Love the way the proponents of the monstrosity imagine that simply saying that some speaker is 'against gender treatment' is somehow sufficient to deny credibility to the views expressed.. amazing - shows how far the human mind has sunk under modern medical malpractice - the same medicine that permits idiots to exist in numbers and with all the mental illnesses rampant through DNA and low infant mortality etc.  Bring on the hare-lips....

Hey - I even get clowns trying to lambast a simple statement that the MIND and the BRAIN are different structures - one is the hardware - the other PARTIALLY the software as inputted through various means throughout life..

Yes - biology has nothing to do with this - talk about a delusional state - men and women are just artificial constructs - nothing artificial about the construction here:-

"A landmark Finnish study has found a sharp rise in psychiatric illness among adolescents following sex-alteration procedures.

The peer-reviewed study, published in Acta Paediatrica, tracked every young person under 23 who contacted Finland's gender clinics between 1996 and 2019.

A total 2,083 individuals were studied, with 16,643 matched controls. They were followed for up to 25 years.

Finland's health registers are mandatory, which means no one opts out — this is the complete national picture.

The numbers: psychiatric morbidity rose from 9.8% to 60.7% in adolescents who underwent feminising reassignment, and from 21.6% to 54.5% in masculinising reassignment.

Even after adjusting for prior psychiatric history, gender-referred adolescents faced five times the risk of male population controls, and three times the risk of female controls.

"Psychiatric needs do not subside after medical gender reassignment," the authors concluded.

Referrals after 2010 arrived sicker. 47.9% had already needed psychiatric treatment before their first clinic visit, against 15.3% among controls.

The authors' read: for some adolescents, gender distress may be secondary to other mental health challenges.

The evidence keeps mounting. The silencing continues anyway.

How many more adolescents will be told this is "care"?

Kurt Mahlburg"

mothra wrote on Sep 20^th, 2026 at 6:59pm:


Did you have to be a Tranny to qualify as a peer to review that rubbish?

These democrats have XY chromosomes they're males they have Autogynephilia

Another one for the "Oh, FFS!!" File :



An Episcopal priest in New York City declared that Jesus is “transgender” and told the congregation that if they deny this, they are denying the “divinity” of Christ.

Reverend Flourish Klink, who considers herself a transgender nonbinary individual, made the outlandish assertions during a recent sermon at Christ & St. Stephen’s Episcopal Church.




And Mohammed was a trans lesbian. Every Muslim knows that.

I had the opinion that Jesus was gay. No relationship with women. Hangs around guys. A bit effeminent. I see no issue with a priest saying that he is a transgender. The fact that Jesus is fiction just furthers the issue of his sexuality into obscurity and irrelevance.

Although the power and influence of gender ideology across many sections of society took most of us by surprise, the takeover had been a long time in the planning.
Since the 1990s, queer theory has become increasingly influential in reshaping the meaning of sex, sexual orientation and gender. Queer theory evolved out of the works of philosopher Michel Foucault, who argued that gender and sexual identities are not biologically determined, but are the result of the social constructs that shape our understanding of society and culture:

Queer theory is a critical theory that examines and critiques society’s definitions of gender and sexuality, with the goal of revealing the social and power structures at play in our everyday lives. In particular, queer theory can serve as a lens to examine subjects outside the boundaries of traditional gender and sexuality binaries that assume that heterosexuality and cisgender* are “the norm.”

(*Cisgender is a contested term which describes a person whose gender identity matches their sex.)

Further, David M. Halperin, an American sociologist, has this to say:

Unlike gay identity, which, though deliberately proclaimed in an act of affirmation, is nonetheless rooted in the positive fact of homosexual object-choice, queer identity need not be grounded in any positive truth or in any stable reality. As the very word implies, “queer” does not name some natural kind or refer to some determinate object; it acquires its meaning from its oppositional relation to the norm.

Queer is by definition whatever is at odds with the normal, the legitimate, the dominant.  There is nothing in particular to which it necessarily refers. It is an identity without an essence.

Until recent times, the general population has been largely unaware of the cultural shift reshaping society. Influence was spread from universities by embedding trans ideology across faculties of health and education whose graduates then acted as missionaries. They spread the word by weaponizing the claim that gender confused adults and children were a vulnerable, marginalised group and any challenge to this was akin to murdering them because of an unsupported claim that they would self-harm if not “affirmed”.  https://newdiscourses.com/books/

Judith Butler is an American intersectional feminist, queer philosopher, and gender studies scholar whose work has been strongly influential the fields of feminist and queer theory, and has provided a theoretical foundation for transgender advocacy. Butler is best known for the book Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity

Queer theorists, like ,Butler, use a lot of pseudoscientific beliefs and ideas couched in dense word salads to support the idea that gender and sex is anything you want it to be:

"Biological sex is also a social construction—gender subsumes sex. According to this view, then, the social construction of the natural presupposes the cancellation of the natural by the social. Insofar as it relies on this construal, the sex/gender distinction founders … if gender is the social significance that sex assumes within a given culture … then what, if anything, is left of ‘sex’ once it has assumed its social character as gender? … If gender consists of the social meanings that sex assumes, then sex does not accrue social meanings as additive properties, but rather is replaced by the social meanings it takes on; sex is relinquished in the course of that assumption, and gender emerges, not as a term in a continued relationship of opposition to sex, but as the term which absorbs and displaces ‘sex’."

To translate, her argument runs like this: gender is performative, therefore women are defined (only) as a woman by how they behave, so anyone who performs as a woman is a woman, and because of this sex must also be a social construct, which means that gender replaces sex, and since social constructs change over time, it is possible for a person to change sex. One of her claims to fame is the discovery of “the female penis”, the intact genitals of a male who identifies as a woman.

https://quadrant.org.au/news-opinions/sexual-politics/queer-theory-the-ultimate-...

Over time, however, the sphere of autonomy expanded relentlessly to include the ability not just to make choices within a moral framework defined by an existing religious tradition, but also to choose one’s framework and even make up moral rules for oneself.

This is nowhere more evident than in the sphere of sexuality, gender, and family life. Many countries have legalized abortion, which is typically framed as a way of protecting the autonomy of women to control their own bodies. But the final frontier in the denial of the significance of biology is the contemporary transgender movement. Transgender activists, supported by a good part of the medical establishment, assert that gender is wholly unrelated to biological sex; that is, to one’s XY chromosomes. Rather, it is a matter of individual choice, much as one might choose a new name or a place to live. They don’t want to be told that their genetic endowment will have powerful effects on their gender identity.

The notion that there is a strong underlying relationship between biological sex and gender identity became one of those verboten ideas in certain liberal circles during the 2010s and 2020s, a prohibition that has been rigorously enforced by transgender activists. The idea is not a very plausible one, however. It doesn’t make sense to think that people were choosing their gender identities over the centuries as a result of social pressure alone: the rootedness of human beings in their biological sex is a necessary precondition for reproduction and family life to take place. It would undermine Darwin’s theory of natural selection, not to mention his whole theory of sexual selection, which goes down the drain under these conditions. There have always been a small number of individuals who were unhappy with their gender identities, and in a liberal society their choices need to be respected. But one cannot build a political right around a characteristic that may or may not be natural, and is shared by only a small minority of human beings.

Francis Fukuyama