Dec 11, 2015
This is what happens when you don’t have enough shame and judgment.
His name is Paul Wolscht. Paul is a 52-year-old pervert, a “transgender” activist, and a “trans consultant” from Canada who was recently given a glowing profile in a gay news site whose name and web address I will not promote. He is, just like every other “transgender,” a homosexual cross dresser and clinical narcissist who wears skirts and makeup because he finds it sexually stimulating (underscored in this case by the fact that his chosen girl name is, I’m not kidding, “Stefonknee”), but there is one detail about Paul that makes him somewhat unique. You see, our hero isn’t just a “transgender” — he’s a “transager.”
A while after getting married and fathering seven children, Paul realized he’s actually a girl. A 6-year-old girl, to be precise. Upon arriving at this scientific conclusion, he abandoned his family and went to live with a couple of deviants who “adopted” him as their son. It will come as no surprise that he has a sexual relationship with his “adopted father.”
Horrifically, there are real children in the house as well. Paul explains the dynamic:
“Well, I have a mummy and a daddy. [An] adopted mummy and daddy who are totally comfortable with me being a little girl. And their children, and their grandchildren, are totally supportive. In fact, her youngest granddaughter… When I was eight. A year ago, I was eight, and she was seven. And she said to me, ‘I want you to be the little sister, so I’ll be nine.’ I said, ‘Well, I don’t mind going to six.’ So I’ve been six ever since… We have a great time. We color, we do kids stuff. It’s called play therapy. No medication, no suicide thoughts. And I just get to play.”
Clearly, these poor kids should be removed from the home. Why in the world do we have Child Protective Services if they don’t step in to protect children who are being forced to engage in role play with a mentally unbalanced, sex-crazed degenerate? Neither Paul nor his “parents” should be allowed within 100 yards of minors, as this sick fantasy of theirs obviously reveals pedophilic tendencies. They are all a danger to kids and to society, and condemnations of their behavior should be angry, severe, and categorical. If I were in charge of these things, I’d have all three involuntarily committed to a hospital for the criminally insane.
But Paul is more likely to hear celebrations than condemnations in our society. Sure, some cis-age transgenders will insist that if Paul wants to be a girl he has to be a 52-year-old girl; transage isn’t a thing, only transgender is, they’ll claim. In the end, though, transagism is exactly parallel to transgenderism. If you can be something other than your biological sex, surely you can be something other than your biological age. You have no choice but to accept one if you accept the other, which is why liberalism will soon champion the age-fluid with the same fervor with which they champion the gender-fluid. Paul is already being heralded as a pioneer in some liberal circles. Soon they will all join the chorus. They have no choice. This is the reality they created.
Just look how quickly liberalism unironically adopted the idea of “transracialism,” after all. Transgender. Transage. Transrace. Throw it all in. You can’t pick one and leave the others.
Transgender. Transage. Transrace. Throw it all in. You can’t pick one and leave the others.
Then there’s transpecies, which isn’t just a concept hilariously invented by South Park. There exists an actual community of people who pretend to be animals and call themselves “otherkins.” As this piece put it, “otherkins are people too; they just identify as non-humans.” A lot of liberals take these bestial fetishists seriously. They have to, I guess.
Transgender. Transage. Transrace. Transspecies. These are different brands of crazy but they are all fundamentally the same — 100 percent comparable, right down the line — and we are witnessing the mainstreaming of them all.
And it doesn’t stop there. You may have heard of the small but vibrant “transabled” community. These are people who feel certain they were supposed to be born legless, armless, deaf, paralyzed, or crippled in some other way. Eventually, if they aren’t given rigorous psychological treatment, they often resort to disfiguring themselves to achieve the realization of their “true selves.” Recently, the world met Jewel Shuping, a woman who was so certain she was meant to be blind that she had her psychologist pour drain cleaner into her eyes.
The LGBT cabal has so far rejected transabled minorities — no doubt realizing that a guy who wants his arm cut off is a little too uncomfortably similar to a guy who wants his penis cut off — but soon they, too, will be welcomed. The transabled are the closest cousins — practically siblings — of transgenders. If a gender-confused woman should lop off her healthy breasts as a form of “treatment,” why shouldn’t a psychologist prescribe drain cleaner eye droplets to a woman who fetishizes blindness? These situations are exactly analogous. The differences between them are merely cosmetic.
Transgender. Transage. Transrace. Transspecies. Transabled. Tolerance will be legally mandated for everyone. There is no stopping the trans-train at this point. All aboard.
Speaking of cousins and siblings, yesterday my Facebook newsfeed introduced me to this story of a brother and sister who’ve been dating for 20 years. They have a child together. The Vice interview of the happy incestuous couple was self-satisfyingly non-judgmental, even favorable.
Homosexual activists initially recoiled at comparisons to incest, yet slowly but surely, it will indeed be granted the same privileged status. Again, they have no choice. If “hey, love whoever you want” is the argument for gay marriage, there is no actual, real, logical way to exclude brother-sister partnerships. You said love whoever we want, right? You said our sexual urges shouldn’t be suppressed to conform to any moral standard, right? Incest and homosexuality are obviously a package deal. They denied it at first, but not for much longer.
Oh, and pedophiles are getting in on the normalization action, too. Not long ago Salon ran a puff piece on a man who confesses to being sexually attracted to little children. It was greeted with reserved approval by liberals across the country. Eventually, the approval won’t be so reserved.
Love whoever we want, right? Sure, they’re kids, but we already give birth control to 6th graders and teach sex ed to kindergartners. We’ve already sexualized them. Pedophilia is just the next step in the process.
Moreover, homosexuals are much more likely to be pedophiles than heterosexuals, which has always made the condemnation of pedophilia quite awkward for the Social Justice crowd. Soon I suspect the awkward condemnations will become almost inaudible, then finally non-existent.
This is real, folks. Look at it. Deal with it. I hesitated to write any of this because if you don’t already know about transagism, otherkins, and pro-incest campaigns, perhaps you’re better off continuing along in that state of enviable ignorance. But this is where we are as a culture, and I think we need to know where we are, especially if we have kids. This is one of the great burdens of parenthood — to act as barriers between our children and the world. To absorb these horrors, carry them on our shoulders, and when the time is right, prepare our sons and daughters for their inevitable exposure to it.
Make no mistake — this is a free fall, not a slide. We aren’t slipping down the proverbial slippery slope; we’re diving into the abyss, plunging right into the bowels of Hell. The only developments that could halt our descent are an apocalyptic asteroid strike, the fall of civilization, the return of Christ, or, less likely, a drastic generational rebellion against the perversity and insanity of our age. Unfortunately, I don’t believe my generation will lead that rebellion — although a bold minority of revolutionaries will certainly try — but perhaps our kids or our kids’ kids will be the ones to turn back the tide. (Then again, we aren’t really having kids anymore, so I guess that brings us back to the fall of civilization as the next most immediate remedy.)
As I said, this is what happens when you remove moral absolutes, shame, and judgment. For years, schools, parents, the media, even some churches, have taught that nothing is inherently wrong, nobody can judge, and nobody should be ashamed of anything. That lesson has sunk in, to devastating effect. The more we hold up shamelessness as an ideal, the more we rob ourselves of our dignity, which is what shame is designed to protect. The more we become something like monkeys who run about grunting and flinging our feces around, metaphorically.
The more we hold up shamelessness as an ideal, the more we rob ourselves of our dignity.
If you listen to the champions of any of these various corruptions — the transgenders, the transagers, the transspecies, the incestuous lovers, etc. — you’ll find that all of them talk about the glorious moment when they overcame the shame they felt (and should feel) for indulging in their kinks and hideous fixations. Almost always, this triumph occurred when they encountered, usually online, other people with the same disturbing propensities. They found “community” in their sin, and there they could build a human wall to block out the “judgment” of the outside world.
Of course, the outside world has been indoctrinated to the same faulty notions of relativism, acceptance, and tolerance, so there is less and less judgment, less and less shame, to hide from. Now, these “communities” can come out into the open, and as they do, more people feel encouraged to nourish and explore whatever sick temptations might be gurgling deep in the recesses of their subconscious. In this way, despite how liberals might scoff at this idea, it is true that sexual deviance — whether it’s transgenderism or homosexuality or whatever else — can be “spread” like a disease. People who would otherwise ignore, suppress, or hopefully seek counseling and spiritual healing to deal with their urges, now feel encouraged to not only act upon them, but become them. To define themselves by them.
Moreover, I’m convinced a certain large number of these folks basically manufacture the urge. They feel too painfully average and unremarkable, and in these debaucheries they see the opportunity to be different, special, and trendy. We all must find our identity in something, and if we do not look for it where we should — in faith and family — we might end up finding it in some fashionable perversion. This is all made possible by a society devoid of shame and righteous judgment.
Shame is a good thing. Shame is, by definition, the painful feeling arising from the consciousness of something dishonorable, improper, or ridiculous. The 52-year-old man should feel ashamed of dressing up like a school girl. Bruce Jenner should feel ashamed of pretending to be a woman. An “otherkin” should feel ashamed of crawling around on all fours and telling everyone he identifies as a woodland fox.These behaviors are ridiculous, dishonorable, improper, and shameful.
Shame tells you something, just as the sharp, burning pain tells you something when you put your hand on a hot stove. It tells you, “This is unhealthy. Stop doing it.” But our society has convinced us that nobody ought to feel such an uncomfortable sensation. Nobody ought to be judged, no matter how gross, bizarre, and twisted their actions might be.
Nobody is wrong. Nothing is wrong. Everything is right, except for what’s right. The things that are actually right — chastity, temperance, humility, the other virtues — are now the only wrongs, and promoting them or trying to “impose” them on others is the greatest wrong.
This is the new normal. We didn’t slide into it. We removed the ground from beneath us and fell straight down, and we’re still falling. It’s not a pretty sight, but to ignore it would be the worst shame of all.
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us