I copied this from the FB page where I dumped it.
It's in response to the Canadian parents who have decided to raise a genderless child. And a comment that this undermines the LGBT claim of inborn sexual identity.
At this point in Western history, "undermining stereotypes and questioning definitions of masculine and feminine" is the LAST thing we need. Feminism has so masculinized women and feminized men that a good dose of opposite sex sanity would only be a plus.
Were I an agent of the State in the Child Protective Services, in a less deranged culture, I would remove the child from these abusive ideologues, who, in the name of some moronic narcissism, seek to deprive the child of his or her identity. To me it is vile. Would you have wanted to be so raised? What image of yourself in your parents' eyes could you embrace?
The "LGBT" "community's" theory of gender formation and identity is a muddle. On the one hand it is wholly in thrall to post-modern queer theory,which reduces all gender to socially constructed performances. On the other hand, it asserts that sexual orientation is inborn. And for the T part of the whole mess, that gender identity is even more deeply inborn than the chromosomal and sexual shape of the body.
The inclusion of the T in the LGB acronymn makes it uninhabitable for me. LGB can be held together on the basis of a shared erotic attraction to the same sex. But when you add the T, then you find the common ground not in desire but in gender identity. LGBT thus means non-conforming to gender identity and behavior norms.
It embraces as ideology one of the deepest shaming wounds that gay men, at least, have to endure: the judgment that you are less than a man, not really a man at all, but some kind of feminine freak.
Granted that sex with someone of your own sex breaks the gender behavior norms, but at least in my own case, I might be considered as a transgressive man --held by many to be thereby not really a man-- but for myself, to imagine myself as a female is literally unthinkable for me.
Inherent to the concept of manhood is hierarchy and rank. So manhood always comes in degrees. Being homosexual may place me archetypally lower in the male ranking system, but it does not, IMHO, expel me from it into some feminoid or transgender hell.
What was novel about the "gay" form of homosexuality, different from any preceding form --age-graded, initiatory, situational, or transvestic-- was that it asserted that males who engaged with each other erotically, regardless of "position" likewise asserted their claim to identity as men. That's the only "gayness" that I am interested in.
And since I am on a rant n roll...it is a symptom of deep societal rot when the pathologically selfish conceit of these parents is given any kind of sympathy at all...when, if they had announced that they would raise their child without race, the whole world would have laughed at them. We live in a madhouse where race is simultaneously considered to be nothing more than than the color of one's skin and therefore no grounds at all for so-called "discrimination" but on the other hand is felt to be so deeply constitutive of identity that becoming a "transracial" as we now have "transgenders" would be seen as insane and ineffably offensive.