Transgenderism or Gender Dysphoria?

Here is a story from where I used to live, Fairfax County, Virginia, about parents who want to confront the school board there about sex education, including transgenderism, so called. The extremist school board decided to table that discussion until later in the summer, presumably when more concerned parents will be away on summer vacation. The story tends to support my theory that government schools are no place of children (see my political agenda here). The story provides an adequate jumping off point for me to pontificate on my views concerning gender dysphoria.

I prefer to use the term "extremist" above rather than "liberal" because that's what these people are, they're extreme. Normal, middle-of-the-road, middle-class people have ceded the language over to the extremists, which gives them a huge advantage in the war over social policy. They call themselves nice words like "liberal" and "progressive," while calling these middle-of-the-road people "conservative."

Same with "transgenderism." Such a newfangled term sounds pretty cool, doesn't it? It gives the whole thing an air of legitimacy. But what is it really? 

It's really a mental illness called "gender dysphoria."

My beef is not with people with gender dysphoria. These are people with a mental disorder who are due all the love and empathy that anyone else deserves. And it's a free country. People can do what they want with their lives. It's a crazy world out there and it's easy to get confused. People need to have the space to figure it out. Children are another matter, of course. Parents need to guide their children, not government school employees, and children need to wait until they're adults to make life-altering decisions like this.

Elon Musk Laments Low Birthrate: Letterman-style list to Solve the Problem

Elon Musk recently lamented the low birthrate in the industrialized world. Musk took Italy as an example, where the birthrate fell last year to its lowest level ever. There will be no Italians on the Italiian pennensula, Musk says, if things don't change. He also cited Japan declining population to make his point.

According to Musk, “Most people believe that we have too many people on the planet. This is an outdated view.” Convincing people otherwise seems to be his only solution to the perceived problem.

I would like to offer a few more. Regardless of their views on how more people might adversely affect the environment and other possible negative ramifications of population growth, people can't keep from having sex, and sex will lead to higher birthrates if left to its own devices. The problem is, it is not.

I'm tempted to arrange these items from last to first in the manner of David Letterman's old Top Ten List, but there are only four so it's not all that dramatic (or funny, except maybe the last one). Aw, heck, I'll do it that way anyway. Here goes. Top 4 ways to increase the birthrate:

If I Were to Run for Office, This Would Be My Agenda

I'm not likely to run for office, but if I did this would be my agenda. I wanted to go ahead and get the list out there now. This is a work in progress. I'll flesh it out little by little later. I'm not sure I would find a constituency, but I wouldn't really care. I would just run on this agenda and let the cards fall where they may.

1. Overturn Roe v. Wade

The abortion issue is what's called a wedge issue--the ultimate wedge issue, it seems--that inures to the benefit of the Republican party and ultimately rich people of both parties. Abortion splits the middle class right down the middle. Half of those middle-class people vote Democrat, the other half Republican. This allows rich people and evangelicals to control the Republican party and rich people, poor people and kooks (mostly kooks) to control the Democratic party. The result of this division has been the resolute decimation of the middle class over the last 5 decades since Roe v. Wade was decided.

Without Roe v. Wade, both parties would have to tailor their respective platforms and policies in favor of the middle class, rather than the rich and the poor. Franklin Roosevelt was the first politician to harness the power of the middle class, and he won four terms in office, followed by a fifth for his Vice-president, Harry Truman. The run was only ended by General Eisenhower, a war hero, who was a Republican, but whose policies were in no way different from those of Roosevelt/Truman, and who was anchored by a Democratic Congress throughout his eight years in office. He was followed by eight more years of Democratic hegemony. This was an era of unparalleled prosperity. A return to a pre-Roe national political landscape would invite back those years of growth and  stability. It would make both parties much more sensible.

Middle-class people tend to be rather no-nonsense in their approach to life. The extremes of the social liberals that have a stranglehold on Washington, DC today would take a back seat to normal, middle-of-the-road middle-class values. This would be the best thing for the poor, as well. A thriving and attainable middle-class to which they can aspire and thrive is far more effective at raising them out of their poverty than any government giveaway program could ever be.

2. Expand the Definition of Religion

Realizing and legally recognizing through court precedent that certain worldviews hold no distinction from historical religions would go a long way toward leveling the playing field of politics and education. Religions like LQBTQ+, Climate Change and even Science in general currently are allowed to indoctrinate throughout society with impunity, particularly in schools. "Outing" them as religions would mean they could no long fly beneath the radar. People would still be able to practice these nihilistic and atheistic religions but they would no longer be allowed to use the airwaves to proselytize and preach that their way is the truth and all other religions are false.