recent image
Gender Dysphoria and Sex Change Operations
mauricezekry
 July 21 2025 at 11:04 pm
more_horiz
Sex change operations are far too large of a choice to make before ones brain is fully developed and youth never quite know what they want, I simultaneously believe that sex and gender are completely different. There is, of course, a male and female sex which is simply the assortment of sex chromosomes one gets from birth (although there are a few more assortments than simply XX and XY). Gender is simply a social construct. We determine gender completely culturally. We give masculine qualities to males, and feminine qualities to females. When one chooses to follow one set of qualities over the other, that should be it. It should barely be a topic of discussion. While there are many who argue, "Okay, but the feminine characteristics are just naturally assigned to females and vice versa to men.", I ask them to consider people born with the aforementioned other arrangements of sex chromosomes such as Klinefelter, Turner, or Jakob syndrome and why they are typically still expected to fall into one of the binary cultural roles of gender. If sex and gender were completely inseparate, logically you'd expect people with those syndromes to have their own roles and expectations. Additionally there's another argument toward sex change therapy's as a medical treatment, which should also be considered. Gender dysphoria is a completely real mental condition, there's no good argument to invalidate it. Many say it is a recent epidemic and has only started just now although there have been a few cases throughout history, though it has still definitely seen an uproar in recent years. I suspect the reason for this is because western culture has evolved to embrace individualism, which shouldn't be entirely rejected. When children get teased at school today we affirm them saying no one knows your true value or character besides you. This was a very different case a few century's ago. Men would fight to the death over honor, gain titles for them and their family such as sir or madam, which are today used in emails to Jane from HR. I also maintain that sex change operations are certainly practically irreversible changes to peoples body's but as of 2021, the rate of regret post transition is just about 1%, which in some ways is a relatively absurd rate to complain about, at least in regard to many other mental health treatments. Is that 1% still a tragic and upsetting scenario? Sure. But what are the alternatives? Are there any medications or a conversion camps that can treat gender dysphoria with a 1% failure rate? It's time to take sex change operations just as seriously as any other treatment. Here's a horrible statistic. 82% of transgender individuals have contemplated suicide, 40% have attempted it. Gender dysphoria is a life threatening condition, that should be the entire conversation.
recent image
How social media could be reducing birth rates
angelobottone
 July 29 2025 at 08:47 pm
more_horiz
post image
Fertility rates are plunging around the world and have dropped in many cases to less than the replacement level of 2.1 children per couple. The finger of blame (so to speak) has been pointed in many directions, not least the cost of living and changes in values. But a new piece of research reckons part of the explanation is the amount of time we now spend on social media. The research comes from Anna Rotkirch, Professor at the Population Research Institute of Helsinki. Finland is known for its generous family policies and strong welfare systems, which should push up the number of children people are having. But Prof Rotkirch and her colleagues first noticed something odd around 2015. While most young adults still said they ideally wanted children, the proportion of those who didn’t want any had tripled, rising from 5pc in the previous decades to 15pc. Surprisingly, the reasons were not mainly financial. Instead, many cited personal lifestyle choices. Statements like “I want to do other interesting things in life” or “I don’t think I’m suitable for parenthood” became increasingly common, especially among women who were highly work-oriented and heavy users of social media. A new distinct category, separated from traditional obstacles such as job insecurity or lack of housing, emerged among those who were delaying or avoiding parenthood. Research by Prof Rotkirch revealed a clear link between heavy social media use and uncertainty about having children. Those who spent less time online tended to express more stable intentions around family life, felt less work pressure, and were in more settled life situations. The emotional influence of digital content may go further than we think, Prof Rotkirch suggests. Psychological experiments have shown that viewing simple, positive images of parents with children can increase the desire to have kids. On the other hand, online platforms like TikTok often amplify negative portrayals of parenthood, with viral content listing dramatic or even absurd reasons to avoid having children. Such content can easily change young adults’ perceptions. There is growing concern about the broader mental health impact of smartphones, particularly among under-30s. Psychologists like Jonathan Haidt point to rising levels of depression, anxiety, and self-harm, especially among girls and young women, who are more vulnerable to social comparison. Young men, meanwhile, are more likely to retreat into digital worlds of gaming and pornography. These patterns, combined with increased loneliness and psychological distress, contribute directly to falling fertility rates. Relationships are changing as well. Across many countries, people are dating less, having less sex, and forming fewer long-term partnerships. Even when couples do form, screen time often interferes with their time spent together. Research shows that screen use can harm relationship stability and in turn, the decision to have children, Prof Rotkirch claims. As family formation is pushed later in life, due to career priorities, health concerns, or lack of emotional readiness, many simply run out of time. Moreover, marriage rates are also declining. Why does this matter? Data show that the majority of births happen within long-term, stable unions. If fewer such unions form, and if they form later and break more easily, fewer children will be born. Delaying relationships and family life not only reduces fertility but may also feed into a wider cycle of isolation and relationship instability. “It is possible to reverse these negative trends and promote screen-life balance—provided governments have the guts to tackle the gigantic technological and commercial interests involved”, Prof Rotkirch believes. Image by Pexels from Pixabay
recent image
How stable families build more prosperous...
angelobottone
 July 17 2025 at 10:23 am
more_horiz
post image
If we want prosperity, one important step is supporting and rebuilding the family. This is the central argument presented by the economist Philip Pilkington in his new booklet “Family Matters: Why Our Choices Determine Our Economic Prosperity”, which is published by the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC). The study connects economic growth, and demographic trends to the strength of family structures. The modern economy often focuses on productivity and investment, but family stability is frequently overlooked as a crucial factor, Pilkington maintains. Without strong families, societies face declining birth rates, lower labour force participation, and rising welfare costs, all of which hinder long-term prosperity. Looking ahead, Pilkington warns that declining fertility rates could lead to economic contraction, similar to Japan’s experience. He links issues such as low birth rates, mental health challenges, substance abuse, and crime to family breakdown, suggesting that strengthening family structures could be a key to reversing these trends. One of the most striking points in Pilkington’s publication is that marital fertility – the number of children born to married couples – is significantly higher than non-marital fertility. Marriage provides both emotional and financial security which makes couples more willing to have more children. This is crucial because a stable birth rate is essential for sustaining a productive workforce and preventing economic stagnation. Societies that see a decline in marriage also tend to experience overall population decline, something highlighted in a new Iona Institute paper. In those countries, policies often focus on boosting fertility rates through financial incentives, such as child benefits and tax breaks. However, Pilkington argues that the real issue is not just birth rates but family formation. Simply encouraging people to have more children without strengthening family structures is short-sighted. Children born into stable, two-parent households generally experience better outcomes in education, health, and future employment. In contrast, births outside marriage often correlate with lower stability, higher poverty rates, and increased reliance on State support. If governments want higher birth rates, they should prioritise policies that encourage marriage and family stability rather than just providing direct financial incentives. When families break up, the State must step in, but this comes at a significant financial cost to the tax-payer, and the families themselves. By shifting the focus from individual fertility to family stability and formation, policymakers can create conditions that naturally lead to higher birth rates and a more sustainable economic future. The consequences of family breakdown extend beyond economics and welfare costs. Pilkington highlights social problems like crime, addiction, and mental illness that are often linked to unstable family environments. One particularly telling statistic from the British government says that 24pc of adult prisoners had been in the care system at some point of their childhood. Pilkington’s research makes one thing clear: economic prosperity and social stability are deeply intertwined with family structures. Countries that neglect the importance of marriage and family will face declining birth rates, rising welfare costs, and growing social problems.
recent image
The dangerous lesson from Switzerland’s...
angelobottone
 August 10 2025 at 02:58 pm
more_horiz
post image
An Irish woman travelled to Switzerland to end her life through assisted suicide and her family only learned of her death afterwards, leaving them devastated. Such situations can occur in any jurisdiction where euthanasia or assisted suicide is legal, as there is generally no legal requirement to inform family members in advance. The decision is treated as a private matter between the individual and the providers. The recent death of Maureen Slough, an Irish woman who travelled to Switzerland to end her life through assisted suicide, has reignited concerns about the country’s permissive approach to the practice, and the possibility of similar laws being introduced in Ireland. Maureen’s family were left shocked and devastated after learning of her death only after the fact. The news came not from a relative or a doctor, but through a WhatsApp message from Pegasos, the Swiss assisted-suicide clinic where she died. “It was one o’clock our time… I got the message saying my mum was gone,” her daughter, Megan Royal, recalled. The message stated that Maureen “passed away peacefully… embraced by a Pegasos nurse, an attendant, and a dog,” with Elvis gospel music and Amazing Grace playing. Maureen was not terminally ill. According to her daughter, Megan Royal, she had endured years of chronic pain, bereavements, and two prior suicide attempts. Switzerland is known for “suicide tourism” as it is relatively easy to access. It allows assisted suicide for any adult who has full mental capacity, is free from coercion, and can self-administer a lethal substance. There is no requirement for a terminal diagnosis or even illness. A doctor must confirm mental capacity and prescribe the means, but the person assisting does not have to be a medical professional. Pegasos claims Maureen underwent psychiatric evaluation and provided documentation of “unbearable chronic pain”. Her daughter Megan disputes the process. Critics say this amounts to “assisted suicide on demand,” and Pegasos openly states that it supports the right of any competent adult to choose death, regardless of nationality. The organisation has encouraged greater international acceptance so people “needn’t travel to Switzerland” to end their lives. Last year, commenting on the report of the Oireachtas Committee on Assisted Dying, a spokesperson for the Swiss clinic said: “At Pegasos, we believe that adults capable of judgement should be allowed to exercise their right to a self-determined, dignified death. We hope that the social and individual acceptance of assisted dying, also in foreign countries, might improve in the future, so that people from abroad needn’t travel to Switzerland.” The Swiss model was defended by Irish campaigner Tom Curran at the hearings of the Oireachtas Committee on Assisted Dying. He told them that he personally knew of eight Irish people who had ended their lives at Pegasos in 2023 alone. Many, he said, travelled via the UK or used a UK address to avoid detection from Irish authorities. Curran is the director of Exit International, a group lobbying for highly permissive assisted suicide laws. He has helped draft proposals to legalise the practice in Ireland. Another Swiss clinic, Dignitas, currently counts 123 Irish members and says it has assisted at least 13 Irish citizens to die since 1998. What happened to Maureen could happen anywhere assisted suicide is legal. In Switzerland, or anywhere else where assisted suicide is permitted, there is no legal obligation for clinics to inform relatives beforehand. The decision is treated as a private arrangement between the individual and the provider. Supporters of such laws argue that this protects personal autonomy, the belief that individuals should have the ultimate say over their own lives, including when and how they end. In such a framework, families may have no legal say in the decision, regardless of the emotional consequences. But critics warn it can isolate the person who wishes to die, and leave families blindsided and emotionally shattered. In some cases, families might even have a vested interest, financial or otherwise, in approving, or at least not opposing, the death of a relative. If Ireland were to legislate for assisted suicide, there is little to suggest that families would be informed in advance or have any legal say. This risks normalising death on demand and undermining protections for vulnerable people. The Swiss approach is not a model to emulate. It should serve as a warning, not an example.
recent image
The Point of No Return
LadyVal
 August 13 2025 at 04:43 pm
more_horiz
There is a well-known term often used in matters of movement whether physical or in reference to the procession of life’s events, “the point of no return.” Its meaning is rather clear, especially when associated with travel as it refers to that point at which there is no difference in the time required to “return” to the point of origin or to continue on to the planned destination. There is nothing intrinsically “moral” about this concept. It primarily involves more practical matters although the consequences of any choice can indeed be serious, especially in matters of travel! After all, if one runs out of gas before reaching home, that is far less problematic than running out of jet fuel before landing at LAX! Throughout life, moments do arise at which one has reached – one way or another – one such point of no return and, quite frankly, our nation has reached that point at this very moment in time! Few are unaware of how bad our cultural, political and especially, our spiritual condition has become in these United States. Indeed, we have already almost “crashed” the ship of state, but to date, we have been spared that consequence by a patient and loving Creator who has every reason – as He did with Israel of old – to abandon us to our wicked folly but instead has chosen otherwise! However, as in all things that God does with His children, having given us the knowledge of our evil and the opportunity for repentance and the restitution of what is good and just, He now awaits our response! Will we do what He demands of us as His loving and obedient children, or will we continue committing (or permitting) the present wickedness to go on unabated? If we do, the results have already been made quite clear to all but the intentionally blind! Today it can be said with perfect justification that America – indeed, the entire world! – has reached that point of no return – after which, there is naught but chaos. As with any such “cross-roads” or “tipping point,” there is a time at which the moment is seized or lost – and, once lost, cannot be retrieved. That moment will soon be upon the United States, and we as a people will have to abide by our final choice for good or ill. The matter involved began in earnest with the election to the Presidency of our nation, a man who was (and remains), a creation of the Global Deep State. He is the child of a white mother and a black father, a citizen of Kenya, then a colony of Great Britain. This fact alone made him ineligible to run for President as he was not a citizen of the United States by birth. His mother, who was a citizen, was seventeen at the time of his birth, one year too young for her to provide to him that citizenship by law. Eventually she married an Indonesian gentleman by the name of Lolo Soetoro. Her son – then known as Barry Soetoro – was then “chosen” by the globalist elites (as a boy, Barry was close to George H. W. Bush!), to be brought from Indonesia to California and enrolled in Occidental College as a foreign exchange student – a further admission of his citizenship status! Soon, however, Barry was moved again, this time to New York where he (supposedly) was enrolled at Columbia University although no one seems to remember seeing him there! Finally, this chosen young man was moved again to Harvard Law School and soon made Editor of the Harvard Law Review. As with Occidental and Columbia colleges, the young man is remembered by few if any of his supposed classmates at that institution. Upon “graduation,” the man now known as Barak Hussein Obama was conveyed into the protective arms of the Chicago Democratic party machine where he flourished, eventually being enrolled into that party’s political apparatus where he won every election in which he ran because his opponents were all disqualified for one reason or another by the Democrat controlled Chicago court system. Finally, he was chosen as that party’s presidential candidate, again overcoming every effort to disqualify him through the court system by the use of the legal concept of “standing!” This concept denied any person or group the right to bring a case questioning Obama’s eligibility! And so, with the blessings of both the courts (openly) and the Republican Party (quietly), “constitutionally ineligible” Barry “won” two terms as President. At the end of his second term, Obama worked diligently with the Democratic candidate in the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton, as she sought to defeat GOP candidate Donald Trump. Now, the selection of businessman Trump was a huge surprise to all of the Deep State – Democrats, Republicans, media mavens and bureaucrats! This unprecedented situation caused great fear in Washington that a non-politician might damage if not upset DC’s well-oiled corruption applecart! Worse, candidate Hillary was embroiled in a scandal in which a great many of her top-secret e-mails had been lost or otherwise misplaced, a matter of great importance given that she was then serving as Secretary of State in the Obama Administration! This top-level faux pas resulted in a desperate need to find something to deflect interest in Hillary’s problems while feeding the highly supportive “main stream” media’s efforts against her opponent, Donald Trump. The “strategy” involved resulted in the Steele dossier, an entirely fictional account of a claimed “relationship” between candidate Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin – and here is where the problem reaches from the past and into the present – and the future. When the charges of Trump’s “association” with Putin came to light, our nation’s intelligence agencies – the FBI, the CIA and the NSA – naturally investigated the matter. After careful consideration of all the information available – and there was a great deal! – it was determined by the professionals that there was no basis for the charges and that no collusion or even communication had taken place between the Russians and Donald Trump or his campaign. There were even those who believed that the Steele dossier was a strategy being used by the Clinton campaign to deflect interest away from the missing e-mails! These well documented conclusions were then brought to the attention of President Barack Obama and here is where the matter moves from the ordinary response by the intelligence community to something never before seen in any American election! For President Obama gave the information back to the agencies with instructions to FIND that corroboration between Trump and the Russians! No claim can be made that Obama was led to believe that such corroboration existed! He knew that was not the case, but he certainly wanted that scenario in hopes of throwing the election to Hillary whom he expected to continue his “remaking of America” in his (and her) socialist image! The proofs of the validity of these charges are simply overwhelming. Crimes were committed against not only Donald Trump but against those who served with him such as General Michael Flynn. The use of the nation’s statues and bureaucratic agencies to destroy a man who had been duly elected President by the people of the United States is without precedent and to the point at which no one who participated in these shocking crimes dares to come forth and deny anything! Rather, these creatures wait patiently in hopes that, when the chips are down, the Deep State will step in and prevent anything but the mildest of censures against the participants – thus allowing all to go on as before! But if that does indeed happen – and it is more than possible! – America has truly passed that point of no return and we are as dead as a nation as is the Roman Empire! And so now, all that left to us Americans is to wait and see what happens! Will justice prevail as it has failed to do for so many years? Will it again be a matter of “business as usual?” Or will truth, justice and the law return to now re-established constitutional government? Only time will tell.

Trending Topics

Recently Active Rooms

Recently Active Thinkers