You haven't yet saved any bookmarks. To bookmark a post, just click .

As a nation of economically dependent people relies upon a government for aid, alms, and financial support, a nation of weaklings and cowards dependent upon the physical protection of others does the same. Economic self-reliance is but one kind of independence; there are other types. The independence of physical safety and bodily integrity is another form of freedom, and an often overlooked and unconsidered one. People generally look to power/authority, usually governmental power/authority, for both physical and economic security. People who do not feel safe and secure, those who can not defend themselves or safeguard their own rights and interests, are more likely to tolerate police state tactics, mass surveillance, heavily armed policemen, unthinkably intrusive laws, etc.

The social condition of widespread debility can enable the growth of a powerful state, just as well as diversity can. Diverse societies are unstable and mistrusting societies. Mistrusting and unstable societies are societies that require a potentate to stay together and in order. Diversity, like physical weakness, effeminacy, and timidity, is fertile soil for statism to take root and grow.

While some might say that transgenderism masculates women to the same extent it emasculates men, thus leading to no net loss, this is not so. Women cannot be men. Not really. Masculine women, pumped up on male hormones or delusions of physical strength, are not really comparable to men. A masculine woman, except in the rarest of cases, is a cheap substitute for a real man, as a feminine or “gender dysmorphic” man is a cheap substitute for a real woman. A gender dysmorphic biological female can not fight like a man, and a gender dysmorphic biological male cannot breed like a woman. Both are basically dead weight everywhere but in Hollywood movies. Thus, you have really just lost both men and women and gained none.

Ultimately, it is fine to see transgenderism as a form of mass hysteria (think 17th Century Dutch “tulip mania”), because it is. And it is fine to have a problem with teachers normalizing transgenderism amongst the young, those whose minds are plastic and whose identities are unformed, since they are highly impressionable and easily disoriented, and liable to be manipulated or deceived and led on errant paths to misery and ruin. Just as it is fine to see the proliferation of those who identify as transgender, and the normalization of this bizarre and delusional pathology, as a function of the moral nihilism and relativism that defines our times. Indeed, one might even argue that the number of transgender folks is increasing rapidly for the same reason that hate hoaxes, like the recent Jussie Smollett debacle, are increasing rapidly, namely because everyone wants to be a victim and everyone wants to enjoy the many benefits of victimhood. The self-same Cultural Marxist social forces are incentivizing these two unrelated phenomena.

Nevertheless, the normalization of transgenderism (and to lesser extent homosexuality), serves another purpose, and we must not discount that purpose as being another motivation leftist elites possess for normalizing these things and flooding us with incessant propaganda and conditioning concerning them. An effeminate and weak (and especially a confused and delusional) population is more inclined to look to government for security. Thus, when the Cultural Marxist power structure seeks to normalize these bizarre behaviors and pathologies, it not only weakens the people, it strengthens itself.

A nation of weaklings and girlie men is an invitation to statism and totalitarianism. The weak and cowardly cannot defend themselves. They will not protect themselves. They will thus look to government for safety and security. This is likely another significant reason why the Cultural Marxists who rule over us are normalizing transgenderism and homosexuality, and now even calling masculinity itself “toxic”. They desire a nation of damsels ever in distress. Damsels can not defend themselves from external threats. They can not protect themselves from minor risks posed by ordinary -albeit violent- criminals, who fancy themselves eternal victims no matter how many innocents they victimize, and they especially can not defend themselves from tyrannical Marxist threats, which imagine themselves liberal democratic governments, no matter how illiberal or anti-democratic they have become.


by Esther Haas

I am an attorney. I have had my articles published at,, & I write under various pen-names: Amalric de Droevig Emmanuel Spraguer Esther Haas