Douglas Wilson's Letter From America

Defending the Trannykid

By Douglas Wilson
Blog&Mablog

In addressing the topic of child sexual abuse, we must begin by distinguishing between abusers who represent the system and abusers who work free lance. The free lance abusers are usually despised by all, but the despisers frequently support outlandish systemic abuse themselves, and to such an extent that if anyone objects to the abuse, then he is the one disciplined. Think of what would happen in the Obama military if an American soldier intervened on behalf of an Afghan boy chained to an Afghan officer’s bed. Who is disciplined? Right — the soldier who intervenes.

Back home, coming back to our version of the same kind of travesty, a recent uproar concerns two workers at a Texas daycare getting their pink slips because they refused to call a little girl a boy. The girl is apparently a trannykid, and the daycare had obtained this important information from the girls’ two fathers. Does anyone see a pattern starting to develop here?

We have these shirts in all sizes, including infant onesies . . .

One of those workers, Madeline Kirksey, said that her religious liberty rights were violated when the center gave her the sack, and so I would like to get that issue out of the way first. At first glance, this looks like it is actually not a religious liberty issue. The center is privately owned, or so the argument goes, and if the owner only wants to employ crazy people, that is the owner’s prerogative. If the owner wants to employ people to take care of little children all day, but wants employees who do not know the difference between boys and girls, then said daycare should have the right to fill their roster with such highly-qualified individuals.

But does a daycare have the right to require its employees to look the other way in cases of sexual child abuse?
This is a religious liberty issue because society has an obligation to intervene on behalf of children who are clearly being abused, and that includes daycare workers. Suppose the two dads were not insisting that the girl be treated as a boy, but rather as a famous porn star who works for the studio they are starting up. Now what? Can the daycare workers object to that? If they do, and are fired for it, what is that?

In this case, Child Protective Services was called. Should they be, or not? Remember — there is no neutrality, ever. Some worldviews like Christianity, which actually invented childhood, object to the sexual exploitation of children, including this kind. Other worldviews, like the current kultursmog, get their jollies from such exploitation.

In the meantime, employment issues aside, on to the merits. Little girls are not little boys. Little girls cannot become little boys. But what if a female could be transformed into a male through our magic surgical prowess, or a male into a female by our jurisprudential juju? Suppose for a moment that we really could get down into the trillions of cells that make up a dude. We have isolated every single presentation of XY chromosomal machismo and we put a little dab of lipstick on each one. That would be really hard. It would be no easier with the trillions of cells that make up a chick. But we finally located every last XX display of maternal tenderness and gave each one some martial arts training, a set of nun-chucks, and some tight leather pants. Suppose we could actually do something like that.

I interrupt this argument to notify everyone that I am using terms like dude and chick intentionally. Ten bonus points will be awarded to the first commenter who can identify the reason.

Back to our thought experiment. What in the Sam Hill makes people think that a six-year-old has the emotional, intellectual, or spiritual capacity to agree to such a momentous decision? A six-year-old girl has trouble deciding at WalMart what color her lunch box should be. A six-year-old boy has the attention span of an ADHD hummingbird.

So take my point here. It is not that we shouldn’t be having little kids make such decisions — because that is not what is happening. The point is that adults who do such things to kids are the worst kind of child abusers, and societies which stand by watching when it happens are the worst kind of enablers. These people are abusing a little girl with the whole country watching.

We live in a time when credentials have been substituted for education. Certification and paperwork serve instead of thinking. So then, in the state of Oregon, if a fifteen-year-old boy gets together with a thirty-year-old man in order to have his membrum virile stroked, we have ourselves a case of sexual abuse and somebody goes to jail. But if he gets together with a thirty-year-old medical doctor, he can have that same member cut off, without parental consent, and get the taxpayers of Oregon to pay for it. Do you understand yet why some of us have nothing but contempt for the sexual intelligentsia?

Now remember what I said a few days ago about what is done to the one, and what is being done to the one hundred. Child abuse in the shadows is terrible, no doubt. The church does need to be better equipped to deal with such things when they happen. True enough, and we have done our part in fighting that battle. But what we really need is the backbone to challenge the open abuse, the plain light of day abuse, the taxpayer-supported abuse. We need to confront the abuse that is being treated by the ruling elites of our society as wholesome, progressive and enlightened.

If a fifty-year-old man is teaching teenagers the joys of masturbation, along with various techniques for furthering the pleasure, what is that? Well, we don’t know yet whether we are supposed to applaud or not, do we? We need more information. In order to know whether this is an Approved Activity, we first need to know if the lessons are being conducted on the other side of the city park, under the train trestle, or up at the government school, in the well-lit sex-ed classes. If the latter, then the gent is clearly credentialed and the fundamentalists had better Shut Up.

21st century America abuses children, and it has to be said that we do so on a massive scale. We have chopped millions of them up into little pieces. Moreover, we groom most of the survivors to tolerate all manner of abuse — which is what the government school system is. One of our highest priorities should be to get every Christian child out of those fantasy farms and into a Christian school.

Every mother who cross-dresses a little boy is participating in that abuse. Every family that entertains the kids on a diet of skanky movies is helping to groom them for life among the filthy-minded. Every person who teaches kids to accept demented sexual behavior for the sake of “art” is an enabler or worse. The issue is not what we all (still) formally reject. We all still reject the free-lancers. But most of us accept, and fiercely defend, the credentialed abusers. If the abuser is in sync with the spirit of the age, to be at all critical is to be a bigot.

Perhaps you deny it hotly. Nobody has been trained to tolerate abuse. Oh? Why do we tolerate it then?