Monday, 25 April 2016

‘Non-Binary’ and the LGBT Agenda

‘Non-Binary’ and the LGBT Agenda 
The War on Gender which is currently being waged by the LGBT lobby puppets of the Cultural Marxist propagandists has recently stepped up a gear, or possibly two.
           If you haven't heard my interview with the estimable Lana Lokteff on her Radio 3Fourteen show, then I would recommend you do so before you read this so as to get as much background to the subject as possible first.
Following the insanity of liberals allowing anyone access to either sex toilets according to how they ‘identify’ (whatever that means exactly), and the inevitable and predictable reaction by conservatives to prevent this, we see O’Bummer himself in a doubtless vetted set piece with a person of female appearance and Pakistani ancestry who claims a ‘non-binary’ identity.
The mainstream media don’t seem to be questioning what this means, but rather jumping to ‘support’ ‘them’, while the on-the-ground level reaction I have picked up so far is that real people are saying “WTF is ‘non-binary’?”
So what indeed is a ‘non-binary’ identity, and why has it been sicced on an unsuspecting public at this particular time?
Although this young person has been associated with the ‘Transgender Movement’, we should distinguish between several closely related but distinct terms that have arisen in this culture.
‘Transgender’ is a word now widely used as an umbrella term for all gender non-conforming people, but this is a comparatively recent usage.  It was coined in about 1980 by a person calling themself Virginia Prince as a more acceptable term than that used at the time for cross dressers, ‘Transvestite’, which was commonly associated with sexual fetishism. 
‘Transgender’ on the other hand was designed to emphasise the gender aspect with which TGs were supposedly identified, since they would seek to pass in public in their desired gender without actually having had medical treatment like transsexuals..
‘Transsexual’ is a term which had been in use since at least the 1950s that was specifically applied to people who had medical hormonal and surgical treatment to modify their physical appearance and morphology to be like that of their desired sex.
All of these at various times have been put forward as mental illnesses, from the early ‘Psychopathia transsexualis’ to the more recent ‘Gender Identity Disorder’ but there has been evidence for some time that the closely defined Transsexual group have an actual neurological birth condition in which they really do have parts of the brain which had developed as that appropriate to their opposite physical sex.  Thus, it really is the case that the reported sense of being a ‘woman in a man’s body’ and vice versa is an accurate description.
So the term ‘Transgender’ has gone from meaning someone who is a Cross Dresser, to include both CDs and Transsexuals who have a more primary sense of their bodily identity.  Thus the distinction is blurred.
It is my understanding that this is a matter of some disagreement in the Trans world, my own preferred blanket term.  Many transsexuals do not like being associated with people they see as being entirely unlike them, while TGs often will argue that such distinctions are irrelevant, or divisive politically and attack TSs as ‘post-op elitists’.
And this is where ‘Non-Binary’ comes into the debate.
A large proportion of the general public will accept transsexuals who successfully pass in their desired sex/gender and who have had reassignment surgeries.  They may not exactly understand it, but it doesn’t challenge the very nature of sex and gender if the person involved seeks to fit into an existing pattern and is morphologically congruent.
TG is a grey area which has more recently been thrust on an unsuspecting world.  After the term was picked up by Judith Butler in her books from the late eighties and early nineties it somehow managed to get to be used as a conflation of several variants, including possibly the best known, transsexualism.  Her observation that there is a ‘performative element’ in gender has been widely abused and misrepresented to claim that sex is in itself only performative, and thus anyone can be either sex merely depending on their behaviour.  The finer points of distinction between sex and gender tend to get air brushed out of the picture when the LGBT promoters get their hands on it and we arrive at the stage we have got to at the present in which anyone claiming to ‘identify’ with one or the other ‘gender’ can use the toilets of the opposite sex.
The point at which ‘Non-Binary’ can now enter has been achieved because sex having been reduced to only gender is now only a concept, and so bodies have become irrelevant.  When we had sex, we knew that there were two forms, or at least two poles, male and female.  There might be intersex, hermaphrodites and transsexuals who are a mixture of male and female bodies, but there was this principle dynamic of the polarity, which has been designed into biological reproduction by nature over a billion years or so.
Enter ‘Non-Binary’.  If sex is no more than gender, then we are no longer anchored in nature, no longer rooted in the forms which are its means of expression, but we are seeking to repudiate its classical archetypes.
‘Non-Binary’ is far more than merely TG, TS, Cross Dresser, confused and all the rest.  ‘Non-Binary’ is not merely saying ‘I don’t know what I am, I’m all mixed up, I might be a bit of both, bisexual, asexual or whatever.’  No, all that is kindergarten stuff which we should be able to recognise and understand as the result of feminising chemicals on embryologic development, early maturation and the destructive influence of Cultural Marxist programming through the mainstream media.  What ‘Non-Binary’ does is to put a position that is a quantum leap beyond.
Having got the world all nice and confused with the imposition of ‘Transgender’ as the blanket term, superseding transsexualism, it then goes on the attack the existence of gender itself.
So someone who claims to be ‘Non-Binary’ ‘identified’ is someone who is not just some kind of androgynous, hermaphroditic, intersex like creature who is seeking to either find some slot into which they can fit, or something that is some balance of the sexes that they can become, or that even accepts that they are a confused mix of these two polarities, but is someone who rejects those polarities.  By claiming to be ‘Non-Binary’, they are not only saying that they don’t fit in, but that the ‘Binary’ on which our entire culture is based is no more than a construct, a fiction designed by someone for some arbitrary reason which bears no relation to the functions of nature.
The boundaries, the natural tabu between men and women are to be broken down entirely.  This coming so hot on the heels of the affirmation of transgenders’ rights to use toilet facilities of their preference regardless of appearance or bodily anatomical status is clearly no coincidence.
In the wake of the controversy we are to be reminded, guilt tripped into something most don’t really understand.
First, gender has been detached and deconstructed away from attachment to an actual body.
Secondly, the rights of any who claim an abstract ‘identification’ with that deconstructed construction are to be recognised regardless of demonstrative evidence such as physical appearance and behaviour, or medically reassigned status.
Thirdly, since ‘Sex’ is now only an incidental physical characteristic and not in any way associated with ‘Gender’, people who claim ‘identification’ with a particular ‘Gender’ can thus enter the space previously exclusive to the sex associated with that ‘Gender’.
However, since that space is no longer exclusively inhabited by those of that sex to which it was exclusive, the gendered terms ‘man’ ‘woman’ ‘male’ and ‘female’ are not merely enlarged, or modified as in the case of adapting to the existence of intersexes and transsexuals, but entirely transformed so that they lose critical parts of their meaning.
Policing of dissent from traditionalists is maintained by use of choice words of abuse, such as ‘bigot’ and ‘sexist’.
It is perhaps as much as a decade since I got into an exchange on an anti-Transphobia forum discussing the problematic nature of this discourse when claiming ‘female’ identity for TGs who have had no medical reassignment treatment, and got back the response ‘I’m perfectly happy with my female penis.’  Okay, this is a complete redefinition of language at which Winston Smith would stand back in admiration, as black became white.
When the Gender Recognition Act (2004) was passed I predicted that the failure to require certain medical procedures to be carried before a Recognition Certificate and revised Birth Certificate could be issued would lead to exactly the state we have at present.  Which some believe is a precursor to the elimination of legal sex or gender completely, on the basis of human rights or somesuch.  The fewer objective referents which are attached to the association between sex and gender, then the less meaningful the latter becomes.  As it becomes more amorphous it becomes easier to push the ‘Non-Binary’, and those who are tempted by this notion become thereby more malleable.  If you have no template to aspire to, no gender role model, then you are fair game for the Cultural Marxist to mould to their own ends.
What this ‘Non-Binary’ agenda seeks to do is to break down all that is based on nature and on the basis of ‘equality’ and ‘fairness’ to make us all grey and featureless drones without gender, race or any unique characteristics of our own.  And in the process it seeks to crush the mind which recognises the cognitive dissonance generated by ideas which conflict with our natural instincts.
Without going into details, we need to find some way to adapt to the presence of trans people in our societies. 
This is probably the point at which I should mention that I myself underwent what was then known as ‘Gender Reassignment’ in the 1980s.  I don’t discuss this online with any great enthusiasm as it has been a private matter all my life and I wish it could remain so, but it is important for me to speak out against the current LGBTQ movement which seeks to represent me, but which has goals entirely at odds with my own beliefs.
Our existence is a fact which will not simply go away by wishing it, or by condemning it as some on the Right would have it.  But trans people are a minute proportion of the population, even if the revised levels of prevalence calculated by Lynn Conway are correct,
 and for the general population to have to change their attitudes and behaviour for one person in a thousand or even in five hundred who is to be given a status above the law on the basis of no evidence other than a personal claim is not acceptable. 
There has to be a line somewhere.  We can negotiate where that line might be, but there has to be a line.
I’ve seen several comments on social media recently from people who have said things like ‘They’ve just messed it up now opening up rest rooms to anyone who ‘identifies’ as a ‘woman’.  There were probably thousands of successfully transitioned trans women who passed successfully in stealth and were never questioned when they used women’s rest rooms, but now any woman with so much as a trace of facial hair are going to be grilled, or else total pervs will be using the ladies facilities and no-one will be able to stop them.’
 It’s time we have the discussion.  Where do we draw the line?
The two sides are faced off against each other.  The liberals demand that anyone should be able to use any public toilet on the basis of simple ‘identification’, which is little more than a mere statement of wish, and the conservatives will only accept assignment at birth.  I have to reject the former as without basis in evidence, merely taking someone’s word for something without demonstrative evidence is stupidity in the extreme; and the latter, while I respect the impulse from which it arises, is rather living in the stone age with regard to recognition of intersexual type birth conditions, both morphological and neurological.
So we have to have the discussion.  The Alt or New Right is getting to grips with recognition of the fact that homosexuality exists and that it is an instinctual inclination in some people.  So long as we maintain a balance whereby we don’t punish people for inclinations which are natural to them, so long as they do no harm by them, but at the same time recognise that traditional heteronormative relations are the best basis for a stable and culturally fruitful society then we will be in balance.
We need to take the next step and get to grips with the fact that the trans world exists and that it cannot be stamped out.  But Transgender activists should not presume by this that they can establish and exploit a hegemonic victim position in order to attack heteronormative structures through virtue signalling.
We are a small minority and most of us seek only to pass unnoticed in society.  Those who stand on the soap boxes and promote ‘Non-Binary’ models of gender, and endlessly push their victimhood agendas are representative only of themselves, a minority faction within the minority.
I have my own position on where exactly I think we should draw the line, but I’ll leave that for now.  However, we must have a line, and preferably one which accommodates scientific knowledge on brain sex, but also on morphology, appearance and behaviour.  A man or a woman are recognised through their gestalt, although there are sine qua nons.  There must be a line drawn between male and female.  It is an ancient tabu, both sacred and profane.  Some may cross it due to exceptional circumstances, but those circumstances will be recognised and understood, there will be rites of passage, and formal recognition.  People who claim ‘identification’ will need to provide evidence to substantiate that claim.
I am even prepared to allow for an ‘Intergender’ category.  I mentioned this term to Dr Sally Hines of the Leeds University Dept of Gender Studies in 2009 when I had several conversations with her.  This would accommodate those who permanently inhabited a zone of mixed status.  I understand there is a term ‘Neutrois’ which has been adopted by some, but I don’t find this nearly as troublesome as ‘Non-Binary’.
This latter term is a purposeful attack on the very division of higher life forms into male and female.  People who use this term routinely attack what they call ‘The Gender Binary’, as if masculine and feminine were an affront to human dignity, rather than what gives it its depth of character.
So we must have a line, and we need to have the discussion about exactly where it is, especially when it comes to the use of pubic facilities, or we will fall into the abyss where anyone is anything they say they are, and where the very binary polarity of life itself is denied.
                  *                            *                            *
There is a whole other discussion I could get into about how this is parallel to the current attempt at destroying national identities and borders in a very similar way.  No Borders is not far from Non-Binary.  No boundaries is what these people want, and it is no surprise to me that one of the principle tools of fear that has recently been used against us is the threat of Ebola, the disease which ruptures cell walls, like open borders and Non-Binary abolition of gender.  This seems to be the template for the world which the EU, Soros and their social engineers have lined up for us.
But I will leave the discussion there for now, and thank Annie Dieu-le-Veut for drawing this topic to my attention, as well as for the use of her analogy about Ebola rupturing cell walls.

                     *                         *                       *

You can purchase a paper or e-book version of my account of my rite of passage at The Hundredth Monkey Camp ‘Waking The Monkey! ~ Becoming the Hundredth Monkey’ (A Book for Spiritual Warriors) at
Buy 'Waking The Monkey! ~ Becoming the Hundredth Monkey: A Book for Spiritual Warriors
Amazon Kindle
My Other Blogs
Exerpts from my book and articles around cutting edge ideas related to consciousness and the human struggle for survival.
My original blog with full 2014 Leeds Trolleybus Public Enquiry online audio recording links and reportage from most days at the Enquiry and other material.