Monday, June 23, 2014 - Volume 5, Number 3 – Page 2

© Copyright 2014, The Ultrapolis Project.  All Rights Reserved.


The GBLT’s Transgender Highway to a Genderless Utopia

And Other News from the Gender Identity Front

·         Back to Page 1

·         News from the Gender Identity Front





The Transgender Highway to a Genderless Utopia

Journey Through Contradiction, Simplistic Templates, and Self-Esteem


UWFR Prediction Comes True


Just three months after our prediction that the organized GBLT movement would try to bring gender-neutral bathrooms to a location near you, the effort was brought with full force to Houston.  A new ordinance, presented as an ‘emergency’ measure, sought to use transgender people (previously referred to as transsexuals) as a vehicle for dislodging the principle of identifying males  and females by biological reality (that is, by their actual body parts), for public accommodation purposes.  City hall was packed for days of testimony with activists on both sides of the controversial measure.


The Equal Rights Ordinance introduced by Houston’s Mayor Anise Parker, the first elected openly-gay mayor of a major American city, was backed by organized far-left GBLT institutions based outside of Texas.  It included a provision that spelled out the requirement to allow anyone of any gender to go to in their bathroom of their choice, with the only limitation being that they needed to “look” the part.  Any woman who objected to a biologically male person from entering a women’s dressing room could be fined, and possibly even arrested, for violating someone’s rights.  That provision was ultimately removed from the final law after some churches got wind of the emergency measure, and strongly objected.


True Lies, True Aims


The purpose of this particular provision had nothing to do with transgender needs, even if they were used as the excuse for the law.  How do we know that?  Their arguments reveal it.  First, once one got past all the accusations of bigotry against anyone who objected to the law, the main arguments for supporting the new law were aimed at the ‘silliness’ of heterosexual modesty.  In other words, women who said they were not comfortable with having a fully-equipped male sharing their restrooms or dressing rooms were advised to ‘get over it,’ and that being uncomfortable with members of the opposite sex in compromising situations was backward and silly, and not a basis for continuing to deny a transsexual person their right.


GBLT Contradiction


But, what is this right that is being, and would continue to be, denied the transgender?  The answer is: the right to NOT BE UNCOMFORTABLE in compromising situations with members of the opposite “perceived” sex.  So, apparently, according to the GBLT leaders, it is unreasonable to expect the one transgender person in 10,000 to be uncomfortable and put up with using facilities with other people who ‘feel’ like the opposite sex, but it is not unreasonable to expect the 9,999 others to ‘get over’ their discomfort with someone who is actually built like the opposite sex.  In short, the GBLT folks are saying that it is too onerous (and hateful) to expect the transgender to do with perceptions and feelings what they now want all heterosexuals to do with physical reality.


From the ‘Pro-Diversity’ Horse’s Mouth


Secondly, that genderless bathrooms are the true goal was evidenced by the enormous amount of GBLT discussion online, especially on Facebook, questioning the need for male and female bathrooms in the first place.  To wit, some sample comments:


I need to go to THIS church in drag next Sunday and take a s**t. F**k...WE ALL DO!!!!


Well since the Romans didn't finish the job  [of killing all the Christians] someone has to do it.



Oops, sorry, wrong quotes. Those were just a small sample of the comments displaying tolerance and respect for diverse opinions by people who, no doubt, think of themselves superior in intellect, tolerance, and compassion, than those they criticize. 


Urinals Belong in Unisex Bathrooms!


These are some comments more specific about their views on people’s objections to the ordinance as originally written:


I have never understood the obsession with separate bathrooms anyway, honestly. With the exception of urinals, it's all stalls, and I think the majority of the population doesn't care…



In Europe, Unisex bathrooms are the norm. Not at all a surprise to be standing at a urinal in a Paris bar, and have a woman enter to use a stall. Why are Americans SO hung up on sex and bodily functions?




Editor’s Note:  Having been to Europe, this is not the norm everywhere, but rather more commonly the norm in gay bars (as it is in the U.S., and has been for years), and in bars that are not frequented by conservative Jews, Muslims, or Christians.  These are not places where a guy is likely to bring his mother, so the chances of him pulling out his member to relieve himself while she is next to him washing her hands is nil. In any case, Europe is in a marriage and childbearing crisis, where fewer and fewer Europeans are getting married and having children.  In fact, the native population is declining, and is only being replenished by very conservative Muslims coming in from outside Europe, most who have no tolerance for anything approximating GBLT rights. Thus, Europe may not be a model we want to follow.


Really, do you have men's and women's rooms in your homes?



That last one is so stupid because it is trying to say we don’t need separate bathrooms because we don’t have them in private homes.  But, all residential bathrooms are single person anyway, and that is already allowed, and nobody is arguing about single-person bathrooms.


The point is, almost all the logic argued by the GBLT folks was that the GBLT experience should applied to everyone, by law if need be, and we don’t need separate bathrooms because all gender differences are just artificial “socially-constructed” anyway.


Continued column 2 >



Ultrapolis World Forecast & Review

Ultrapolis Project – ultrapolisproject.com



Editor: Marco Antonio Roberts

Copy Editor: Michael Alberts

Contributing Editors:

Mark Eastman

Mark Steele





Gay Cause Gains at Fort Worth Convention Center. Unknown to most people, efforts by Log Cabin Republicans succeeded in removing some of the more strident anti-gay language that had been in the platform for years.  However, that success was overshadowed by the introduction of a new plank into the platform calling for the state to not prohibit reparative therapy.  If that sounds like a double negative, it is.  The plank is a reaction to new laws in California and New Jersey prohibiting the delivery of such therapy.  Thursday, the Houston Chronicle reported that the Texas State Party Chairman publicly came out against the added plank.  More on this topic in our next issue.





< From column 1


What Happened to Trans Discomfort?


But, wait!  Would this not be a problem for the transgender person who is uncomfortable with sharing restrooms with members of the perceived opposite sex?  Was that not the whole reason it was so important to let them in the ‘other’ bathroom?  Did they not argue that it was “hateful” to expect a pre-operation transgender person to use the bathroom that had persons of the perceived opposite sex?  The answer, of course, is that this does not actually make any sense - it is a blatant contradiction; the transgender are being used, and as a constituency of somewhere between one in 10,000 to one in 20,000 people, they have almost no voting footprint, even within the GBLT community.


Simplistic Templates, Complex Truths


There were other arguments for and against the measure, and we do not have the room here to detail.  Let me just add that on a broader level, pro-gender neutrality folks likened the distinctions between male and female to that of black and white races.  This is liberal-progressivism at its most intellectually lazy and simplistic.  Though scientific evidence continues to pile up against their gender-neutral view of the two sexes, they are stuck in the 1960’s, and they see everything through that view.  That the world is more complex than that, and that human variations are not all of the same kind, escapes them.  And, this is the reason why I touch again on this subject.  There are reasons for norms based on heterosexual behavior that are quite fundamental that have developed over the centuries, but because they have been taken for granted for so long, most people don’t really know how they work; they simply follow them, as almost all humans do in most things, by habit and gut reaction.


Perennial Advantage of the Rebel


This is a very important point, and one you will not hear at all in most mass media.  We, as humans, follow hundreds, if not thousands, of social norms every single day, even every hour and every minute we are next to another human being.  We do not have the luxury of time to think and reason every single act, so we act on habit, and the training and education we received as children.  They are built in as emotional reactions on purpose, like recoiling from touching a stranger’s bare skin, or being instinctively uncomfortable with burping in someone’s face (if you are educated that way). Norms are meant to be automatic.   The trade-off is that, unless we actually spend time thinking about it, we are not generally prepared to explain why each particular norm is important or how it affects society in general, or even us in particular.  This is why revolutionaries always have an initial polemical advantage.   It is far easier to be versed in arguments when you ardently oppose the status quo than when you have paid no attention to it.


This is not to say norms cannot or should not be changed.  It is to say that norms should be understood before they are considered for change. And, no one should be allowed to say that any person expressing an opinion that does not agree with one’s own should be the target of verbal abuse, or outright punishment, or to unilaterally declare any notion beyond discussion.  To be clear, saying, “you are wrong”, or “I object to your behavior on moral grounds” is not verbal abuse.  Saying, or joking, that you wish a group of people dead or killed, is.


Why the Heated Argument?


So, what is the source of all this vitriol?  Why is this gender-neutral concept so important to the left-controlled GBLT movement, and the left in general?  By the same token, many people who strongly support this concept ask me why I care so much to oppose it anyway  (they usually say this when they are running out of arguments).  My answer is, if it is not important, why do they care so much to support it so strongly?  In any case, most GBLT people, probably because of their own personal struggles with their sexuality during adolescence, are intensely attuned to their sense of self-esteem, and often couple it with a nurtured resentment toward society’s norms.  So, they attack anything that makes them feel, even in the slightest way, as “less than” the general population, and a social norm making a distinction at all makes them feel that way.


Again, this is part of the larger far left-wing, liberal-progressive movement, where, for example, women’s self-esteem is actually being used as a formal argument to force the military to include women in combat – despite the fact that 9 out of 10 women in the service oppose the move, and despite studies that have suggested problems with this.  It is not about women in the service or about an effective military; it is about far-left, liberal-progressive women not wanting to feel that there is a difference between them and men by way of acknowledging a distinction that might suggest that, as a group, they are not ‘equal’ to men in physical strength. This is not a secret – they openly say self-esteem is a primary issue.


Ode to Self-Esteem


This is too bad, because people focused on self-esteem will always be unhappy.  There is no way to be equal to, or be the same as, every other person in every way possible. 


Continued column 3 > 


< From column 2


A person who is blind or deaf is not “less than” most other people.  But, the disadvantage of blindness or deafness is real, even if it does enhance other senses.   Yet, even there we now have folks who want to deny children the opportunity to hear, lest it imply that being deaf is not “as good as” hearing.  (Please, I am fully aware that the arguments are more nuanced than that, but that is the end result of these new notions – to say that never hearing Mozart’s “Ode to Joy” is just as good as hearing it, is to justify denying some children a chance at being part of the larger world, of enjoying it in greater measure, all in the name of the self-esteem of those who will never be able to hear anything).


The Path of Denial


No matter how many rules we change, how much we try to force others to act like they agree, or how much we change words to obscure the reality of the human differences, we all essentially know what we see – and what others see.  That’s why some people get so angry at the mere suggestion that a difference in them has a real consequence in life – because deep down, they are afraid it is true.


The Path of Knowing Thyself


I am different than most people, probably in more ways than most, and in many ways not for the better.  Many of my personal traits are not an advantage, and I would not promote their emulation, nor demand their elevation.


The way I see it, the thing to do when one has a peculiar situation is to face it, accept it, and then do the best one can to not disrupt everyone else’s life just to accommodate one’s own sense of self - or aid comfort in one’s own skin.


The way I see it, only then can one walk among the others, sure-footed in the knowledge that one’s sense of self is not dependent on anything those others, kind or not, will ever say or do.


Description: Description: cid:image003.jpg@01CD8765.85884780

Other News from the Gender Identity Front


Bodies Under Attack


On April Fool’s Day of this year, students at the esteemed Ivy League Dartmouth College, occupied the college president’s office in attempt to force the president to implement their left-wing demands regarding a wide range of issues, including gender-neutral bathrooms, the right to be treated as any gender regardless of actual physical identity, and to free sex-reassignment surgery (end to end, this process can cost up to $50,000, plus ongoing expensive hormone therapy).  Without these demands in place, the students said their “bodies are already on the line, in danger and under attack at Dartmouth.”  This was no joke.


Required GBLT Classes


On April 30, at the University of Minnesota, similar demands were presented to the school’s administrators, and were signed by 700 faculty and students.  The administration says the group presenting the demands refuses to discuss the demands.  Included among them are, of course, more gender-neutral bathrooms (already available at the university), and that “all students be required to take one course that deals with gender non-conforming issues in the Gender, Women, and Sexuality Studies Department or any of the courses endorsed by the GLBTA Programs Office.”


Murder = Free Trans Surgery


In January of this year, A federal appeals court ruled that a person who violently murdered his/her wife (and mother of their son) with a wire, nearly severing her head, was entitled to a costly taxpayer-paid sex-reassignment surgery.  This free benefit is not available to most transgender people who have not violently murdered another human being.  The cost of the benefit is equal to about the total federal income taxes paid by a middle class household over a period of four to five years.


To Cut or Not to Cut


On June 13 (June 12 online), The Wall Street Journal published a highly controversial opinion column authored by Dr. Paul McHugh, titled “Transgender Surgery Isn't the Solution”, questioning the value of sex-reassignment surgery.  A response column in Media Matters hotly challenged the claims by Dr. McHugh.  In our review of both columns, only the first cited specific studies to support its position (though some were old), while the second only presented the stated positions of the American Psychological and American Psychiatric Associations.  It appears that there is not much current research in this area today.


Description: cid:image003.jpg@01CD8765.85884780


Our forecast record cannot be beat.  One can follow the herd chasing the latest hyperbolic, melodramatic, and soon-forgotten micro-trend on Facebook and Twitter, or one can be wisely and judiciously in front of it with UWFR. 


Comments may be directed to contactproject@ultrapolisproject.com, or if you receive the newsletter email, also via a reply to the email address from which you receive it. OR CLICK BELOW






 Main Index of the Ultrapolis World Forecast & Review


© Copyright 2014, The Ultrapolis Project – All Rights Reserved.