John Donegan is fortunate that, as far as I know, there are no state laws that make it a crime to be ignorant. Else, he’d be in danger of being incarcerated.
His diatribe (“A medical miracle,” June 9) about Merck’s decision to update its legendary “manual” to reflect 21st century thinking by replacing “gender dysphoria” with “gender incongruence” is his latest contribution to the “Best of 1970 political thought.”
After all, it’s been almost 50 years since the American Psychiatric Association stopped calling homosexuality a mental illness. (Likewise for the other “LGBTQ” categories.) Now, Donegan emerges to inform us that Merck’s failure to get that half-century-old memo was a good thing, not a sign of Merck’s ignorance.
In response to Merck’s joining the current century, Donegan spins his intellectual top all the way around to conclude that the manual’s change is a harbinger that the “Twittersphere” will become the basis for scientific thought.
Nevermind that studies show that half of transgender teens report a suicide attempt during their lifetime; the percentage is 30 percent for transgender females.
It is no reach at all to conclude that such self-hating is a response to bullying and discrimination practiced by people who, like Donegan, consider one’s being transgender an “affliction,” rather than a reflection of who the person really is.
On a more frighteningly transparent psychological level, it remains an ongoing mystery that Donegan, and the bulk of conservatives who share his beliefs, fail to realize that their backward “if you’re not like me, you’re sick” thinking reflects their own fear that they too may be “different.” Deep inside, they’re terrified.
Ain’t that a hoot and a half?
Will Powers
SLO
This article appears in Winning Images 2022.
So true!!!!
Will Powers appears to argue against himself. First he mentions the vastly higher suicide rate suffered by those with gender dsyphoria, and then he amazingly concludes that it is not an “affliction”. Huh? Anything which results in an individual being more likely to kill themselves sounds like an ” affliction” to me.
The vast majority of humanity are either male or female, and anyone who doesn’t fit into those categories is likely to feel different, no matter how much Powers and his pals flood the public discourse with their Orwellian pronouncements like a squid’s inky cloud. Those with gender dysphoria deserve sympathy and freedom from violence and judgment, but they’re not entitled to force the vast majority of humanity to remake their social and scientific structures to accommodate their feelings.
Powers reveals that Merck’s changes are not scientifically based when he says Merck updated their manual to reflect “21st Century thinking”., not to reflect any scientific discoveries. Again, popular consensus is not science, as Galileo could have told you. And Galileo could have told you of the outcome when people like Powers are given the power to enforce their popular thinking on scientist to serve their polical objectives.
Donegan’s ignorance is never more apparent than when he refers to those with gender dysphoria and, presumably, anyone who is gay, lesbian, bi or any other orientation along the gender spectrum, as having “feelings” that require accommodation. He is yet another in a long line of the deliberately and brutally ignorant who imagine that “gay” is what someone does, as opposed to what someone is. His insistence that society be structured to exclude any deviations from his view of the “norm” reveals his sad rigidity, his boxed-in world view that apparently can’t imagine that there are legions of people unlike him, and who–when forced to suffer under a social structure that denies them their very essence, their very existence–contemplate a path to end their suffering. John Donegan doesn’t understand that the “affliction” that leads some groups to commit suicide at a rate higher than others–including gay and lesbian teens, transgender youth, and Native American men–isn’t theirs; it’s his.
tsankawi: “denies them their very essence, their very existence”? Your florid, overwrought pronouncements are unconvincing. No one is denying anybody anything, nor seeking to exclude anyone. Refusing to let a tiny fraction of the population force the vast majority of people into remaking their language, society and science in order to satisfy recently contrived dogma, is pretty reasonable in the eyes of most. And where were Native American men mentioned? You lefties always make such ridiculous stretchs in your efforts to present a “unified theory” of why you are supposedly being picked on.
Presupposing this entire argument is Donegan’s, and other conservatives’, belief that being LGBTQ is simply an abnormal choice (and not the result of a complex interplay of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences) and such people have all sorts of perverted tendencies. Therefore, they should not be afforded any rights or recognition in our society. Hence the cons’ absolute hysteria when school children are invited to a Drag Queen Story Hour.
A recent song written by Jackson Browne and Leslie Mendolson begins:
You can call it a decision
I say it’s how we’re made
There’s no point in shouting from your island
Proclaiming only Jesus saves
There will always be suffering
And there will always be pain
But because of it there’ll always be love
And love, we know, it will remain
Unfortunately, for the cons, there is no love for anyone.
I am amazed to read of all the things I supposedly said or believe, when my point merely was that a tiny fraction of the popolation was not entitled to remake society, our language, and our science, to accommodate them. The shrill hyperbole from the lefties make it clear that my real sin was to not buy into their latest big, new thing, as they trill hysterically over my ideological transgressions. With the increasing reactive intolerance of liberals, it is like we are witnessing a mass nervous breakdown.
“No one is denying anybody anything,” Satchmo Kelvinator writes, “nor seeking to exclude anyone.” That is an absolutely precious pronouncement, secure in its veracity, springing forth from an apparent mind that is paying no attention at all to legislation–both passed and proposed–that would, for example, deny foster and adoptive rights to same sex couples, permit discrimination in health care, criminalize parents who support their non-binary children, permit employers to fire employees based solely on LGBT status, prohibit acknowledgement in classrooms of relationships beyond the hetero-normative….It goes on and on. Before concluding that “No one is denying anybody anything!”, it might be wise to check yourself. And, no, I am not being picked on at all: I am a straight, white, educated male in a society that places a premium and grants a privilege to those traits, but I am also an American who subscribes to the view that equality is intended “for all.” Sorry if I am too florid for your preferences, friendo, but folks like you and Mr. Donegan sport your ignorance balloons with such pride and bluster that it sometimes takes a sharp pin to pop y’all.
@Tsankawi: Your reading skills are impressive if you can find positions that I’ve taken on all of the issues you listed. You must have discovered some sort of digital “invisible ink” that only you can see. Or, perhaps you’re just spring-loaded with a pre-written list of preconceived grievances to trot out any time that someone doesn’t agree with you on any issue.
@Michael Smith: Lyrics from a rock song are always the most authoritative proof that can be offered in any debate. Who can argue against a snappy tune? And, of course, we all are familiar with the vast wisdom of musicians generally, and the impressive job so many do in running their own lives.
“Lyrics from a rock song are always the most authoritative proof “
I don’t know about you, but I feel that music is an art form, and art is usually way ahead of social trends. I would submit “The Rite of Spring” by Stravinsky as a discordant piece that foreshadowed the horrors of WWI. Likewise, songs like “For What It’s Worth” or “Ohio” or “What’s Going On” perfectly reflected America’s opinion on the Vietnam War. Sorry that you don’t see the social importance of art in our society. Not surprising. Cons have almost always been anti-intellectual.
“trill hysterically”
Sure John.
Of course your side also becomes quite shrill whenever it’s mentioned that we might get some of the more than 300 million guns off the street.
Or when elections that don’t go the Republican way are mentioned.
Or when any sort of fee or tax, however well intentioned, is mentioned.
Love you John. Your opinions are almost identical to my grandfather, father and brother. They were wrong, too.
@Michael: I admire your grandfather, father and brother, and note that you are the exception. You would have done well to accept their wisdom and guidance.
Music is intellectual? I suggest that you go to any concert attended by the young, and report upon the lofty cerebral content of the music. I suggest most are primitive, animalistic emotional venting, featuring sex, drugs and rock and roll. Fun, perhaps, but hardly intellectual.
“Music is intellectual?”
Um, yes, I would think so. I guess you’ve never listened to Beethoven’s Pastoral and imagined the same field of daffodils that Wordsworth wrote about (oh, I guess a great English poet is not intellectual) or listened to Tchaikovsky’s 1812 Overture and understood the great sacrifice of the Russian people that was chronicled by Tolstoy (oh, Leo not intellectual enough for you).
And, I guess you would scoff at the fact that Bob Dylan, a purveyor of “animalistic emotional venting,” won a Nobel Prize for literature (but, to you I’m sure that America’s Nobel literature winners, like Steinbeck, Hemingway, Faulkner, Morrison, etc. were “primitive” and “animalistic.” Steinbeck might actually agree with you).
I would also posit that if you actually listened to anything by Jackson Browne, you might like it. Oh, sorry, he’s a liberal, and they are hysterical and hyper emotional, or some such.
Guessing your favorite poet is Rod McKuen, your favorite musician, Perry Como, and your favorite book is any pseudo-history by Bill O”Reilly. I weep in the night for you, Mr. Donegan.
I agree that classical music and jazz are cerebral, but they are not what is being played at most concerts being attened by the young. When was the last time you heard of classical concert goers getting so worked up in primal excitement that they trampled and killed others in the audience? Dylan wrote some interesting lyrics, but I have a hard time seeing “the vandals took the handles” as intellectual. Sorry. Jackson Browne and the others may resonate at the liberal pep rallies where they seek confirmation, but they hardly offer any serious insights into complex issues, just emotional catharsis for truebelievers.
Browne is now 74. What pep rallies do you speak of? Although he is an advocate for liberal causes, mostly environmental, I don’t remember him showing up at rallies for any candidates. However, he often does benefits for underprivileged kids and such.
In fact, it’s primarily conservative candidates who attempt wider appeal by using popular music. Trump alone, has been sued by the likes of Adele, Neil Young, Elton John, and Guns and Roses for using their music at his rallies. Look it up.
In other words, stick to your LGBTQ phobia. At least you have some semblance of an opinion on that.