Social and Bureaucratic Violence Against Children and Conservatives

Written by Laurie Higgins

The meme pictured to the right has been circulating on social media, passing as wisdom in the dystopian Upside Down in which “progressives” live and move and have their being. How is violence defined by those who are sharing this meme? Are they using it in the sense of bodily acts of violence or in the sense of “the abusive or unjust exercise of power”?

Rhetorical and social violence

If the latter, was Amy Coney Barrett a victim of violence on the second day of the Senate confirmation hearings for her Supreme Court nomination? Was she a victim of an abusive exercise of power when the sanctimonious U.S. Senator Mazie Hirono (D-HI) battle-axe-splained to Judge Barrett that the term “sexual preference,” which Judge Barrett had used, is “offensive” to homosexuals? Hirono was abusing her power to try to coerce Barrett into using terminology that leftists invented and which embody their leftist assumptions.

As most people know, “sexual preference” has been used interchangeably with “sexual orientation” for decades, including by homosexuals and other leftists, so Hirono’s claim was false. Not to worry, Merriam-Webster Dictionary has got Hirono’s back. The dictionary editors rushed to change the entry for “sexual preference” identifying it as “offensive.” This is the same dictionary that recently changed its definition of “racism” in such a way as to enable non-racists to be called racists. You know things are bad when even dictionaries engage in politicized rhetorical violence.

This move represents the same sort of rhetorical violence “trans”-cultists engage in when they try to coerce everyone into using “preferred”—that is to say, incorrect—pronouns, arguing aggressively that the refusal to mis-sex humans is an act of disrespect and even violence. They call pronoun use based on correct biological sex “hate speech.”

Language matters—a lot. In a fascinating article, removed twice now from two different websites, titled “Pronouns are Rohypnol,” Barra Kerr illuminates the effects of incongruous pronoun usage, arguing that “People severely underestimate the psychological impact to themselves, and to others, of [pronoun] compliance.”

She uses as evidence the well-known Stroop color test in which test-takers are asked to read a list of color names in which the color of the word matches the font color, so the word RED is printed in red, the word BLUE is printed in blue etc. Then test-takers are asked to read the same list but the color words are printed in a font color that doesn’t match the word. So, the word RED would be printed in green font, the word BLUE in pink font etc. Reading the second list is more difficult, exhausting, and much slower as the brain has to constantly translate.

Kerr argues that in addition to the mental challenge, there is something more disturbing that takes place when humans mis-sex someone. Males and females are different, and in many contexts those differences matter. Kerr uses this famous quote from Oscar de la Renta as an illustration:

Walk like you have three men walking behind you.

De la Renta intended to encourage women to walk upright with confidence because men may be watching them. Others view it as a warning to walk faster. Either interpretation would be lost if “men” were changed to “women.”

Sexual anarchists having been doing violence to language for decades, and they do violence to people when they try to coerce them into using politicized language that affirms ideas with which they disagree or that offend them.

What conservatives should learn from Hirono’s harangue is that no one is morally obligated to use terms that leftists invent to embody their arguable beliefs. No one is obligated to use those terms even if the failure to comply constitutes—in the leftist Newspeakian universe—a microaggression.

If all that’s required to wangle conservatives into using leftist language is for leftists to whimper their feelings are hurt, conservatives deserve what we get. If we will not stand for truth in the face of such feeble attacks, we don’t deserve the gift of liberty.

Bodily Violence

If, however, the “violence” that concerns the meme disseminators pertains more to direct bodily harm, then surely there are some leftist physicians who serve on an American Academy of Pediatrics committee and board that are guilty of violence. These are the physicians who have concluded that if a minor experiences a sense of a mismatch between her healthy, properly functioning body and her subjective feelings about her femaleness, the problem is with her healthy body. Following from that bizarre conclusion, they recommend and/or perform double mastectomies on 13-year-old girls and hysterectomies and oophorectomies on healthy 21-year-old women.

How many of the thousands of teen girls and young women who are now taking testosterone and being mutilated by quack doctors after a few visits to “gender clinics” are on the autism spectrum but don’t know it? How many of these girls have been sexually abused and never talked about it? How many of them have experienced other forms of trauma and not shared it with parents, counselors, or doctors? How many of them are filtering their experiences through the easily accessible distorted lens provided by the “trans” cult and its science-denying acolytes who believe that love and compassion include facilitating disordered thoughts and bodily mutilation? Are these girls—some of whom will one day regret their mastectomies, hysterectomies, and non-functioning “neo-penises”—victims of violence or at least medical malpractice?

Bureaucratic violence

It’s not just quack medical doctors who are collaborating to commit violence. The entire governmental social services apparatus in many states has been recruited into the violent criminal “trans”-cultic enterprise as James and Gail Blaise recently learned.

James and Gail Blaise became victims of bureaucratic violence when the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare recently declared them ineligible to foster their own one-year-old great-granddaughter—referred to as H.V.—because as Seventh Day Adventists, they would not agree to embrace the moral beliefs of homosexuals and “trans”-cultists?

On behalf of the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare, the Washington Department of Child, Youth and Families inquisition asked the great-grandparents these questions:

  • “How would we react if H.V. was a lesbian?”
  • “Would we allow H.V. to have a girl spend the night at our home as H.V.’s romantic partner?”
  • “If at 15 years old, H.V. wanted to undergo hormone therapy to change her sexual appearance, would we support that decision and transport her for those treatments?”
  • “If as a teenager, H.V. wanted to dress like a boy and be called by a boy’s name, would we accept her decision and allow her to act in that manner?”
  • “If H.V. had a lesbian girlfriend, would we be willing to have her visit our home and possibly travel with us?”
  • “Would we find it acceptable if H.V. dressed like a boy?”
  • “Would we find it acceptable if H.V. wanted to be called by a boy’s name?”
  • “If at age 14, a doctor ordered H.V. to undergo hormone therapy to change her sexual appearance, would we comply with that order?”
  • “If at age 14, H.V. said that if we did not agree with her having hormone therapy she would leave our home and run away, how would we respond?”

When the Blaises’ answers didn’t conform to the leftist-created foster care policy of the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare, the foster care agent advised them that that their application would likely be denied. His evidence for their unfitness included that,

“they were not willing … to support hormone therapy for transitioning, even if it was medically necessary or recommended, or counseling that was not consistent with their religious beliefs; … to support boys wearing girls’ clothes or vice versa … or… to call a foster child by their preferred name if it was different from their given name.”

It is now a requirement for fostering and adopting children to affirm acts that just thirty years ago would have been viewed as bizarre and immoral. Such requirements constitute an abusive and unjust exercise of power—also known as violence.

Fortunately, the Blaises sued and won.

“Progressive” vipers are nothing if not cunning. They’ve constructed a brave new pagan world in which “trans”-cultists are the gods, and their oracles are “experts.” These oracles divine from the fluttering pages of flawed pseudo-science research whatever conclusions their gods have pre-ordained. Oracles, who serve on influential committees in “professional” organizations, cherry-pick from a mountain of government-subsidized “studies” faux-facts that  appear sufficiently sound to confuse and delude a gullible and intellectually lazy public, thereby pleasing the gods the oracles serve. And then the gods proclaim these evanescent faux-facts “objective absolute truths” and demand obeisance from the plebes.

While American universities have replaced Delphi and Dodona, gaseous nonsense is stinkin’ up the joint again.

Before we can know what constitutes a “violent” or compassionate act, we must first know what is true. “Trans”-cultists are masters of the art of Newspeak. Through their blinkered eyes, they see bodily mutilation as medical treatment. They see true love as hatred. They see true compassion as callous cruelty. They see suffering, confused women with disordered thoughts and feelings as men with disordered bodies. They see the affirmation of truth as violence.

Leftists will engage in virtually any form of rhetorical, social, bureaucratic, legislative, and judicial violence to impose their perverse moral views on all Americans, which is why this election is critical.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

HELP: Our get-out-the-vote campaign is up and running.
We are distributing the IFI Voter Guide to hundreds of churches, civic groups and tea party organizations. 

Please financially support our endeavor to educate Illinois voters and promote Christian family values?