It should come as no surprise to anyone in our circles that we are truly living through troubling times. Every day seems to bring with it some new string of defeats, some new act of depravity, some new testament to the kinds of sicknesses that bubble up and spill over deep in the nooks and crags of the degenerate mind. Now, it just so happens, that special kind of filth associated with the spirit of our age has come to this writer’s own home State of Texas.
On October 21, 2019 a jury in Dallas ruled against a Mr. Jeffery Younger, a father who is tying to protect his seven-year old son James from undergoing chemical castration by means of a gender “transition” by his mother, a Dr. Anne Georgulas, who is insisting on her eunuchizing her son James into “Luna” using hormone blockers. Madeleine Jacob of Life Site News had this to say:
“With a consensus of 11 of the 12 jurors, the jury decided not to grant Mr. Younger Sole Managing Conservatorship over his twin boys. They voted that the current Joint Managing Conservatorship should be replaced by a Sole Managing Conservatorship, but that Mr. Younger should not be that person. Judge Kim Cooks will read her ruling on possession, child support, and Dr. Georgulas’ other requests at 1:30 p.m. CST on Wednesday. Mr. Younger and Dr. Georgulas were in court last week fighting over custody and decision-making abilities for James and his twin, Jude. Mr. Younger argues his ex-wife is “transitioning” James against the boy’s will.”
Thankfully, on October 24, Judge Kim Cooks reversed the decision, ruling instead that both parents will have joint custody over the boy. It is interesting to note, however, that Judge Cooks placed a gag order on both parents, barring them from speaking to the press about anything pertaining to the case. Also, of note, is that James and his twin brother Jude are not the biological children of either Mr. Younger or Dr. Georgulas. Instead, the twins are the product of in vitro fertilization.
From what I understand, the two had been married at St. John the Baptist Greek Orthodox Church in Euless, a suburb of the city of Dallas, and the couple eventually separated some years later.¹ And, from what I have been able to gather, conflicts over James’ gender began when the boy was three, when Anne took the boy to a gender therapist at a local children’s hospital.² The fact that there are even “gender therapists” practicing whatever witchdoctory that profession entails at children’s hospitals is itself frightening.
Dr. Georgulas, who in an alarming twist of irony herself is a pediatrician, insists that she began noticing signs of “dysphoria” in her son when he began to imitate female cartoon characters from television and had begun requesting his mother to allow him to “wear dresses.”³ Mr. Younger, on the other hand, has insisted that Georgulas has been mentally abusing the boy, supposedly locking him in a room and telling him that “monsters only eat boys.”⁴
All of this is very troubling. More than troubling, in fact. At this point, anyone with even a lick of common sense should be able to discern for themselves that this poor boy is being subjected to the worst kind of mental, emotional and physical abuse by his mother. But what horrifies me the most is the fact that this is all taking place in my own back door, and among people who belong to the very same Church as I do.
It’s almost a truism at this point to assume that Texas is one of the last few strongholds in the United States where the ideals associated with “conservatism” hold out against the raging tide of degeneracy, vice and dildoism. It’s even more a truism to assume that the Orthodox Church—that one ancient strain of Christianity that has been able to resist the kinds of infectious cultural pathologies that, have not only caused the mainline Protestant churches to fall into schism and heresy, but have even made their way into the many-columned halls of the Vatican—would have at least met this unspeakable act of barbarism and child abuse with immediate and hurried condemnation. Alas, to the best of my knowledge, not only has Dr. Georgulas not been rightfully excommunicated from the Orthodox Church, none of the clergy or even the laity of St. John the Baptist have spoken up to James’ and his father’s defense, let alone Metropolitan Isaiah of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese under whose jurisdiction this particular parish falls under.
To say that I am baffled by the absolute lack of protest from, not just the clergy of St. John’s, but any Orthodox leader is an understatement. Perhaps we, as Orthodox Christians, have gotten too comfortable; have become so accustomed to seeing the spiritual rot that spread so easily and with little resistance among the congregations and parishes of our Protestant and Catholic neighbors that we honestly didn’t expect this kind of thing—when it eventually came—to be met with the same kind of apathy or, even worse, acceptance.
I think we all knew, deep down, that this kind of evil was coming. The truth of the matter is that we as Orthodox have become too soft, too relaxed, too “theologizing.” The problem with us Orthodox is that we’re obsessed with issues that fundamentally don’t matter. From what I’ve seen, most of our co-parishioners are more inclined discuss the finer theological points put forward by a Barth, a Balthasar, a Milbank or a Hart and not, as we should be, the impending advent of the spirit of Antichrist. This isn’t surprising, sadly, and goes back centuries. After all, what’s that story of Byzantine religious scholars debating how many angels could dance on the head of a pin, all the while Turkish bombards pounded away at the walls of Constantinople?
Before we go any further, we need to address certain inconsistencies with Geogulas’ story. Citing an article in The Texan, Matt Walsh of Daily Wire writes that:
“Interestingly, [amicus attorney] Dunlop revealed that Georgulas told him that Luna was not the first female name that James picked out. The first was “Starfire,” a female character from the superhero cartoon Teen Titans Go! Georgulas, however, encouraged him to pick a different name.”
Walsh goes on to write that this revelation is significant for two reasons. The first of which being:
“It shows what realm James was living in when he allegedly claimed he was a girl. He was in the same realm every normal child inhabits from infancy until adolescence — the realm of fantasy. He was identifying as a girl; he was identifying as a cartoon girl. There is no substantive difference between this “self-identity” and the self-identity of my own 3-year-old boy who regularly claims to be a dinosaur, a bear, a bear hunter, a shark or sometimes all four […] Kids at that age have no understanding of reality, in theory or practice. They cannot cognitively grasp the distinction between truth and reality, cartoon people and real people. There’s a reason why you can convince them that a morbidly obese man flies around the entire globe in one night and delivers toys to billions of children. It wouldn’t occur to a 3-year-old to doubt this claim. In his world, literally anything is possible.”
The second reason Walsh gives is that progressive parents like Georgas know that their children aren’t old enough to make a decision on something as drastic and life changing as gender reassignment surgery by the fact that they won’t allow their children to go by the silly names (such as Starfire) that they pick out for themselves when play pretend. Walsh writes that:
“Reflect on the fact that James’ mom didn’t let him go by Starfire. Indeed, it is striking that these painfully progressive parents, who want their children to have the “freedom” to choose their own genders, still won’t let them choose their own names. There’s a reason why “trans kids” always have names like Luna, or Jazz, or Sky, or Parker or something similarly ambiguous and trendy. Do we think 3 and 4-year-olds are hopping on Google to find out which unisex monikers are in fashion at the moment? No, if you left it up to a young child to decide for himself, he’ll inevitably gravitate towards something like Starfire, or Ninja, or Pirate Poopbutt. All these options are would still be better than Luna, but they wouldn’t look good on a resume. […] Maybe I’m giving these parents too much credit. I suspect that Georgulas didn’t let James be Starfire not because she’s concerned for his long term wellbeing – obviously she isn’t – but because the other enlightened and progressive moms in her circle will think it’s weird. They will applaud her for having a transkid, but they won’t applaud a ridiculous name. That’s where they draw the line. And so that’s where Georgulas draws the line. Because in the end, this is all about her.”
I am personally inclined to agree with Mr. Walsh. As the saying goes, “transkids are like vegan cats, we all know who’s making the decisions.” And in this case, as I imagine as it is in every other, the decision on the part of James Younger to transition into “Luna” was made by none other than Anne Georgulas herself.
According to Dulcan’s Textbook of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, signs indicative of so-called gender dysphoria usually subside by early adolescence with the onset of puberty.⁵ Interestingly, symptoms associated with gender dysphoria are also thought to be related to neurological disorders linked to autism spectrum disorder⁶ which, to me at least, I find to be unsurprising. People with autism and related disorders already have an immensely difficult time trying to adjust to reality and encouraging them to be the cute anime girl they always wanted to be and lop their genitals off isn’t exactly helping them make the most of the hand they were dealt by life.
Now, this isn’t meant to be condescending toward any transpersons who might (although I imagine it would be very unlikely) be reading this. Believe you me, I can’t even imagine what it’s like to suffer from a form of mental illness where I am constantly being barraged by my own thoughts and insecurities, telling me that the body I had was wrong. But we need to acknowledge that’s exactly what we’re dealing with, viz., mental illness.
We don’t encourage people who suffer from depression or anxiety disorders that somehow they’d be better off killing themselves, that would be callous and irresponsible. So why is it, then, we make an exception for gender dysphoria where, more often than not, treatment often involves irreversible and life changing surgery and hormone therapy?
With all that being said, we need to ask ourselves one very important question: why?
Why is any of this happening? Why would any parent knowingly subject their own child to this kind of abuse? Is it really just to be trendy? To keep in line with the current zeitgeist? Personally, I think there’s more going on than meets the eye. I think this whole issue is bigger than any one child, certainly bigger than little James Younger.
We need to ask ourselves who would desire this state of affairs in the first place? Qui bono? Who benefits?
It’s no secret that, despite what you hear from feminists, Marxists, liberals and cucks, men in the West have it exceedingly difficult, more so now for the generation of young boys who will be growing up in an multicultural, post-racial society that will be laying the blame for every atrocity ever committed throughout history at their tiny little feet as soon as they are able to comprehend the concept of what’s “bad.”
As of this year, the American Psychological Association has already released guidelines which have marked out “traditional masculinity ideology” as a danger to physical and mental health. Back in 2017, the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, Canada passed a resolution termed Bill 89 which adds “gender identity” and “gender expression” as factors to be considered when assessing whether a child should be taken into legal custody by protective services, all the while omitting the religious faith in which the child is being raised as a factor to be taken into consideration.⁷
With all this in mind, the situation looks bleak for our young boys growing up in a society that is fundamentally antagonistic towards their existence. The prevailing fear of our elites seems to be that masculinity, “toxic” or otherwise, is a real tangible threat to the prevailing order, and the solution seems to be to do away with, or at the very least demonize, the concept of masculinity in general.
Contrary to what you may hear, women in the Western world have it good. Actually, they have it pretty great. Women are graduating at higher rates than their male counterparts, are earning more money then men on average and are expected to live longer. So why all the hullabaloo about toxic masculinity? About rape culture? About patriarchy? Utter nonsense. All of it.
The movement to dismantle masculinity of any kind on the part of the subversives and culture-distorters isn’t a push for the supposed concern and well-being of young boys and men’s mental and emotional health. To be completely frank, what we are seeing taking place before our eyes is nothing less than a targeted attack, an insidious campaign by the powers-that-be (or whatever you wish to call them) operating through their useful idiots in the universities and NGO’s to feminize young boys by making them weak, docile and submissive.
The fact of the matter is that young men are the greatest resource a nation or a people can possess. Men, by nature’s design and by the work of providence, are the expendable sex. They are the muscle that keeps a community or society safe in times of war, protected in times of peace, feed in times of scarcity—often at the cost of their own lives. They are, as history has borne out, the brain by which almost all scientific discoveries and technological breakthroughs have been achieved; account for all the great explorers of human history as well as nearly all its great philosophical minds, religious leaders and spiritual guides.
A soft, passive, and compliant race of men will eventually be that people’s last generation. Women, despite what they may say otherwise, hate a man who is subservient to her needs and will not respect him. A woman will always be drawn to a man who is strong, who is forceful, who respects himself and, above all else, is self-sufficient. After all, a man who can rely on himself needs no one else, depends on no one else for anything, adheres to his own rule, charts his own course by his own polar star. If a woman can not find such a man among her own people, she will inevitably find one among another.
With the absence of good strong men, the State has taken over the role of alpha male. How many single mothers rely on the State (and its generous benefits) after their boyfriends and baby daddies decide to pack up and leave the poor wench and little bastards behind? How many times has the court system ruled in favor of the mother over the father in divorce cases? Allowing him only the meagerest of visitation rights at best? How many men have had their lives and reputations ruined by false rape accusations? Too many, if you ask me.
Make no mistake, the modern liberal post-national State and the sycophants, sociopaths and parasites that run it are keenly aware of the position that they have garnered as the decades have rolled on, much to the detriment of our Culture.
All of this brings me to my final point, and that is this: the final solution to “toxic” masculinity is to eliminate all things associated with traditional masculinity itself. There is a reason why that special category of lanky, limp-wristed, soy drinking, neckbearded, prematurely balding, videogame addicted genus of “men” are referred too, in contemporary parlance, as “Nu-males.” This is to say that they represent the end goal, the final product of the on-going series of social engineering attempts by the Archenemy.
If confused and brainwashed parents want to castrate their sons and turn them into little walking trophies to progressivism’s triumph, if our young men want to spend their youth addicted to videogames and internet porn, shoveling gratuitous amounts of junk food down their respective gullets, having nothing more to live for in life than the release of next superhero movie—or better yet, guzzle down HRT like Skittles believing that if they can’t get the girl in the end they might as well be one—well, all that works out fine for the people who hate us and want to see us defeated, broken and our great works and civilization fated for nothing more than an antique curiosity, only half-remembered yet entirely loathed by the future peoples who will have replaced us.
Let us be clear, little James Younger isn’t the first casualty of the protracted struggle for the souls of our young men and boys and will most certainly not be the last. I doubt James is old enough to understand the circumstances that led him to the controversy of which he now finds himself at the center of, doubtful still if he even realizes how high the stakes are in this game between the forces of normalcy and total subversion.
But this court case is bigger than James, bigger than all of us really. James represents what could happen to any young boy, to any parent in this postmodern hellscape. The Archenemy and his servants hate innocence and will seek to corrupt it any chance they have. Make no mistake, today it was James Younger who found himself the target of the insanity of our age, tomorrow, however, it could just as well be your child.
Footnotes and Citations:
- Crane, Emily and Butterfield, Alan. “Judge rules James Younger’s dad can have say in transition” Daily Mail, 27 October, 2019. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7611057/Judge-rules-James-Youngers-dad-say-transition.html?fbclid=IwAR3q7vFTRw6ekI1uhsiVnZruSp1Pb1o8epL-A4SzQpj9JdZflqbQSX6tcps
- Dulcan, MK. (2015). Dulcan’s Textbook of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Second Edition. P. 591
- Lawrence, Lianne. “Ontario passes ‘totalitarian’ bill allowing government to take kids from Christian homes.” Life Site News, 1 June, 2017. https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/breaking-ontario-passes-totalitarian-bill-allowing-govt-to-take-kids-from-c