The genderqueers

I just learned a new word: genderqueer.

One word, not two. And it’s a hoot.


The news story that enlightened and amused me comes from preciously elitist Mills College in the far-out-left city of Oakland, California, where my sister once settled, not surprisingly, but that’s another story.

Those who keep up with the absurdities in the politically correct precincts, and Mills College certainly qualifies — as does all of Oakland — are familiar with the sexually confused and how they paint themselves and demand to be honored.

I put to you, however, that most of these young folks, and they are almost exclusively wet behind the ears, who claim sexual confusion are not actually sexually confused. They are the horrendously spoiled, faddish spawn of upper-class, poorly informed America.

Privileged kiddies in rebellion.

Yes, this is a fad of the ruling class in a nation that has not known true troubles since the 1930s, and who remembers those times? Virtually no one.

That these particular ones at Mills are kiddies in rebellion is obvious. Look at the name of the organization of these allegedly sexually confused kiddies: Mouthing Off!  With a flippant exclamation point! They probably stomp their little feet while saying it.

They say there’s a difference between gender and sex. They say they’ll pick their own personal pronouns, thank you.

The news story says this growing phenomenon “is challenging anew the limits of Western comprehension and the English language.”

The only way this childish nonsense challenges anything successfully is when actual grownups are cowed into accepting it. And cowing grownups in the United States is becoming easier by the day.

Ole Felipe’s solution: Have the kids bend over, and get out the paddle.

Then write on the blackboard 100 times:

I am not a genderqueer. I am Molly Johnson from Greenwich, Connecticut. My mom organizes luncheons, and my dad works for the ACLU. They are my best friends! I’ve never had to work a day in my life, and I adore my BMW.

24 thoughts on “The genderqueers

  1. Oh, let them be. During the Nixon Administration, we went through the stage of s/he, womyn, and similar nonsense, and we got through it. There are more important things to worry about — like a decline in reading, nannyism, and a welfare state.


    1. Ms. Shoes: What you went through, in those distant days, was the beginning. It’s getting worse, far worse.

      Not to say the decline in reading, the nannyism and the growing welfare state are not problems too.


    2. These are the same young people (with their faculty partners in crime) who have turned university campuses over the last decades into little North Koreas where speech and ideas are ham-handedly controlled. It is just as important as the decline in reading, the nanny state, etc. Or more so. That’s what I think.

      This is no trivial phenomenon.


    1. Christine: I am puzzled as to where you found me name-calling in the post. Where is this name I have called? The sole possible contender for the name-calling nomenclature is “spawn.” However, I don’t think that is so bad. It means children, offspring, etc.

      Were I to call these foolish kids genderqueers, now that would be name-calling in my book. But I did not call them that. I repeated what they call themselves.

      So … I await clarification.

      But allow me to point out the truth. I do not name-call. Ever.

      And why all the emotion? Because it’s something to get worked up about. More people should get worked up about it.


      1. Ooooh, I understand. You are quite correct in that I used those adjectives to describe a sector of a generation of Americans. I guess I have a narrower definition of name-calling. I think of name-calling as being something tossed toward an individual.

        But I’m sticking with my description of these kiddies because I think it’s accurate. You are, of course, allowed to hold an opposite view. No problem.


        1. So, stripped of the labeling, what I understand your argument to be is this. It is one thing to live a highly individual life and live outside of the expectations of society–you did this and you are proud of it. It is quite another thing to expect to be praised and/or coddled for choosing a unique and unpopular path. You never were and you never had those expectations. And that is why you are so contemptuous of the people you are deriding, not because of the particular path they have chosen. In fact, to be contemptuous of people who choose an outsiders path would be highly hypocritical of you, considering the life path you chose. Right?
          Labeling people is a trick to get others on your side without convincing them with your logic. I think you are better than that.


      2. Christine: I would liken this exchange to a Southern Baptist and a Hindu having a conversation on religion. There is no baseline, no common ground.

        I’ll be the Hindu. You can be the Baptist. Or we can swap.

        I don’t see the topic at hand as an issue of living “a highly individual life.” I see a much larger picture. I see a nation that started to go bad in the 1960s. “Do your own thing.” “Shoot the pigs.” “Off the Man.”

        We now have that generation’s grandchildren in college. They are mind-bogglingly self-absorbed (their parents, their “best friends” are too). These kiddies are so sure of themselves and the rightness of their beliefs in all things that they are extremely intolerant. Their parents and grandparents are the university faculty, still “doing their own thing” too. The whole shebang leans way Left, which is why so many university campuses are little North Koreas these days where improper thought and speech is repressed.

        These youngsters simultaneously are doing what most all youngsters do. They are also rebelling and acting out. Thus, this uni-gender nonsense, which is a spin-off of their embrace of gay rights, black rights, most everybody’s “rights.”

        That particular aspect could be just written off, but as the news story I linked to mentioned, grownups actually give power to these notions, getting themselves in a dither about language and sexual identity.

        Taken all together, and there are many other elements I have not touched on, what we are witnessing is a cultural meltdown.

        I am sure you see it differently. I’ll give you the last word if you want to say more, but for me, I’m done. I am a Hindu.


        1. How much time have you actually spent on any US college campus in the last thirteen years? Last twenty? Is your viewpoint truly informed by your own primary research?

          As a former newspaperman yourself, you are of course aware of the media’s habit of taking a group of slightly interesting facts, and turning it into a story and a so-called movement. After all, that’s what sells papers. (Or, these days, pageviews.)

          You might want to take some of these things you read with a slightly larger helping of salt.

          Here in Boston, where universities are one of our top industries, we aren’t suffering too much nonsense. Sure, there’s a lot of blather going on everywhere at all times. But it doesn’t seem to be out of hand.

          Also, I personally know tons of leftie, “People’s Republic of Cambridge” types, and they are quite open minded about stuff, but require an argument (vs mere assertion) to be persuaded. I also have yet to meet a young, intolerant leftist. Also, Stanley Druckenmiller, who is on a national campaign to wake up youth to the massive intergenerational theft going on (in favor of your generation) says that he finds the young people of today to be smarter and more willing to work hard than ever. He has been hiring a few to work in his funds for years, so he should know.

          Also, I’d remind you that all of these “privileged, self-absorbed” young people are what have brought us a global leadership position in little industries like the internet, search, social media, and on and on.

          So don’t be too critical of them, unless you’d like to mail us all mimeographed copies of your blog every day.


          Kim G
          Boston, MA
          Which is certainly a hotbed of liberalism, but not of the kind of which you write.


          1. Somehow, I doubt that Boston has much in common with Oakland, CA. And a person writing a blog of their own opinions is not required to produce research to prove their opinions.


          2. Kim: “I also have yet to meet a young, intolerant leftist.”

            You obviously have never met my sister. But wait! She’s not young.

            Kim, your saying this intolerance does not exist is akin to Louis Farrakhan going to a Nation of Islam meeting, talking to folks, and then saying, “Everybody seems nice to me.”

            Point being that they see you as one of them, and to a degree that is correct though you are more tolerant than most of that crowd. Try this experiment: Say out loud that you think Newt Gingrich would be a great president and that Paul Ryan’s economic ideas are on the money.

            Then duck!


        2. “Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers.”–socrates


  2. Enjoy your posts, this one included. One thought, who remembers the 1930s? Well my 93-year-old mother remembers them, the depression that was part of it and, of course, we do in that we were raised as children of depression aware parents, which has nothing to do with your thoughts of genderqueer except your mention of the 1930s and who would remember … our parents and us through transmitted stories. Peace


    1. John: Actually, there is a connection with the theme here. I think much of the cultural silliness now in full bloom in the United States is due to there having been no grave difficulty in the nation for over 60 years. The citizens, for the most part, are incredibly spoiled.

      Thanks for your feedback. And peace to you too.


  3. Sounds like first-world problems to me.

    I don’t like it that they’ve changed the Mills chant to be gender neutral. That’s taking away from women power, I’m serious. We have few enough places that uplift women, we don’t need women to be completely erased like this. If a sole person is a “they” or a “ze”, why are they going to a women’s college, using their genitals to get in, and then declaring themselves as not women? I don’t like it that a small group of theys, zes and ous have erased women from a women’s college.


  4. “These kiddies are so sure of themselves and the rightness of their beliefs in all things that they are extremely intolerant.”

    The whole truth! You LOVE to open a can of worms, amigo.


  5. Totally taken back by Kim’s “I also have yet to meet a young, intolerant leftist.”

    Let me introduce Kim to my lesbian daughter and her pack of man-eating friends — wow!


Comments are closed.