Future historians will wonder how the sexual desires of only three to four percent of the population became the fulcrum on which an entire worldview was dislodged and overturned. A partial answer is that the media are to blame. Back in 1993, a cover story in the Nation identified the gay rights cause as the summit and keystone of the culture war: All the crosscurrents of present-day liberation struggles are subsumed in the gay struggle. The gay moment is in some ways similar to the moment that other communities have experienced in the nation’s past, but it is also something more, because sexual identity is in crisis throughout the population, and gay people—at once the most conspicuous subjects and objects of the crisis—have been forced to invent a complete cosmology to grasp it. No one says the changes will come easily. But it’s just possible that a small and despised sexual minority will change America forever.

We have gone beyond gay people to allow transgender people — fewer than one percent of the population — to change America forever.

Progressives! They make a desert and call it peace. They carve a gash and call it a vagina. They make us all insane, and call the sane crazy.

If you want to save yourself and your children from this doom, turn your back on it now. Let the dead bury their dead. Let our finest surgeons gouge holes into our mentally ill young people, and call them heroes.

What about the Hippocratic Oath? Here you have someone declaring on the pages of The New York Times that the surgery he is about to have will not make him happier, and in fact may drive him to suicide. But he doesn’t care. He wants that he wants. In a just order, those surgeons would be charged with a crime if they go through with this. Desire is the only criterion of health, is that where we are now? What if someone desires to have their legs amputated? Or to commit suicide? Where are the limits?

Nihilists. We are nothing but nihilists. We are wicked and deserve to be judged.

UPDATE: From Andrea Long Chu’s Go Fund Me appeal for surgery:

Transition is expensive. I’m lucky enough to have insurance that covers hormones and (most of) vaginoplasty, which I am getting in November. Everything else, including facial feminization surgery, hip augmentation surgery, vocal surgery, is considered “cosmetic,” and therefore insurance won’t cover it. That makes paying out of pocket the only option. I live on a stipend from NYU, where I’m a doctoral student, plus money I make writing freelance. I’m hoping to sell a trade book in the next year, but that remains to be seen, and even if it’s a good deal it may not free up the funds necessary for my surgeries. Dysphoria can be hard to describe. I’ve said elsewhere it feels like heartbreak. I like to talk a big talk about how all transition-related surgeries are cosmetic, and they are—no one wants to transition into an ugly person—but it’s also true that without any of these surgeries my suicide risk is much, much higher.

Give me money for surgery or I might kill myself. Or, according to me in The New York Times, give me money for surgery and I might kill myself anyway. It’s my right!

UPDATE.2: Transgender columnist at the NYT miffed that Chu is off-Narrative:

It is always good to have diverse trans voices on the page. I love that. But calling the business “a wound” instead of the gooshy miracle it is? Emphasizing misery and suffering and self-loathing? Is that what is most needed to be shouted into the megaphone at this perilous hour? — Jennifer Finney Boylan ???? (@JennyBoylan) November 25, 2018

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

“Gooshy miracle.”

UPDATE.3: On Chu’s website, he posts a PDF link to a paper he delivered earlier this year at a Columbia University conference. This is the kind of thing they’re talking about at one of America’s great universities. The paper is titled “Did Sissy Porn Make Me Trans?” There are no images, but don’t click through to it and start reading unless you are prepared to go to an extremely dark place. I almost didn’t post this here, but after thinking about it, I concluded that it’s actually vitally important to know.

I’m going to summarize the paper for those who don’t want to read it. Again, I cannot caution you strongly enough about its content, and the pornographic images Chu describes in detail in the paper.

The paper’s title comes from a comment Chu saw on an online forum. “Sissy porn,” we learn from the paper, is a genre in which submissive men are forced to have sex with other men, in such a way that their masculinity is forcibly taken from them. Chu says this genre is also called “forced feminization porn.” Chu says that sissy porn explicitly intends to turn male viewers into transsexuals, in part by “instruct[ing] them to understand their addiction to the genre as constitutive of their own feminization.” Chu writes:

Now Jon would hardly be the first closeted trans woman whose gender dysphoria felt like porn addiction. Indeed, the internet is full of women like this, if you know where to look. The phenomenon is common enough, in fact, to have given rise to an entire subgenre of anxiety fielding on the popular discussion website Reddit. In typical post from 2014, titled “Did sissy porn make me trans or was I trans all along?,” one user writes: “About 3 years ago, I discovered sissy hypno videos [that’s “hypno” like short for “hypnotism”], which in a nutshell are flashing subjective images telling you to wear panties, be girly… and even take hormones. I became completely obsessed with these videos….”

This person is now “95% sure she is trans,” writes Chu.

Now, imagine a confused 12-year-old boy — perhaps one experiencing same-sex desires — finding sissy porn on his smartphone, and giving himself over to it. It’s only a few clicks away.

Chu goes on to talk about the dynamics of sissy porn. Here’s is a key portion, one I can quote here

Sissyhood is not the obliteration of subjectivity, but its diminishment. Sissies have selves, in other words, but these selves are simplified, emptied, dumb. The technical term for this is bimboification. Numerous captions instruct spectators to submit themselves to hypnosis, brainwashing, brain-melting, and other techniques for scooping out intelligence.

Chu describes, unprintably, that the porn video’s explicit instructions order the viewer to surrender his entire to the sexually dominant male’s desires. The act of sexual submission is not only castration, and the willed destruction of the submissive’s masculinity, it is — this is crucial — also the willed destruction of personhood. Of sexualizing the desire for obliteration.

What Chu describes here is the process of demonic possession. If that is what is in Andrea Long Chu’s head, no wonder he is depressed and suicidal. This is profoundly evil stuff.

UPDATE.4: Read this comment. Do you let your kid have a smartphone and/or unsupervised Internet access? You might want to rethink that: