enjoyed the Monty Python reference. Brevity is the soul of wit.

By: Ron19

Ron19 — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 18:16:29 +0000

Today’s Reality was also yesterday’s science fiction, especially some of the dark or semi-apopaliptic stuff.

By: Spartacus

Spartacus — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 18:02:06 +0000

Q: How many legs does a dog have, if you count the tail as a leg?
A: Four.
(Attributed to Abe Lincoln, but I don’t recall the quoting source.)

As a society, more and more, we are confusing the concepts of “One could argue…” with “One should argue…”

By: Ymarsakar

Ymarsakar — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 16:22:12 +0000

I often find it surprising that people react so strongly to violence done by others to others, not even to themselves. The latter I could understand, but the first seems strange. A sort of conditioned response bred by society more than a direct damage from the violence. One of the things I had to do to sharpen some of the tools was to put myself in the shoes of the attacker and logically analyze what could be done better. To think as the predator, not the prey. That required that one “get rid” of ideas like “I’m better than that criminal” or “I could never be that rapist, serial killing, corpse eating guy”. To be better than those, I would have to be better at violence, which was perhaps the only relevant criteria Being morally better was an irrelevant issue.

I find it surprising now, but curiously, if I remember far enough back, I probably reacted the same way as others to the mere sight of other people doing bad things to other people. Or stories told of this and that. Stories that seem to traumatize normal people. Normalized by society’s conceptions of right and wrong, violence and pacifism.

I wonder if psychologists who hear stories of child molestation, rape, abuse, internal family incest rapes, are traumatized because they associate too closely with the helpless victim, and thus begin to feel helpless as well. Which if they were talking to a predator, might induce the predator, purely because of the fear detected, to attack the psychologist. And I wonder if my reaction is different because I do not have the same fear. My fears can be summed up as the fear of failing to kill those that need killing, and/or killing those that didn’t need killing. I do not put myself in the place of the victim, having to defend myself, but as something else.

The human mind is such a weak and fragile thing, perhaps more so than even our bodies that break so easily. Psychologists can hypnotize susceptible women and make those women think they were molested as children by their fathers, when nothing of the sort happened. The reverse can also be true, where the patient hypnotizes and brainwashes the psychologist.

Human emotions… while it offers us great strength, it is also a great weakness when those emotions come not of your own will and soul, but merely because of society’s shackles and expectations of you.

By: Ymarsakar

Ymarsakar — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 16:09:16 +0000

It is true that psychoanalysts often need to check in with a senior psychoanalyst in order to be psychoanalyzed for any patient caused trauma.

By: Danny Lemieux

Danny Lemieux — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 15:57:45 +0000

A lot of psychologists are also blooming insane. When I was a university student, the standard joke was that the clinical psychology department was staffed by patients.

By: Ymarsakar

Ymarsakar — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 15:13:10 +0000

A lot of psychologists are Democrats.

By: Andy

Andy — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 15:09:40 +0000

They should move to Oregon where gender identity is protected by state law. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/11/transgender-student-in-womens-locker-room-raises-uproar/

By: Mike Devx

Mike Devx — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 14:53:34 +0000

I shouldn’t comment, because I don’t know a damn thing about transgender stuff… but what the hell, why not comment? But it’s true I’ve never investigated it a jot, and I’ve never read anything about it that seemed even close to authoritative, that someone had any *real* insight into it.

I think Oldflyer’s comments are awfully good.

Is there anything at all to indicate that it is genetic in nature? Can a child be born with a psychological sexual identity that is different from his or her sexual organs, driven by genetics? Or is it entirely psychological or mental?

Heck, in homosexuality, they’ve been looking for a “gay gene” for decades. Haven’t found anything like it. And then you have the apparently true phenomenon of bisexuals, who when sexually active seem to change preference each day as if they were changing hat colors. ”Today I feel… like I want women! No, men! No, women! No…” Or they say, “I’m dome with men. Women only!” When asked why, they say, “Because the last time was with a guy, and he was a complete JERK.”

So there you have, with bisexuals, something that appears to be completely psychological, AND completely arbitrary. Why might “false” sexual identity/transgenderism not be any different? A six year old boy feels like a girl. Who’s to say next year he won’t just completely drop it? ”But Billy, I thought you wanted to be a girl.” ”Ew, Mom, girls are dodo-birds. Yuk, no way.” And that might be the end of it.

By: Oldflyer

Oldflyer — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 05:26:16 +0000

I guess I am obtuse.

I would think the function of a Psychologist in this situation would be to try to help the obvious male to be comfortable in the gender he was born to. On the other hand it is so “today” to help the little fellow be comfortable in something he is not, and then to tell the rest of the world that they must conform to his desire to be something that he is not. The only problem is when you coerce the rest of the world to conform to his desire, you start to intrude on the privacy of others who have no vote on the matter. In due time you could also compromise their safety.
How about when the little darling turns 16 and is using girl’s bathrooms and locker rooms. Are the girl supposed to pretend that he is what he demonstrably is not? Are they supposed to be sacrifice their privacy to accommodate him and should they be comfortable with him checking them out? Suppose after he checks them out, he decides that he really wants to be what he actually is, but enjoys the coed dressing privileges, while showing his appreciation for what they demonstrably are?

If I were a teenage voyeur, and had a lot of guts, I would declare myself transgender, and enjoy the show.. Then if I later became a sexual predator, I would have a free pass to a rich hunting environment.
We have convolulted ourselves into the a state of complete ridiculousness.