"Individuals cannot be permitted to change their race for the same reason that the Fed cannot permit foreign nations to print US dollars: it would lead to disorder and decline of the reserve currency of oppression." LOL yes
Oppression is the new luxury item all the cool kids must have (even if they have to settle for a cheap knockoff)...
Sorry to be a curmudgeon but socially conservative journalism has, in a way, played into the hands of the loony left in the case of the endless 'transgender' blah blah that now deluges the internet..... been its unwitting useful idiots. These would not, in a sane world, be "interesting questions"; they would be non questions. 'Transgenderism' has gone in the space of a very few years from something which people rightly did not give a flying f*** about to some supposedly great contentious issue of our time....and part of the reason is the click-bait oxygen that conservative journalism has given it.
Note how many "basic" white boys have become "trans" since 2015. Lots of new "women" are young, white, progressive men taking advantage of this new loophole. Without the status-boost of becoming "trans," Charles Clymer would be a forgotten mansplainer, Dylan Mulvaney would be driving an Uber, and Rachel Levine would be recognized as a dangerous fraud. Whereas the mythology of the "trans" cult wants us to believe that this new discursive category of cross-dressing humans is in mortal danger at all times from an unforgiving society, the reality is that no transgender person has visibly lost a single bit of personal status through transition in my lifetime, and I am old enough to remember Christine Jorgensen.
> Why was Rachel Dolazel denounced by the same elites who promote transgender identity?
Because unlike women, Blacks are willing to resort to violence to protect their place in the victim hierarchy. Fundamentally, it really is that simple.
"The third objection holds it is insulting or otherwise harmful to the Black community for a White person to identify as Black…"
It is insulting or otherwise harmful to the White community for a White person to identify as Black…"
"Black slavery is America’s original sin."
This is true. But any slavery is wrong. Black slavery in America was wrong for two reasons.
1. It was a terrible injustice to Blacks.
2. It was very detrimental to Whites; it has cost trillions of dollars and the lives of countless Whites to attempt to ameliorate the damage and distrust between the two incompatible races.
Very enlightening piece. One point that I have been struggling with is the biological basis of race. Is there a consensus among geneticists on whether or not race has a biological framework. I can understand that physical phenotype originates from the genetic makeup but the case it’s not clear cut of people of mixed backgrounds. You can look like race X but actually because of your ancestors have genes of race Y you are more predisposed to race X genetic conditions. On the surface we can attribute that some external traits contribute to the concept of race. But as the example of Sickle cell was given we are not going to run blood tests to determine race.
They came hard for Rachel Dolezal, but when will gay men receive their transracial reckoning? With all the "Oh no she di-int", snapping, etc. For whatever reason, a major component of the mainstream gay identity is the mimicry of the wider culture's impression of a lower class black woman.
"Individuals cannot be permitted to change their race for the same reason that the Fed cannot permit foreign nations to print US dollars: it would lead to disorder and decline of the reserve currency of oppression." LOL yes
Oppression is the new luxury item all the cool kids must have (even if they have to settle for a cheap knockoff)...
Sorry to be a curmudgeon but socially conservative journalism has, in a way, played into the hands of the loony left in the case of the endless 'transgender' blah blah that now deluges the internet..... been its unwitting useful idiots. These would not, in a sane world, be "interesting questions"; they would be non questions. 'Transgenderism' has gone in the space of a very few years from something which people rightly did not give a flying f*** about to some supposedly great contentious issue of our time....and part of the reason is the click-bait oxygen that conservative journalism has given it.
Note how many "basic" white boys have become "trans" since 2015. Lots of new "women" are young, white, progressive men taking advantage of this new loophole. Without the status-boost of becoming "trans," Charles Clymer would be a forgotten mansplainer, Dylan Mulvaney would be driving an Uber, and Rachel Levine would be recognized as a dangerous fraud. Whereas the mythology of the "trans" cult wants us to believe that this new discursive category of cross-dressing humans is in mortal danger at all times from an unforgiving society, the reality is that no transgender person has visibly lost a single bit of personal status through transition in my lifetime, and I am old enough to remember Christine Jorgensen.
> Why was Rachel Dolazel denounced by the same elites who promote transgender identity?
Because unlike women, Blacks are willing to resort to violence to protect their place in the victim hierarchy. Fundamentally, it really is that simple.
"The third objection holds it is insulting or otherwise harmful to the Black community for a White person to identify as Black…"
It is insulting or otherwise harmful to the White community for a White person to identify as Black…"
"Black slavery is America’s original sin."
This is true. But any slavery is wrong. Black slavery in America was wrong for two reasons.
1. It was a terrible injustice to Blacks.
2. It was very detrimental to Whites; it has cost trillions of dollars and the lives of countless Whites to attempt to ameliorate the damage and distrust between the two incompatible races.
Transgenderism and transracialism are psychoses.
Trans ideology is basically about make biological categories "social" identities
Very enlightening piece. One point that I have been struggling with is the biological basis of race. Is there a consensus among geneticists on whether or not race has a biological framework. I can understand that physical phenotype originates from the genetic makeup but the case it’s not clear cut of people of mixed backgrounds. You can look like race X but actually because of your ancestors have genes of race Y you are more predisposed to race X genetic conditions. On the surface we can attribute that some external traits contribute to the concept of race. But as the example of Sickle cell was given we are not going to run blood tests to determine race.
> Is there a consensus among geneticists on whether or not race has a biological framework.
At least among the ones who aren't lying for PC points.
> I can understand that physical phenotype originates from the genetic makeup but the case it’s not clear cut of people of mixed backgrounds.
Fallacy of gray. Just because gray exists, doesn't mean black and white are the same color.
They came hard for Rachel Dolezal, but when will gay men receive their transracial reckoning? With all the "Oh no she di-int", snapping, etc. For whatever reason, a major component of the mainstream gay identity is the mimicry of the wider culture's impression of a lower class black woman.