Sunday, May 14, 2017

Shocking new DNA study reveals that human beings are divided into two genders!

There’s some additional bad news out there for the “party of science” (as the Democrats have taken to calling themselves) and particularly for transgender advocates. But even if you have no interest in such social justice topics, a new study published by geneticists in Israel is still pretty fascinating. The Liberty Council has a report this week on new research material coming from Israel’s Weizmann Institute of Science, where scientists have undertaken an exhaustive study of genetic differences between the two genders which go far beyond just what’s found in their 23rd chromosomal pair or what sorts of genitalia they display externally. And some of this research could have far reaching implications in terms of fighting diseases and solving other medical mysteries on top of sorting out this “gender vs sex” question which liberals keep trying to push.

A recent study released from Israel’s Weizmann Institute of Science refutes propaganda from LGBT activists who detach gender completely from sex and promote that men can become so-called “women” by merely “identifying” as female, and vice-versa.

Professor Shmuel Pietrokovski and Dr. Moran Gershoni, both researchers from the Weizmann Institute’s Molecular Genetics Department, “looked closely at around 20,000 protein-coding genes, sorting them by sex and searching for differences in expression in each tissue. They eventually identified around 6,500 genes with activity that was biased toward one sex or the other in at least one tissue, adding to the already major biological differences between men and women.”

You can access the study here in .pdf form and browse through it.

They discovered all manner of fascinating things, some of which seem obvious in retrospect while others are quite surprising. They identified specific genes which are directly associated with hair growth in skin cells. These genes are far more widespread in men than women, showing up in different places. (The result of that should be obvious.) One of the more surprising developments (at least to me) came in the area of mammary glands. Both males and females have all of the “equipment” to support lactation, but it’s almost never seen in men. The study identified specific genes in men which apparently turn off that process since it’s not needed. Some others would be easier to predict, such as higher levels of muscle building genes in men as opposed to higher levels of genes which are related to fat storage in women. The list goes on.

But mostly, this is just one more brick in the wall for the folks who seem to insist on “listening to the scientists” except when it’s inconvenient to do so. Whenever this debate comes up, someone inevitably tries to point to a single study done years ago hinting that the brain waves of transgender people match those of people of the opposite sex. But further research showed that those results couldn’t be reliably repeated under laboratory conditions. To boot, experts in the field have already admitted that they can’t tell a male brain from a female brain in those scans to begin with. By comparison, any deep dive into readily measurable and repeatable genetic studies shows the true nature of our species, as well as the striking and generally wonderful difference between our two genders which are established basically at the moment of conception.


The Handmaid's Tall Tale

Leftists might be on to something if they replaced Christian red dresses with Islamic black burkas. But they ignore the obvious.   

“The Handmaid’s Tale” is a new TV series based on the 1985 novel of the same name. Don’t bother watching or reading either, though both are in the news. In summary, the theme is anti-men, anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, anti-American, anti-conservative and perverts any other aspect of American culture that is currently being destroyed by the Left.

There. Hopefully, that just prevented you from wasting your time.

“Progressives” are already equating the Margaret Atwood novel-turned-series to the faith community and those with any degree of a moral compass whose values inform their votes, their entertainment, educational choices, etc. In other words, the Left has found another tool by which to inflict cultural criticism on those who refuse to consent to the unhinged Left’s demand for consensus of their Rainbow Mafia agenda and their destruction of the First Amendment to silence all critics.

The novel rightly exposes the dangers of extremes of thought and indoctrination. That is its singular value. Otherwise, the parallels drawn are clearly meant to frame America as a nation on the verge of collapse to fundamentalist Christian theocrats.

The story goes that a mythical country governed by a totalitarian theocracy, formerly the United States of America, the Republic of Gilead is formed. America has been overthrown through the mass assassinations of the president and most members of Congress. The villains are, you guessed it, in a Christian fundamentalist movement organized under the banner, “Sons of Jacob.” In other words, let’s not only attack through creative writing the faith of those who believe in Jesus Christ, but include Judaism by evoking Jacob, the son of Isaac and grandson of Abraham, the Jewish patriarch.

The novel brought to the screen also notes that the post-American nation is structured into a “hierarchical regime of Old Testament-inspired social and religious fanaticism.” Uh, remember the entire Old Testament is about Israel and the Jewish people and the New Testament is about Jesus Christ, a Jew, whose teachings of liberty, grace and righteous living fulfill and/or replace the law.

This fairy-tale “Christian” coup results in a nation where women are kept for reproductive and sexual purposes, with essentially no other function. Women are not permitted education, to work or to have access to money. A national population, portrayed as shrinking due to environmental toxicity resulting from war, has few fertile woman. Hence, “Handmaids” are designated for sex at the homes of the elite to perpetuate their lineage. The first episode released on April 26 featured “disobedient” women shocked with cattle prods and having one eye removed, with the third episode featuring the bank accounts of females being frozen following the new government’s decree that women cannot own property.

Of all the religions currently practiced in 2017, there is one which embraces the open abuse of women, honor killings and the subjugation of women as property, preventing them any rights of property — and it’s neither Judaism nor Christianity. It is, of course, Islam of the sharia variety. But you won’t hear Hollywood address that 800lb gorilla.

Don’t miss the fact that when Atwood, a Canadian, wrote her clearly anti-Semitic, anti-Christian book in 1985, she was living in West Berlin within close proximity to the dividing wall that separated the despotism of Eastern Germany from the freedoms of West Germany. So, during the Reagan-Thatcher years, this malcontent living on the free side of the German wall composed this writing that, today, is being used by the same angry Left to malign anything that resembles an institution or individual with a belief system that notes good versus evil or decency versus indecency.

Describing in the first-person her methods of construction of the story, Atwood, featured in the New York Times on March 10, 2017, couldn’t contain her dripping disdain for the founding of America. “The Republic of Gilead is built on a foundation of the 17th-century Puritan roots that have always lain beneath the modern-day America we thought we knew.”

There are many things responsible for today’s messed up culture. The Puritans and Pilgrims who fled European religious persecution are not one of them.

One little piece of information that proves this resurrected fantasy is intended to deride the political and cultural Right is the title of the NYT’s piece: “Margaret Atwood on What the Handmaid’s Tale Means in the Age of Trump.” And, Ladies and Gentlemen, there you have the entire reason this 32-year-old novel is relevant to anyone.

Let’s take the only valuable point of the book and make a more intellectually honest argument. Remember, there is agreement that there is danger in the extremes of thought and indoctrination for the purpose of power. So, answer the following by indicating if the statements best describe the political and cultural Left or Right.

In Berkeley, conservative speakers have been met with leftist rioters dressed in all black with masks and hoods, waving flags that resemble the flag of the 1933 Communist Party of Germany. They’re setting fires, breaking windows and threatening violence. Who was eliminating speech, Left or Right?

The day after the inauguration of the 45th president, a mass of females gathered on the Washington Mall wearing hats fashioned to represent the reproductive organs of those who are biologically female and angry. Cheered remarks featured at this gathering included a female singer claiming she’d entertained the thought of blowing up the White House and a poem that claimed the American president had incestuous thoughts toward his daughter. Which group, Left or Right, objectified women as only being “true women” if they’re uniform in this angry ideology?

Which group, while focusing on the “rights” of women, ends the lives of millions of their own gender in the womb as some statement of empowerment called choice?

Ironically, Atwood, in her NYT piece, noted that “the control of women and babies has been a feature of every repressive regime on the planet” as evidenced by genocide, rape and infanticide.

The emotional incontinence on the Left is always — always — a device to hide the absolute failings of their arguments and fallacies of belief. “The Handmaid’s Tale” is no different. What the Left claims to fear most are the exact same tools and tactics they use to impose their agenda and indoctrination on the rest of America. Indeed, they bear more resemblance to the Tale’s villains than they’d ever care to admit.


A most dangerous form of Western Liberalism

The outcry against UK Liberal Democrats leader Tim Farron’s delay in stating whether or not he personally believes homosexuality to be a sin — despite he and his party supporting LGBTI rights including marriage — has pointed to an emerging threat to the coherence of western liberal societies. It hinders the integration of people with strong religious convictions.

A sound and integrated liberal society is one in which all its members are committed to its liberal and tolerant ideals, at least as far as the civil rights of others are concerned. But outcries like that against Farron send the message that you must not only give such support to the full civil rights of your fellow citizens but you must morally agree with their behaviour — and believe that God does too. (After all, discussions of ‘what is sin’ do, as Farron tried vainly to point out, involve theological questions.)

The thing about those with deep religious convictions is that, whether rightly or wrongly, they believe that they have an overriding obligation to obey God in such matters. This is true of the devout Muslim, and for that matter Christian, Jewish or any other serious religious adherent. Therefore insisting they must personably agree with behaviour which they, again rightly or wrongly, believe God has declared to be sin simply becomes a price too high to pay for inclusion in liberal society. So they are left outside.

The problem is that not only is such an insistence in itself illiberal — after all one of the marks of a liberal society is that its members tolerate and give freedom to views and behaviour they may not agree with — but that by setting a barrier to the inclusion of the devout creates a recipe for a dangerously divided nation. It is a most dangerous form of Western liberalism.


Australia: Anti-Islam candidate claims discrimination

The founder of a controversial anti-Islam party wants the operators and venue manager of a Queensland pub to undergo "anti-discrimination training" after barring her from the site, tribunal documents reveal.

Love Australia Or Leave Party founder Kim Vuga, a grandmother who rose to prominence after starring on SBS program Go Back To Where You Came From, made headlines when she and her members were blocked from meeting at the Beach House Hotel in Hervey Bay in April 2016.

The stoush has now made its way to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal, with Ms Vuga claiming she was discriminated against because of her political beliefs and seeking orders including a public apology in writing, as well as "anti-discrimination training" for the pub's operators and venue manager.



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here


No comments: