Today’s “public” schools have become ideological, political, and religious indoctrination centers aimed at reprogramming and transforming America’s children. They are being sexualized as many are now being lured into mental traps that encourage sterilization and depopulation. New laws are being ratified prohibiting parents from hearing about their child’s transgender “transition.” This unethical trans ideology with its cruel medical interventions, including surgical mutilation to affirm subjective gender identity, strongly resembles the eugenics movement of the past. Tonight on Ground Zero, Clyde Lewis talks about GLEN GLENDA GLEN ROSS.
SHOW SAMPLE:
SHOW PODCAST:
https://aftermath.media/podcast/5-15-23-glen-glenda-glen-ross/
SHOW TRANSCRIPT:
Being an Old Horror and Science fiction buff there has been a place in my heart set aside for what critics called the worst movie director in history.
His name is Ed Wood Jr. He was infamously known for films like Bride of the Monster, and the film Plan 9 from Outer space. But one of the films he is rarely known for is a film about Transgenderism called Glen or Glenda.
In early 1953, the film was loosely based on the story of Christine Jorgensen, the first person widely known in the US to have had sex reassignment surgery having been born biologically a man.
It was shot in four days and you can tell. A large portion of the film is composed of stock footage with voiceover on top. It was more or less a documentary with some unintentional hilarious scenes of Bela Lugosi playing God.
It begins with five minutes of Bela Lugosi alone in some sort of mad scientist laboratory. He pontificates on the meaning of life, like in this, the film’s opening monologue:
“Man’s constant groping of things unknown, drawing from the endless reaches of time brings to light many startling things. Startling? Because they seem new. Sudden. But most are not new to the signs of the ages.”
Lugosi stares down at stock footage of a street scene and says:
“People, all going somewhere. All with their own thoughts, their own ideas. All with their own personalities. One is wrong because he does right. One is right because he does wrong. Pull the string! Dance to that which one is created for!”
I can only imagine what 1953 American audiences must have thought of this Lugosi intro. Once it finishes, we come to our first proper scene: a male transvestite has killed himself in a hotel room and the police have arrived.
It goes on to explain the tragedy of the transgender and transvestite -and the difficulty in breaking the news to girlfriends and family.
Wood of course at the time was with a woman named Delores Fuller. In the film Delores no longer struggles with Woodsundefined passion for women’s clothing and hands him a pink Angora sweater.
I met Deloris Fuller in Burbank, California during a Famous Monsters of Filmland convention. I was invited to touch the sweater undefined it was very soft and I kind of thought to myself no wonder Ed Wood wanted it.
Overall, I appreciate both the ambition and the sensibility of Glen or Glenda, despite its glaring problems. And seeing a film that at least is partially about transsexuality from the early 1950s – and a movie from that era that is 100% about not fitting into society’s norms – made me think about where we are in this debate in 2023.
A film about the struggle is compassionate and interesting for historyundefineds sake undefined but as we know the debate has now taken a dark turn where it is not just about gender reassignment surgery undefined but political coercion of minors to change their gender as they move through the most confusing times of their lives.
Children now are no longer taught basics – they are now being constantly programmed with extremist neo-liberal views.
Although millions of American parents send their children off to public school every day, imagining their kids’ days will be filled with reading, writing, arithmetic, science, history, sports and music, they’re not only in for a shock – but for total betrayal. Today’s “public” schools have become ideological, political and religious indoctrination centers aimed at reprogramming and transforming America’s children.
Kids are being taught to hate their own country, blame their elders for polluting and destroying the ecosystem and to see themselves and their parents as racists – or victims of racists. They are sexualized and corrupted, and many are now being lured into mental traps that encourage depopulation and eugenics directives.
New laws are being ratified prohibiting parents from even hearing about their child’s transgender “transition.”
Governor Jay Inslee of Washington state signed a bill allowing youth shelters to not report children there to their parents if the child is deemed a “runaway” seeking an abortion or “gender-affirming” irreversible surgeries.
Irreversible surgeries considered “gender-affirming care” under existing state law include removing a girl’s uterus and breasts and a boy’s genitals.
Inslee described the law as a way to “help young people through difficult times” by “taking a more compassionate developmentally appropriate and reasoned approach to support these youth as they access gender-affirming treatment and reproductive services.”
But Inslee with all of his so called liberal compassion and virtue signaling probably canundefinedt see the fact that he signed a law that allows directives that were once seen as deplorable after World War II.
But no problem undefined these types of sterilization programs were completely supported by the elite, and scientists who were champions of the Eugenics movements of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
As much as it might cause us a fair deal of displeasure and even an upset stomach to consider such ideas as the hold eugenics has on our presently troubled era, I believe that ignoring such a topic really does no one any favors in the long run.
This is especially serious, as leading World Economic Forum darlings like Yuval Harari flaunt such concepts as “the new global useless class” which Artificial intelligence, genetic engineering, automation and the Fourth Industrial Revolution is supposedly ushering in.
I have wanted for some time to address the controversy over children and sex reassignment surgeries and the coerced taking of Puberty blockers for kids with sexual dysphoria.
I do not want to speak bout it in a political and religious way because those are easy arguments that people make out of shock and that fact that this transhumanism places many people on the road to the uncanny valley.
The road to sex reassignment covers some very difficult terrain, ranging from hormone treatment and possibly surgery, to social stigma and discrimination. But in many European countries those wanting to have the reassignment legally recognized face extra challenges.
Citizens of Malta, Ireland, Denmark and Norway can simply tell authorities their decision.
Elsewhere the process requires judicial consent or even the diagnosis of a mental disorder. Switzerland, Greece and 18 other, mostly Eastern European, countries have a final hurdle: sterilization.
That is right sterilization. Something that rhymes a lot with eugenics directives from the early 20th century.
The requirement for sterilization has dark echoes of eugenics. In the early 1970s, Sweden became the first country in the world to allow transgender people to reassign their sex legally. It enforced a strict sterilization policy though, on the grounds that such people were mentally ill and unfit to care for a child.
The World Health Organization still lists “transsexualism”, which it describes as “a desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex”, as a mental and behavioral disorder.
The nationwide eugenics program ended in 1976 after 42 years, but sterilization remained a condition for sex reassignment until 2013; it had already spread to other countries when they started tackling the same issue.
Today’s strange trans ideology with its cruel medical interventions, including surgical mutilation, to affirm subjective gender identity strongly resembles the eugenics movement of the past.
The latter is now recognized as a malevolent and abusive force; but like evolution-based pseudoscientific racism, it was hailed in its day as the best and most responsible science, cheered on by the mainstream media, public school teachers, and the government. All that is true of our contemporary transgender ideology.
There’s more.
Endorsed by prestige academic opinion, eugenics focused on surgical sterilization for the “unfit.” Similarly endorsed by prestige opinion, transgender ideology welcomes the surgical removal of genitalia and even provides “eunuch” as a new possible trans identify. In the case of eugenics, sterilization was coerced, not a matter of personal preference.
But even in the 20th century undefined there were those who believed that science undefined no matter how cruel was warranted to eliminate defectives undefined and now as much as science is a champion of gender tinkering they too are supporting the sterilization of the gender confused.
Pushing trans theory on vulnerable young children, molding their brains before they’ve reached the age of consent, is hardly giving them a free choice in how they think of gender.
It is also cruel and unusual punishment to remove any sexual desires whatsoever undefined while in the process of dulling sexual desires and puberty.
It is a guaranteed win for those who support depopulation.
In fact, go back in time and you will find it isnundefinedt all that different.
Many respected Americans accepted eugenics. Margaret Sanger who was a founder of planned parenthood advocated a program of breeding for “the gradual suppression, elimination and eventual extinction, of defective stocks.
Dr. John Harvey Kellogg undefined founder of Kelloggundefineds Cereals, believed that eugenic methods would help save the white race and supported racial segregation. As governor of New Jersey, Woodrow Wilson signed a bill that forcibly removed reproductive rights from criminals or adults considered to be “feeble-minded.”
I have warned time and time again that the acceptance of mad science will come back and bite us. The mad science along with progressive acceptance of it is one of the reasons why we are at odds with things like Climate Change, vaccine requirements and now the issue of gender reassignment surgeries and the use of Puberty Blocking medications on young children.
Out of all of the mad science proposals it is the new progressive support of gender reassignment and Puberty blocking that needs to be called out as a Eugenics directive rather than a sociopolitical issue that creates derision and leads to accusations of Transphobia or Homophobia.
But again this is a bioethics eugenics concern that slowly breeds out certain kinds of people undefined and renders the victims sterile and unable to procreate.
Bioethics is the new way to water down thew evil of eugenics.
At first glance, bioethics might seem like just another branch of ethical philosophy where academics endlessly debate other academics about how many angels dance on the head of a pin in far-out, science fiction-like scenarios.
What many do not know, however, is that the seemingly benign academic study of bioethics has its roots in the dark history of eugenics. With that knowledge, the dangers inherent in entrusting some of the most important discussions about the life, death and health of humanity in the hands of a select few become even more apparent.
The practice of eugenics is returning to contemporary life in the treatment of transgendered children.
With the cooperation of the Family Court, and recently many bills have been signed into law where children as young as ten are being put on puberty-delaying drugs after being diagnosed with “gender identity disorder” or “gender dysphoria”.
There is the expectation that they will be moved onto cross-sex hormones at 16 and receive surgery to amputate their genitals at 18.
There are similarities between the eugenic sexual surgeries and drug treatments of the past and the transgendering of children now.
The ideas for both treatments come from scientists of sex such as biologists, endocrinologists and psychiatrists. Both practices are based on the idea that certain problematic behaviors have a biological basis and can be “cured” by treatments that alter sexual characteristics.
Historically, eugenics practice was directed at the control or elimination of the economic underclass, “morons”, prostituted women, criminals, gypsies, those deemed morally deficient and lesbians and gays.
The eugenic treatment of lesbians and gays in the past included surgeries such as castration, hysterectomy, vasectomy and lobotomy.
There were also eugenics directives and treatments to sterilize women that were on the Autistic Spectrum and that had Downs Syndrome.
Gay men and women were also tortured with something called Conversion Therapy.
If people would understand what is happening in contemporary America with regard to gender reassignment and the intentional blocking of puberty as a repackaged Eugenics directive undefined then maybe we would not need the arguments about who is trans or homophobic.
For about 30 years, from around 1900 to the late 1920s, America had an active and popular eugenics movement. Supporters of eugenics argued the public good, required removing from the population genes thought to cause low intelligence, or immoral, criminal or anti-social behavior.
Beginning with Connecticut in 1896, states passed laws requiring medical exams before issuing marriage licenses to make sure the unfit did not reproduce.
Indiana passed the first compulsory sterilization law in 1907, although other states had tried and failed before . Prominent Americans – among them Theodore Roosevelt, Stanford University President David Starr Jordan, W. E. B. Du Bois, and Margaret Sanger – supported the eugenics movement, as did such organizations as the National Federation of Women’s Clubs, the National Conference of Charities and Corrections, and various religious organizations. State Fairs included Better Baby contests.
As the list of its supporters indicates, eugenics was considered a progressive reform, related to the larger Progressive movement by its emphasis on the good of society and the use of science and rationality to achieve it.
Eugenics programs were being introduced where a selection of what can be seen as genetic defectives were chemically sterilized using drugs, some women were given hysterectomies and some men were castrated.
Now mind you, when science becomes extremist, militant and even political the technocracy behaves in the same way as it did at the turn of the century.
The open conspiracy, its strategy and tactics have been openly announced and discussed with clarity for nearly a hundred years. Whether it be identified as the Illuminati, Bilderberg, The Enterprise, The Octopus, or the Fabians there is nothing illegal about it. The open conspiracy is not secret, but secret things happen when these controllers are allowed to do their handiwork.
What they set out to do is human engineering – to ensure an evolutionary outcome prepped and ready for a golden age. I’ve neglected to tell you so far about the role pain and suffering play in this manufactured evolutionary theory.
Just as Hegel taught that history moves faster toward its conclusion by the way of warfare, so evolutionary socialists were taught by Hegel to see the pain and struggle as the precipitant of evolutionary improvement for the species, a necessary purifier eliminating the weak sheep from the breeding pool.
The truth is your government and the world agenda have created grade school drama with all of their well-publicized doomsday scenarios.
From Global Warming to COVID 19, we are seeing that pain and suffering are heading our way. The government-created crisis, masquerading as an unexpected external provocation, is an elementary Hegelian strategy. We all know this. It was the main theme in Orwell’s animal farm.
It has been the agenda by the secret societies for decades and the groups like Tavistock, Tri-Lateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations, the Committee of 300 and others are there to set the agenda, the action, the reaction and the solution that the people will clamor for by design.
People are now supporting the sterilization of children, children with sexual dysphoria undefined and since it has a political strategy of encouraging the LGBTQ community to fight for this sterilization undefined it again becomes similar to how a very famous and progressive figure one hundred years ago supported the castration and hysterectomies of women and children of color. Also abortions of minority babies.
By the 1920s, eugenics had become a global movement. There was popular, elite and governmental support for eugenics in Germany, the United States, Great Britain, Italy, Mexico, Canada and other countries. Statisticians, economists, anthropologists, sociologists, social reformers, geneticists, public health officials and members of the general public supported eugenics through a variety of academic and popular literature.
American eugenicists from a variety of disciplines declared certain individuals unfit, “feebleminded” or anti-social, which resulted in the involuntary sterilization of at least 60,000 people through 30 states’ laws by the 1970s.
These eugenicists disproportionately targeted Latinos, Native Americans, African Americans, poor whites and people with disabilities during the entirety of the 20th century.
Most Americans have absolutely no idea, but a very dark philosophy is spreading like wildfire among the global elite. This philosophy is an obsessive belief that humanity has become cancer that is destroying the earth. There are now large numbers of global leaders that are convinced that the exploding population of the world has become like a virus or a plague and that it must be combated as such.
In fact, it would be very difficult to understate just how obsessed many members of the global elite are with population control. The United Nations puts out position papers about it, universities have entire courses dedicated to it, radical population control advocates have been appointed to some of the highest political positions in the world, and some of the wealthiest people on the planet get together just to talk about it.
Those who believe in this philosophy are constantly talking about the need for “increased access” to abortion, contraception and gender reassignment of young children.
Gender reassignment undefined is another form of sterilization.
In the 20th century some proponents of eugenic sterilization argued that if vaccination was an acceptable public health measure, and compulsory vaccination was legal, then compulsory sterilization should be as well.
If there is something fundamentally evil lurking behind these processes which has any connection to the Anglo-American rise of fascism and eugenics nearly a century ago, then lets at least have the courage to explore that possibility.
It was after all, only by looking at this ugliness 80 years ago, that patriots were able to take appropriate measures to prevent a bankers’ technocratic dictatorship in 1933 and again during WW2.. so perhaps a similar display of courage to think the unthinkable might be worth the effort for those who might find themselves in a similar situation today.
Defending Eugenics directives couched in virtue signaling for the LGBTQ communities is still as deplorable today as it was 100 years ago.
Though males seeking to be transgendered today may be attracted to women or other men, it is recognized that the women are generally lesbians before they are diagnosed as “transgender”. Professionals involved in treating gender identity disorder in childhood are aware that three-quarters of the boys referred for diagnosis by their parents will be homosexual or bisexual when they reach adulthood.
The practice of transgendering children is a consequence of the increasing normalization of the practice of transgendering adults.
Male transgender activists argue that early intervention is vital to prevent what they see as “transgender” children from experiencing puberty. They say the physical changes of puberty will make it harder later on to achieve a convincing likeness of the desired sex.
Parents and professionals are told by transgender organizations and websites that transgender treatment is the only responsible way forward. And that it may be the only way to protect children from self-harm and suicide.
The effects of the drug treatments and sexual surgeries that make up the transgendering of children can damage their reproductive rights, as well as their bodily integrity and future health.
Treatment with puberty-delaying drugs leads to sterilization when followed by the administration of cross-sex hormones at 16 years old. As a result, semen and ova do not come to maturation. The long-term effects of these treatments are unknown.
Decades after the sterilization of the unfit was mostly abandoned, a similar practice is increasingly being carried out on children who are considered to be innately “transgender” because they are disobeying culturally acceptable gender roles.
As happened with eugenic practices of the past, many progressive people including many feminists, feel that transgendering children is a reasonable practice and have not yet begun to criticize it.
Children are diagnosed with “gender identity” disorder as a result of engaging in behavior unsuited to the child’s biological sex.
There is no physical test available, so clinicians rely on the accounts of the child and the parents. The diagnostic criteria for Gender Dysphoria in children include “a strong desire to be of the other gender or an insistence that he or she is the other gender” and the engagement in behaviors culturally associated with the other sex.
The effects of the drug treatments and sexual surgeries that make up the transgendering of children can damage their reproductive rights, as well as their bodily integrity and future health.
Treatment with puberty-delaying drugs leads to sterilization when followed by the administration of cross-sex hormones at 16 years old. As a result, semen and ova do not come to maturation. The long-term effects of these treatments are unknown.
Decades after the sterilization of the unfit was mostly abandoned, a similar practice is increasingly being carried out on children who are considered to be innately “transgender” because they are disobeying culturally acceptable gender roles.
As happened with eugenic practices of the past, many progressive people including many feminists, feel that transgendering children is a reasonable practice and have not yet begun to criticize it.
But perhaps it would be less of an issue if people were aware of just how deplorable it was in the past, even when all of the so-called progressive people were allegedly trusting that science and sterilizing all who they saw as unfit.
undefined
undefined
