Scholars note suppression and censorship of academic criticism, harassment, plots to dismiss critics

Trans Power: The above graphic appeared on the Transgender Law Center’s website the day after Donald Trump’s presidential victory in 2016. The colors mimic those of the “Transgender Pride flag,” the equivalent of the “rainbow flag” long used by “gay” activists. Click to enlarge.

By Gina Miller, 10-23-18

More than fifty scholars who work at universities in the U.K., U.S., Australia and elsewhere, and are part of a group of over a hundred, have signed a letter that was published last week in the U.K. Guardian. They expressed their concern about the detrimental effects of political correctness and the “trans” lobby on their ability to research and report their findings regarding so-called “transgenderism.”

The scholars are from a myriad of fields, as they note:

Our subject areas include: sociology, philosophy, law, criminology, evidence-informed policy, medicine, psychology, education, history, English, social work, computer science, cognitive science, anthropology, political science, economics, and history of art.

In part, they express their worries:

We are also concerned about the suppression of proper academic analysis and discussion of the social phenomenon of transgenderism, and its multiple causes and effects. Members of our group have experienced campus protests, calls for dismissal in the press, harassment, foiled plots to bring about dismissal, no-platforming, and attempts to censor academic research and publications. Such attacks are out of line with the ordinary reception of critical ideas in the academy, where it is normally accepted that disagreement is reasonable and even productive.

How unsurprising. The aggressive pushers of “tolerance” are bullies. And just like in the United States under Barack Obama (or whatever his name is), these militant homofascists have imposed their propaganda will on schools and universities in the UK:

Many of our universities have close links with trans advocacy organisations who provide “training” of academics and management, and who, it is reasonable to suppose, influence university policy through these links. Definitions used by these organisations of what counts as “transphobic” can be dangerously all-encompassing and go well beyond what a reasonable law would describe. They would not withstand academic analysis, and yet their effect is to curtail academic freedom and facilitate the censoring of academic work.

Nothing about “transgenderism” would withstand any kind of rational analysis or scrutiny, because its very basis—the notion that a man could possibly be a woman, and vice versa—is not simply wrong, it’s crazy-wrong, a million pseudo-scientific claims to the contrary notwithstanding.

Transgenders who get “sex reassignment” surgery 19 times more likely to die by suicide; findings do not support encouraging young children to pursue opposite-sex ‘gender identity’

Child Sexual Abuse and Homosexuality: Two self-identified “gay” national cable news anchors, Don Lemon of CNN and Thomas Roberts of MSNBC, were victimized as boys by homosexual predators. A new special report in the journal The New Atlantis reveals that, “Compared to heterosexuals, non-heterosexuals are about two to three times as likely to have experienced childhood sexual abuse.” Click to enlarge.

Folks, below is the Executive Summary of a new, in-depth special report, “Sexuality and Gender: Findings from the Biological, Psychological, and Social Sciences,” appearing in The New Atlantis: A Journal of Technology & Society (Fall 2016). The report is co-authored by Lawrence Mayer and Dr. Paul McHugh. Mayer is identified as a “scholar in residence in the Department of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, and a professor of statistics and biostatistics at Arizona State University.” McHugh is a world renowned psychiatrist and professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at John Hopkins.

I highly recommend that you join me in reading or at least scanning this report. You can view or download a PDF copy of the 116-page “Sexuality and Gender” report (plus endnotes) HERE. Or you can order a printed copy of the issue for $7 HERE. Sign up for New Atlantis e-updates HERE, or go to their Twitter page. — @PeterLaBarbera, AFTAH

Emphasis in bold is ours below:

________________________________

Executive Summary – “Sexuality and Gender: Findings from the Biological, Psychological, and Social Sciences”; The New Atlantis, Fall 2016

This report presents a careful summary and an up-to-date explanation of research — from the biological, psychological, and social sciences — related to sexual orientation and gender identity. It is offered in the hope that such an exposition can contribute to our capacity as physicians, scientists, and citizens to address health issues faced by LGBT populations within our society.

Some key findings:

Part One: Sexual Orientation

• The understanding of sexual orientation as an innate, biologically fixed property of human beings — the idea that people are “born that way” — is not supported by scientific evidence.
• While there is evidence that biological factors such as genes and hormones are associated with sexual behaviors and attractions, there are no compelling causal biological explanations for human sexual orientation. While minor differences in the brain structures and brain activity between homosexual and heterosexual individuals have been identified by researchers, such neurobiological findings do not demonstrate whether these differences are innate or are the result of environmental and psychological factors.
• Longitudinal studies of adolescents suggest that sexual orientation may be quite fluid over the life course for some people, with one study estimating that as many as 80% of male adolescents who report same-sex attractions no longer do so as adults (although the extent to which this figure reflects actual changes in same-sex attractions and not just artifacts of the survey process has been contested by some researchers).
• Compared to heterosexuals, non-heterosexuals are about two to three times as likely to have experienced childhood sexual abuse.

Part Two: Sexuality, Mental Health Outcomes, and Social Stress

• Compared to the general population, non-heterosexual subpopulations are at an elevated risk for a variety of adverse health and mental health outcomes.
• Members of the non-heterosexual population are estimated to have about 1.5 times higher risk of experiencing anxiety disorders than members of the heterosexual population, as well as roughly double the risk of depression, 1.5 times the risk of substance abuse, and nearly 2.5 times the risk of suicide.
• Members of the transgender population are also at higher risk of a variety of mental health problems compared to members of the non-transgender population. Especially alarmingly, the rate of lifetime suicide attempts across all ages of transgender individuals is estimated at 41%, compared to under 5% in the overall U.S. population.

Gender-confused “rights”? Women should feel safe and not have to worry about (“transgender”) men in dresses using female restrooms and shower facilities, say Maryland activists with the Citizens for Responsible Government.

From NotMyShower.com and the Citizens for Responsible Government, a Montgomery, County Maryland grassroots organization formed by citizens outraged at Montgomery County, Maryland’s passage of a “gender identity” “nondiscrmination” bill:

“By the stroke of a very powerful pen, County Executive Leggett has broken the biological barriers that separate male and female facilities. No longer will women and girls be able to feel completely safe in the most private and personal bathroom and locker facilities of schools, public pools, malls, stores, health clubs, restaurants and other such public places throughout the county. County Executive Ike Leggett signed Bill 23-07, the outrageous legislation that may result in forcing even religious schools to hire transgender teachers; and then also allow cross-dressing but biological males in your daughter’s school locker room. Maryland Citizens for a Responsible Government has filed a referendum to prevent the implementation of Bill 23-07. We are calling on every concerned Montgomery County citizen to join us in this huge undertaking.”

‘Transgender’ revolutionaries have joined their homosexual activist allies in ripping off the real civil rights movement. At left is a photo depicting Jim Crow racism. Racially segregated restrooms should never be compared to keeping gender-confused men wearing dresses out of public female bathrooms.

The following is excerpted from a report titled, “Peeing in Peace: A Resource Guide for Transgender Activists and Allies,” produced by the Transgender Law Center, based in San Francisco (where else?). What an insult to the genuine civil rights movement that ended the institutionalized racism of Jim Crow (emphasis added):

C. Historical Bathroom Activism
Bathrooms have long been a place where people with authority, power, or wealth have denied access to other people. Over 150 years ago, only wealthy people could afford bathrooms in their homes and poor people were forced to use insufficient, non-hygienic public toilets. For far too long, public bathrooms here in the United States were segregated between “white” and “colored” facilities. “Colored” bathrooms, along with colored sections of restaurants and buses to name only two more instances, were less sanitary and convenient than “white” bathrooms. One of the hard fought victories of the Civil Rights Movement was the elimination of these “colored” bathrooms because it was determined that “separate” was never equal. Women working in the construction trades struggled in the 1970’s to create women’s bathrooms on job sites where before there had been only men’s rooms. After decades of struggle, people with disabilities succeeded in passing the Americans with Disabilities Act in the 1980s, part of which included guidelines for the creation of accessible public bathrooms.

Despite all of the great work mentioned above, bathrooms continue to be unsafe for some people. Because of this, the work described in this guide is a continuation of the work of each of these past movements. One important thing that can be learned from past bathroom activism is that, unless we work on this issue with a variety of needs in mind the bathroom revolution will never work for everybody. [p. 3, “Peeing in Peace,” Transgender Law Center, 2005]