Thursday, October 3, 2013

J. Neil Schulman and the "Transgender" Silliness

You know by now, I'm sure, that it is de rigeur to refer to Bradley Manning as "she," because that's what he wants.  Kind of like how, in Huckleberry Finn, Huck and Jim went along with calling the "king" "your majesty," etc., just to keep him happy, although they knew he was a fraud.  But all Huck and Jim had to worry about was slavery and other such injustices — Political correctness hadn't been invented yet.

And this also reminds me of when I was in the Army, and one day I went to the mess hall, and for the menu item "pizza" they served some flattened-out bread with tomato paste on it.  It looked like pizza, or so I imagine the theory went, and in the military version of political correctness, we called it pizza while we ate something else instead.

And when Bradley Manning and his ilk get sex-change surgery, much like the pizza, they look like females, sort of, but remain male — mutilated males, but males nonetheless. It is totally idiotic to use "she" on them, so of course that's what liberalism demands.

And I find Lincoln annoying, but he had a way with words — he once asked how many legs a dog had, if you call a tail a leg.  "Five," came the answer.  Lincoln shook his head and said, "No.  Four — Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg."

J. Neil Schulman comments on this in a more scientific manner:

There's an old expression: if my grandmother had balls she'd be my grandfather,

Are we not still alive, mammals, primates, and homo sapiens -- or is all that politically atavistic, homophobic, transphobic, and misogynistic?

The last time I checked it still takes a penis shooting sperm in the close proximity of vagina to make a new human.

L. Neil Smith is convinced of a worldwide movement to eliminate most of the human race, and denying that biology divides our species into biological males capable of impregnating biological females does seem to me to support his contention that eliminating live human births by any means possible is part of that agenda.

I have been a science-fiction writer for much of my career. That makes me a futurist. I'm interested in a free future, but that does require more generations of humans, and having participated in the making of one really excellent one has prejudiced me in favor of people making more humans to be free in the future.

Sorry but only sexual anatomy and sexual physiology has any real meaning as far as providing for a future for the human species,

I have no fear or worry about men or women who are unhappy with what anatomy nature gave them and I do wish them as happy a life as they can achieve with such a challenge. But if you really want to help them, be the scientist who figures out how to create a human body of the opposite sex that they can transplant their brains into. Because short of that, the idea that there is such a thing at the current moment as gender reassignment surgery is the pretense. — J. Neil Schulman

6 comments:

  1. I think I saw that "girl" guy at Dragoncon a couple of weeks ago.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes there is a depopulation agenda. Http://Www.TRUTHaboutAgenda.com

    ReplyDelete
  3. Manning had the balls to stand up for what appeared right and is taking a full set of lumps for it. Whether he keeps his physical balls or not is no one's damn business, and making a fuss over his choice to become a her distract attention from Manning's courage and sacrifice.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Considering what Manning has done for truth and justice, I should think calling her "Chelsea" and using the feminine pronoun is simply a sign of respect, if not courtesy. You don't have to go along, but I find it strange how some people get so worked up about it. As if some emotional button is being pushed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course an emotional button is being pushed. That's the whole point.

      Delete
  5. I had hoped to deal with the above controversy which I started at last year's Libertopia during my presentation at this coming week's Libertopia but alas a combination of personal travel challenges and other responsibilities won't allow me to attend. So let me revive this year-old discussion.

    Some weeks after the incident caused by me during the Q&A at Angela Keaton's presentation I was appalled by the video recording in which I came across as an intolerant asshole, I immediately apologized in a comment on the YouTube video.

    Soon after I added "Chelsea Manning" into the Special Thanks of the Alongside Night movie.

    I still think there is an Orwellian issue in replacing sexual anatomy with gender politics, but as a libertarian I don't want my voice to be on the side of anyone -- including myself -- being judgmental on how a human being presents personal identity. So I switch sides on this question and will address Private Manning as she chooses.

    Alongside Night -- The Movie took some collateral damage due to this Libertopia 2013 incident and the many fine actors and craftspersons who made this movie deserved better from me.

    J. Neil Schulman

    ReplyDelete