texas

State-Enforced Transgenderism

A jury in Texas recently told a man that his 7-year-old son (both pictured above) is going to be transitioned into a girl and there’s not a damn thing he can do about it:

“A jury in Dallas, Texas has ruled against Jeffrey Younger, the father who is trying to protect his seven-year-old son, James, from chemical castration via a gender “transition.” This means James’ mother, Dr. Anne Georgulas, will be able to continue “transitioning” him into “Luna,” and now has full authority to start him on puberty blockers and eventually cross-sex hormones.

The jury’s decision likely means that Mr. Younger will be required to “affirm” James as a girl, despite his religious and moral objections, and will also be forced to take a class on transgenderism.”

This is pure humiliation for the dad. As if he is the one who needs to be enlightened about Transgenderism. He’s just an angry, ignorant white male conservative who’s stuck in the past and afraid of all this wonderful Change and Progress.

“With a consensus of 11 of the 12 jurors, the jury decided not to grant Mr. Younger Sole Managing Conservatorship over his twin boys. They voted that the current Joint Managing Conservatorship should be replaced by a Sole Managing Conservatorship, but that Mr. Younger should not be that person.

Mr. Younger and Dr. Georgulas were in court last week fighting over custody and decision-making abilities for James and his twin, Jude. Mr. Younger argues his ex-wife is “transitioning” James against the boy’s will.”

This man’s insane liberal wife wants to make their son transgender so she can be like the Cool Celebrities and their #trendy transgender kids. The insane liberal wife also refers to James as “Luna,” a Hispanic name for the virtue signaling double-whammy, because apparently you get double the Woke Points for being both transgender and trans-racial. And white names are just so boring, aren’t they?

She does not care that she is already doing serious psychological damage to the boy by telling him he’s a girl. And that’s to say nothing of the serious physical damage she’s about to inflict on this poor boy by forcing him to take medications that will turn him into a female. The human body was not designed to literally change its sex, and any attempt to do so is unnatural, in addition to being immoral, and will inevitably lead to serious medical and psychological problems.

But the Affluent Female Liberal need to virtue signal trumps all of this. Poor James’ mother WILL have a transgender child at any cost.

I remember not so long ago there was a time in this country where Affluent Women’s status seeking could be satisfied with a nice car and an expensive purse, maybe some breast implants. Now in 2019 they’re giving their 7-year-old sons hormone blockers to turn them into girls.

The term “child abuse” is appropriate here, but in my opinion it is not strong enough to fully convey the wickedness of what this woman is attempting to do to poor James. It’s more like child torture.

We are truly living in upside-down clown world when a jury decides a custody battle in favor of the parent that wants to torture the child.

Just four years after gay marriage was legalized, we now officially have state-enforced transgenderism.

“SLIPPERY SLOPE FALLACY!” they shouted.

***

Update: Thankfully, a judge has overruled the jury’s ridiculous decision and Jeff Younger will be granted partial custody of James. Hopefully this means the poor boy will not have to be pumped full of chemicals and hormone blockers.

Still, the fact that this almost happened is worrying because it shows just how bad the state of this country is when a jury of a man’s peers rules that he has to allow his insane ex-wife to chemically castrate his son.

The fact that it was a jury of everyday people making that decision is evidence that degenerate liberal propaganda and brainwashing has been devastatingly effective.

When Will Republicans Wake Up and Realize that Demographics Are Destiny?

Lee Kwan Yew, founder of Singapore:

In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.

He couldn’t be more right.

This explains why inner cities consistently vote over 90% Democrat even though the Democrats have done nothing to improve the inner cities over six decades.

When I was younger, I used to think it was all about ideology. I was obsessed with conservative ideology and comparing socialism vs capitalism and stuff like that. I thought that was what drives people’s voting decisions.

And so I could never wrap my head around this idea that someday Texas is going to start voting Democrat.

What? Are you crazy? Texans are the most conservative people around. They’re not just going to change their whole worldview and become liberals? Never!

No, Texans as we picture them are not going to become liberals. It’s not going to be an ideological shift within an existing, static population.

What’s going to happen is that Texans as we traditionally know them are going to become the demographic minority in the state. The combination of mass foreign immigration and liberal white transplants from other states (like California) is outnumbering Texas’ traditional white conservative majority. No longer is the state full of Hank Hills. The Hank Hills are in the process of being outnumbered. That is why Texas will probably turn blue in the next 4-8 years.

Hank Hill is not becoming a liberal over time. That’s ridiculous.

What will happen is that the state’s demographics will change.

And so this leads me to the Republican Party nationally, which still insists that it’s not against all immigration, only illegal immigration. In fact the GOP loves legal immigrants and tells you every chance it gets–even Trump:

“We want to allow millions of people to come in [legally] because we need them. We have companies pouring in from Japan, all over Europe, all over the world, they’re opening up companies here, they need people to work.”

Trump, just like the Chamber of Commerce and the big businesses that have traditionally controlled the GOP, wants “millions” of cheap foreign workers pouring into this country.

But does he realize that it’s legal immigration that will be the end of the Republican party one day soon if not massively reduced?

I’ve never seen a political movement actively campaign for its own demise, and pursue policies that will ensure its extinction in the near future. This is what Republicans are doing in celebrating legal immigration: ensuring their own doom.

It’s not illegal immigrants that have tipped so many states toward Democrats. Although many illegals do in fact vote, and Democrats today want to make it so all the illegals in this country (some 30 million of them, not the 11 million lie that has been repeated since the mid-2000s as if not a single illegal has entered this country since then) can vote, the real issue for Republicans is the legal immigrants who are already voting for Democrats in large numbers:

Screen Shot 2019-08-13 at 9.34.49 PM.png

There is a fair amount of ideological diversity among white voters. This is a remnant of pre-Diversity America when elections really were about issues rather than race. This is why you see the white vote split like 60-40 these days.

But there isn’t ideological diversity among nonwhite groups. They all vote heavily Democrat because they believe it’s in their racial interest to do so. They would feel like race traitors voting Republican because they see it as the White Man’s Party. In 2016 Trump carried the white vote 57-37 over Hillary. But Hillary carried the non-white vote by a margin of 74-21.

Screen Shot 2019-08-13 at 9.37.17 PM.png

Minorities vote Democrat almost monolithically. It’s not really about the issues, it’s about racial identity. This is the payoff for Democrats’ identity politics obsession, i.e. tying voting behavior to race.

Do you remember in 2016 seeing those signs “Latinos for Hillary”?

proxy.duckduckgo-1.jpg

We’ve grown used to seeing this type of thing but have you ever stopped and thought about what “Latinos for Hillary” truly means? It is a frank admission that race drives voting decisions. “Latinos for Hillary” completely ignores the fact that there are male Latinos, female Latinos, young Latinos, middle-aged Latinos, old Latinos, rich Latinos, poor Latinos, middle class Latinos, etc. This is a total refutation of the idea that people vote primarily based on their economic interests. Otherwise, we’d see middle-class Latinos (and middle-class blacks and Asians) voting the same way as middle-class whites. “Latinos for Hillary” is the acknowledgment that race transcends everything and that voting for Hillary will benefit all Latinos no matter their gender, age and income status.

The only people who don’t see this are white conservatives. Well, some see it, but for whatever reason they ignore it or pretend they can change it.

Someone focused on ideology alone will never be able to understand American politics in the coming years. They will wonder why Texas, Georgia, Arizona and other states are flipping blue despite being ideologically conservative for decades. “Why are people in those states suddenly becoming liberals??? It does not make any sense!!” They’ll wonder.

But just because you’re ideological doesn’t mean other people are. Just because you don’t vote based on race doesn’t mean other people don’t.

People need to start realizing what’s going on and why.