.

Target

If you’re too young to take a marriage vow,
Stuck at an awkward age that won’t allow
A dizzy dose of liquor-laden brew
Or puffs of buzzy stuff… just one or two—
__Target beckons you—right now!

If you’re too juvenile to drive a car,
Too green to party at the bluest bar,
Too innocent to fight a gory war,
Too ignorant to know what’s what and more—
__Target is your guiding star!

If you are deemed unqualified to vote,
Too gauche to grab existence by the throat,
Too wet behind the ears to place a bet,
Too raw to cut the apron strings just yet—
__Target’s primed to float your boat!

If you’re too wee to earn a weekly wage,
If you are at that coy and callow stage,
Then greedy, seedy saviors paid to sell
Will faze and mold you till they’ve sold you hell—
__Target’s range is all the rage!

So, take your birthing person by the hand—
Come view our new and grand, satanic brand!

.

.

.

Stolen Rainbows 

Yesterday a rainbow swept the sky
To paint a bruise of nimbus in a hue
Of red and orange, yellow, green and blue
And indigo then violet splashed on high.

This astral arc of splendor spread its pledge
In notes that sang of every person’s worth
In tones that lifted sinking souls on earth
From floods of woe that lapped at Hades’ edge.

Today we see this sacred symbol flown
By thieves who snatched its wonder from the realm
They demonized with plans to overwhelm
The world with rainbows passed off as their own.

Now prideful flags are raised by iron fists
As weak knees bend to every twisted whim
Without a prayer of thanks to offer Him—
The reason why a rainbow sky exists.

.

.

A Timely Triolet

It’s time to stand. It’s time to fend
Off fiends who butcher budding youth—
It’s time to stop this twisted trend.
It’s time to stand. It’s time to fend
Off monsters paid to blind and bend
The minds of minors seeking truth—
It’s time to stand. It’s time to fend
Off fiends who butcher budding youth.

.

.

Susan Jarvis Bryant has poetry published on Lighten Up Online, Snakeskin, Light, Sparks of Calliope, and Expansive Poetry Online. She also has poetry published in TRINACRIA, Beth Houston’s Extreme Formal Poems anthology, and in Openings (anthologies of poems by Open University Poets in the UK). Susan is the winner of the 2020 International SCP Poetry Competition, and has been nominated for the 2022 Pushcart Prize.

NOTE TO READERS: If you enjoyed this poem or other content, please consider making a donation to the Society of Classical Poets.

The Society of Classical Poets does not endorse any views expressed in individual poems or commentary.


CODEC Stories:

93 Responses

  1. Joseph S. Salemi

    Let’s hope that Target has just as much financial grief as hit the Bud Light people. And maybe the gutless Dodgers will get a kick in the teeth that they didn’t expect.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Joe, having written the Target poem, I’m now beginning to wonder whether all these Titan companies are committing financial suicide by design. Maybe they’re going to be torn to shreds and buried by their financial overlords if they don’t go along with the agenda… so it’s their last ditch attempt to survive… and, in a strange twist of these bizarre psyops, the disgruntled public are giving the WEF exactly what they want… and (as a wonderful bonus for the wicked) the closure of every business that doesn’t belong to them can be blamed on the unsuspecting public. That’s how cynical this warped and wayward world has made me.

      Reply
      • Shaun C. Duncan

        The most intriguing theory I’ve heard on the matter is that it’s the overlords driving the stock price down so they can buy up more shares at a cheaper price, confident that it’ll rebound again once the storm passes. This doesn’t negate the obvious social-engineering aspect, but it does add a profit-motive which I feel just has to be mixed up in this somehow and it also fits with the general move toward centralization we’ve seen during the past few years. Shaking out the small-time investors from the megacorps would be the next logical step on from destroying small businesses.

      • Susan Jarvis Bryant

        Shaun, I believe this theory is right. I’m just reading the frontpage headlines of Target’s plummeting stock prices, and instead of feeling justice has been done, I know I’ve been played. Whenever something makes front page news… I’m suspicious of motive. Now everything makes sense, and it galls me that we’re being misled into thinking the power of our collective purse has triumphed over evil. Darn it!!!

      • Joshua C. Frank

        It turns out that Target never took that stuff out in the first place; they’ve been lying to us.

      • Joseph S. Salemi

        When there’s a potential loss of money in the offing, capitalism always caves.

  2. David Whippman

    It won’t be any consolation, Susan, but back at home, things are no better. I just watched a youtube clip of Ed Davey, the nonentity who now leads the Lib Dems (or what’s left of them.) He was asked if a person with a penis can be a woman. He looked condescendingly at the interviewer and said, “Of course.” They just lost my vote (if they ever had it.)

    PS: well crafted poems, as ever.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      David, what twisted times we live in. As for the vote, I am beginning to believe we don’t have one. On the bright side, we still have a choice – a choice in what we believe and whether to be bold enough to shout it out loudly and clearly or to bleat along with the rest of the sheep. I’ve made my choice.

      Reply
      • David Whippman

        Hopefully, more and more people will find the courage to defy the woke mob and stand with you.

      • Susan Jarvis Bryant

        David, I hope so, and would like to thank you for standing with me… your support means a lot! It also leads me to believe you’re more Wayne than Woody! 🙂

  3. Sally Cook

    My favorite is “Stolen Rainbows” as it is the most profound.

    Brought to mind the many time when driving with my mother, an exquisite rainbow flashed across the sky, and she remarked “See what God is giving us today?”

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Dear Sally – that’s my favorite one too. I am so sick and tired of having a symbol of the divine manipulated into a logo for a devilish ideology and shoved down my throat, I decided to reclaim the rainbow and all it stood (and still stands) for before being snatched from the sky and dragged into the pits of hell.

      Reply
  4. Roy Eugene Peterson

    I wonder if the executive and marketing staffs of these inane companies sit around the board rooms with the men dressed as women and women dressed as men. I am reminded of a poem I saw a long time ago that stuck in my mind:

    A lesbian once from Khartoum
    Had a queer come up to her room.
    They spent the whole night
    In a heck of a fight
    As to who should do what and to whom.

    In a country that once protected youth, now we are in a fight to restore sanity and protect them from an overwhelming number of predators. The time indeed has come to stand for what is right and “fend off the fiends!”

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Roy, thank you for the poem… it’s hilarious and we certainly need a smile in this world of doom and gloom. The sad thing is, there’s so much truth in the poem… we now have a propagandized public confused beyond belief in one way or another. Our global dictators have divided us in so many ways, only the truth will unite us. I believe it’s getting out there slowly but surely… far too slowly for my liking. You are right when you say: “we are in a fight to restore sanity and protect them from an overwhelming number of predators” – let’s hope there are many more out there who feel as we do. Thank you for your sane voice of solemnity in this screeching world of insanity.

      Reply
  5. Shaun C. Duncan

    It never ceases to amaze me how you can hold on to your sense of humour in the face of such horrors, and I admire the way you can switch seemlessly from light-hearted mockery to righteous indignation without sacrificing any of the musicality which makes your work unique.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Shaun, having just read your satirical epigrams, your comment is all the dearer to me, and I believe you may have used much of the same technique in your latest poems. So much can be revealed when one sees a tricky subject from a humorous angle… the sheer insanity of toxic behavior is made all the clearer when mockery is employed to reveal the wickedness behind the giggle. Shaun, thank you very much for your inspiration and for your appreciation.

      Reply
  6. Mark Stellinga

    Hi Susan, each of these detectably SJB pieces stir the coals of desperation you and I, and many others who share our various views are prompted to address when we put pen to paper, and few do it as well, and none do it *better* than you, my dear. 🙂 PS: Your 2 new books are wonderful, as expected.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Mark, thank you very much indeed for your generous and kind comments. You’re spot on when you say, many poets are prompted to write about the atrocities we face in today’s world. There are many ways to get the truth out there, and I find poetry to be a perfect medium and I’m glad you do too. I’m thrilled you’re enjoying my debut books… it inspires me to hurry up with my next one… and that’s saying a lot for one who’s reluctant to arrange her poems into a semblance of order.

      Reply
  7. Cheryl Corey

    I’ve never been a big Target shopper, and now I have even more reason not to shop there. I’m disgusted by how some of these corporations are capitulating to a radical left minority, and equally disgusted to see the rainbow, a symbol of beauty and innocence, usurped for unhealthy practices. Your triolet is very well done and purposeful.

    Reply
    • Joseph S. Salemi

      Cheryl, the most incisive comment I have ever seen about the rainbow flag was made by the British actor Laurence Fox. He put together several small rainbow flags into the shape of a swastika, posted the picture on-line, and pointed out that Nazi-like thought-control and political tyranny were what the rainbow flag actually stood for. The leftists and perverts who now run the UK went berserk, of course. But Laurence Fox didn’t back down.

      Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Cheryl, thank you. I’m glad you liked the triolet… the form allowed me to pack a powerful punch in its brevity. I’m with you on the rainbow front.

      Joe, thank you for mentioning Laurence Fox. I have a great deal of respect for him. Would you believe that a gentleman in England was arrested for simply re-tweeting Fox’s rainbow-swastika meme?! RE-tweeting… he hadn’t made it up himself… yet, there were the British bobbies, handcuffs and all, on his doorstep for… what exactly?! Now I’m getting an up close and personal view of exactly what my grandparents fought to stop. How soon we forget.

      Reply
  8. Yael

    Superb poetry as always Susan. I’m amazed at how you can quickly turn the daily news into great poems! It definitely makes reading bad news a lot more rewarding and beneficial for the mind.
    I think you are right ‘on Target’ with your assessment in the comments section above. The whole transgender farce appears to be a controlled demolition of the economy to centralize control and set the stage for antichrist and his mark of the beast system. The poor demon-possessed transgender fiends are merely the secondary decomposers which are feeding on the rotten corpse of godless materialism as it enters its final phase.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Yael, your wisdom and insight knows no bounds, and you have enlightened me on many occasions in the comments section. Your latest observation has sent a shiver down my spine… simply because, I believe you are right. I cannot think of any other explanation for this increasingly depraved behavior where our children are concerned. The Bible is making more and more sense… what I couldn’t get my head around in the past is becoming increasingly clear as it unfolds before my eyes. It really is time to step up and speak out, and I thank you wholeheartedly for your continued support.

      Reply
  9. Cynthia Erlandson

    Great stuff as always, Susan. The theft of the rainbow has rankled me no end. Who do they think they are, to think every color belongs to them? They must be completely ignorant of what happened to certain people shortly before the first rainbow appeared. I’ve imagined trying to make a poem of that idea, but I’m stumped as to how to approach it. You’re welcome to the idea if you’d like it.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Cynthia, I agree with every word you’ve said about the rainbow and love your idea. I know there’s a bigger and better poem for me to write on this subject, and you’ve given me plenty to think about.

      I knew I had to write something when a friend sent me pictures of the Ark Encounter from Williamstown, Kentucky. There was a huge rainbow painted over the entrance to the exhibit. I turned to Mike and said, “I simply can’t believe the Ark Encounter has been politicized!”… I then realized (with horror) I no longer associated that divine symbol with God. And I thought I was immune to propaganda. Our children don’t stand a chance!

      Cynthia, thank you very much indeed!

      Reply
  10. Joshua C. Frank

    Susan, great ones as usual!

    “Target:” My favorite lines are: “ So, take your birthing person by the hand—/Come view our new and grand, satanic brand!” That made me smile despite the evil behind what Target is doing… I just can’t see myself shopping there anymore.

    “Stolen Rainbows:” Yes, I hate that the symbol of God’s mercy and His promise never to flood the earth again has been appropriated by the LGBT etc. movement, as if in mockery of this mercy and promise, not to mention of the horizontal stripes of the American flag. (Perhaps if it had been designed in France, the stripes would be vertical and the purple would be at the staff.) This is as good a place as any to post an epigram I wrote on that exact subject:

    Why should God bless America,
    Who makes her soldiers fight
    For Sodom’s six-striped swastika
    That mocks the red and white?

    (Yes, I’m alluding to Laurence Fox’s retweet that got him arrested.)

    “A Timely Triolet:” I agree with every word, it’s well done, and I love the triolet form!

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Josh, thank you very much for your generous comment. Your Laurence Fox inspired epigram is spot on, and it makes me see (all too clearly) how hell skulked into Germany… bit… by… bit.

      Sadly, I think your favorite lines (mine too) speak loudly of our times. I’m hoping the initial grin gives way to the realization that our world has not only gone insane, it has also stepped into the realm of pure evil. If adults don’t make a stand now, our future generations will never forgive us for leading them down a path to butchery, lifelong pain, and infertility. I found out last week that transgender surgery is “experimental”, which means that when a child wakes up in agony and realizes they’ve been abused… they can’t sue those making huge sums from experimenting on minors – Mengele-style. Shocking!

      Reply
  11. Adam Wasem

    Miller Lite to Bud Light: Hold my beer. Target to both: Hold my tuck-friendly bathing suit. Witty and giddily loquacious and on target as always (no pun intended), Susan. As to why all these companies are so spectacularly self-immolating, I myself subscribe to Occam’s razor–the c-suite executives are just out of touch, is all, with their core customers. The gangs of soyboys and dangerhairs the colleges are churning out march in with their woke marketing spiels and the executives just smile and nod and figure “well, this is what’s hot with the kids nowadays, only a couple years to retirement, might as well just go along with it.” Oh, and congratulations on the publication of your books, I can’t think of anyone more deserving.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Adam, it’s lovely to see you back on the site, and thank you very much for your highly amusing comment… so vivid and so good, I’m inspired to write another poem! You have a keen eye for exactly what’s going on… it’s a pitiful shame that many are turning a blind one! Thank you too for your congratulations! At long last, I decided to get my poetry house in order. I hope to read more of your poetry soon.

      Reply
  12. Brian A Yapko

    Susan, each one of these fine poems demonstrates your consummate skill as a poet, your cheeky sense of humor, your unyielding commitment to objective reality, your scathing contempt for diabolically mesmerized social engineers and your compassion for the often-overlooked victims. What of impressionable, inarticulate and naive children who stand to have their lives ruined because venal corporations figure they can score a few culture-war points and increase their profits on the backs of the misdiagnosed? Entities like Target couldn’t care less about the long-term havoc their policies will wreak because they’re too busy attending to their bottom line and grooving on what compassionate corporate policies they present. Your aptly named “Target” is my favorite of the three because you really do hit the target with an anti-woke bullseye as you spell out the insanity of entrusting children who can’t drink, vote, marry, bear arms to have the sophistication, insight and experience to decide that they’ve been born in the wrong body. Doesn’t anyone out there see how bonkers this is? And how ultimately destructive? Well done, Susan. The Titanic may well be sinking but at least you encourage the sane among us to prepare the lifeboats.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Brian, you always manage to sum up the messages I try to get across in my poetry with creativity and an admirable clarity that dissolves any smidgen of residual fog lurking between the lines. You make plain to anyone still confused by those of twisted tongue and wicked deed, exactly what these money-hungry hustlers stand for… and I thank you wholeheartedly for doing so! I also thank you for your continued appreciation, encouragement and support in this ugly and increasingly wicked cultural war… it means the world!

      Reply
  13. Norma Pain

    Thank you Susan for these perfectly written, very much needed poems.
    I broke my arm badly (shattered at the wrist area), a week ago, so I can do very little for a while but I just wanted to acknowledge these important poems and all the other poets works to bring the truth into the light.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Oh Norma, I am so very sorry to hear of your horrible injury and hope and pray you mend quickly and fully without too much pain along the way. Sunshine healing vibes are winging their way to you from my Texas backyard as I type! I owe an extra special debt of gratitude to you for making the effort to support my poetry… the truth matters, and I thank you for spreading the word (poetically and otherwise) too! Norma, get well soon… we have a lot to do – poetically, of course. x

      Reply
  14. Margaret Coats

    Susan, thanks for adding to the expressed outrage on the Target issue, but from my point of view, what’s new? During my children’s youth, we associated mainly with religious homeschooling families, but I cannot count how many inappropriate gifts of toys, clothing, children’s books, decor, gadgets, and entertainment they received from others who pitied their impoverished lives because they didn’t have every kidz latest thing. That is, adultz go to Big Box stores and buy trash contrary to family values to give to children they know.

    And where do families who value beauty, truth, and goodness find “cool stuff” to counter it? Very occasionally, the Big Boxes have some (not much, and not the best) because they know there is a small market for it. Thank God, though, for small local stores and small businesses who produce good things and make them available.

    This is not a new economic problem. Selfridge’s of London introduced unisex in the 1960s, and it only had to be in fashion for a single year to change clothing into what it now is. Look around you and say whether or not male and female clothing is, for the most part, made up of the same items. It may be sleazy for the gals and sloppy for the guys, but again, what’s new? Codpieces and padded sundresses? I’ve seen ’em.

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Margaret, to me this is something new, and I happen to think it’s a big deal. I’ve never seen swimwear specifically designed for boys to tuck the bulge of their penis from view because they want to appear as girls. I’ve never seen a clothing range that offers chest binders for girls who want to be boys. I embrace unisex clothes for adults and children. I wear them. However, I draw the line at a clothing range specifically designed (by a satanist, no less) to promote an ideology that involves child abuse. I’ve never seen slogans on toddlers’ clothes that promote transgenderism and I never want to… hence my poem.

      Reply
      • Joshua C. Frank

        I agree. I can’t even fathom why little boys want to “tuck.” As a man, all I can think is, that sounds really painful (I’ve heard of what the process entails), and not to be indelicate, but a swimming area where the women are dressed immodestly would be the worst place for any boy 12 or older to try a thing like that.

        But advertisers are apparently trying to make tucking appealing to little boys so they’ll ask their parents to buy them tucking swimsuits. Given the problems with tucking that I’ve described, the only way that can happen is if they make the boys want to be girls and thus ruin their lives just to sell swimwear. It makes me sick to my stomach just thinking about it.

  15. Brent W

    -In your opinion, then, at what age is someone allowed to begin to develop their own identity, their own sense of self? Research suggests that children begin to develop an understanding of gender and gender roles as early as 5 or 6. They begin to relate themselves to those concepts at a very early age. Does it not make sense for them to begin to determine, from that young age, whether or not they wholly fit into the roles and expectations that others place upon them? Children are acutely aware of these expectations and pressures, and are fully capable of feeling that they do not want to be defined by them, even if they do not have all the right words to express it. The actual qualified medical and scientific professionals who work in these spaces know this to be true, and make their recommendations accordingly.

    Also, considering the Target apparel in question, what is the logical conclusion of this outrage? That there should be a legal age limit to purchase gendered clothing? That people need to show off their reproductive organs before buying certain clothes? Sounds like a hellish dystopian nightmare to me. Just let people wear the clothes they like.

    -“This astral arc of splendor spread its pledge
    In notes that sang of every person’s worth”
    Ironic, isn’t it, that you speak of singing of every person’s worth in the same breath as calling people “thieves” who “demonize” the world with “iron fists?” Doesn’t sound much like seeing the inherent worth in every person.

    -I must admit, I do agree with “A Timely Triolet,” in isolation. We should, indeed, take actions to stop people from butchering young people and bending their minds for selfish purposes. But I imagine you’re not on the same page as I, in terms of promoting care that reduces suicidality in children, prioritizes their health and well-being, and is seen as the standard of care by dozens of relevant professional bodies. I imagine the implications in this work are not that we should treat children with compassion and care and listen to their concerns. I imagine the implication is that we should instead smother questions of identity and force children to conform, conform, conform. No variety in self-expression, no opportunities to explore their place in the world, no deviation from strict archaic forms of gender expression. Every child must conform to what you think they should be, how they should look, what they should be interested in. Conform, conform, conform.

    Reply
    • Margaret Coats

      A child’s identity begins to develop from the moment of his or her conception, and is best guided not by “professionals” but by his or her mother and father.

      Reply
      • Brent W`

        The idea that everyone who has a child is an excellent parent who always know what’s right is not only demonstrably incorrect, it is deeply dangerous. I would think that the thousands of children who have been abused, neglected, and traumatized by their parents would have very much welcomed the intervention of qualified professionals at some point in their lives.

      • Margaret Coats

        Brent, you’re an anti-family authority-monger. The most compassionate helper for a child abused by professionals (yes, they do, and ever) or by a parent is another family member. That works marvels.

      • Brent W

        “Anti-family authority-monger,” that’s another new one for me. And what exactly is your basis for saying that another family member is always the best choice for helping a child? What if there are no other family members, or they don’t want to get involved? My point is that “family is always best” is simply not true, and again, can be an exceedingly dangerous and harmful blanket approach for addressing the needs of children. I don’t know why you’re so set against putting the needs of a child first, but… I choose to acknowledge reality and nuance here.

      • Joshua C. Frank

        What would you know about acknowledging reality, when you’re the one pushing for the “right” to deny the reality of biological sex? Why should we accept trans people for who they claim to be when they couldn’t accept who they were to begin with?

        For your information, family is one of a child’s basic needs. If you deny this, then you’re so far off in your own self-made reality that there’s no talking to you.

      • Margaret Coats

        I don’t know why you’re so set on putting intervening “professionals” with one or more of thousands of psychosocial degrees AND a government salary ahead of the needs of boys and girls for a family.

    • Joshua C. Frank

      Believe it or not, I understand where you’re coming from. It is a monstrous crime to force a boy to live as a girl, or vice versa. Where you and I disagree, however, is the definition of boy and girl. You believe that a boy who believes himself to somehow “really” be a girl, despite being male by any measurable test, is somehow automatically a girl. If that were true, it would be awful to force such a child to live as a boy, just as we (rightly) believe that such a child, being a boy, should not be forced to live as a girl even if he wants to make that irreversible decision.

      Under your system, all a boy has to do is say he’s a girl, and presto, he’s a girl. That being the case, how can “boy” or “girl” even be defined, except by resorting to a circular definition, such as “a girl or woman is one who identifies as female.” If that’s the case, what is female?

      Furthermore, why is that the only life-altering decision you want to allow children to make? I wanted to be a dog when I was little. Should my parents have scheduled me for fur implants and flappy-ear surgery? I say, thank God they didn’t!

      There are quite a few transsexuals who come to regret transitioning. For one, Chloe Cole: https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/252376/chloe-cole-leading-fight-to-protect-children-from-transgender-surgeries

      I submit that your pro-transgender view is not scientific, but religious. As an analogy, Catholics (such as myself) believe that what looks like the bread and wine at the altar of a Catholic church is really the body and blood of Jesus Christ despite being bread and wine by any measurable test. Yet we openly acknowledge that this belief is religious, a matter of faith. You claim that your similarly unprovable belief is “science,” when it’s really a religious view. So don’t push your religion on us or on children.

      Reply
      • Brent W

        Hoo boy, there’s a lot to unpack here. Firstly, a question for you. I apologize in advance if I assume incorrectly, but I think it’s safe to say you identify as a man? Would you honestly say that your entire experience of manhood can be reduced to the fact that you have a penis? Is that the only thing in your life that makes you a man? I would think not. I imagine your definition of manhood would also include certain expectations and pressures placed on you. Certain experiences with other men and with women. Certain elements of being told “be a man” in various contexts. In this way, manhood is far more than just the body parts you have. Similarly, womanhood is far more than just having a vagina, and I imagine many women would be quite angry if you tried to tell them otherwise. So I say, “A woman is someone who identifies with womanhood more strongly than anything else.” Which is also, in its own way, useless because womanhood is different for every person. And that is what I mean when I say that gender identity is completely internal and inherently unquantifiable.

        Equating different gender identities to different animal species or inanimate objects is absurd, reductive, and not useful. If you want to talk about gender, I will talk about gender, not meaningless and deeply flawed metaphors/analogies.

        Anecdotal evidence of the roughly 1% of trans people who say they regret transitioning is a laughably poor argument in favor of banning gender-affirming care. If you want anecdotes, I will find you plenty more instances of people for whom transitioning was anything from “a good choice” to “literally saved my life.”

        Lastly, I admit that the idea of my opinion being “religious” is a new one for me, but it does not hold up under scrutiny. The purpose of science is to explain observable phenomena. I can observe, with my own eyes, that trans people exist. Obviously. Given the fact that gender identity is observably separate from biological sex (given that people exist whose gender identity and biological sex are not the same), and is by nature not outwardly quantifiable, then the only reasonable option is to seek understanding from people themselves. And so I listen to what people say and use that information to build my understanding. It is not religious in nature, and from your position I think the idea of “don’t push your religion on me” is somewhere between ludicrous, tone-deaf, completely at odds with reality, or just hilariously inept. Failing all that, gender-affirming care prevents suicidality in children, so “children shouldn’t be stopped from committing suicide” is a pretty bold stance to take on your end.

      • Mike Bryant

        Gender-affirming care does not prevent suicide. It is just another experiment carried out by the new Mengeles of the military/medical complex. Because it is experimental, the mutilated children will not be allowed to sue the money grubbing fiends that are carrying out these horrific crimes. You are deluded, complicit or very, very stupid.

      • Joseph S. Salemi

        Brent W’s views are certainly religious, in the sense that they are backed up by his sheer faith and his unwillingness to question politically correct piety. His entire approach to this question, and his rhetorical style and diction, scream “Left-liberal wokester.”

      • Joshua C. Frank

        Brent, thank you for answering. So many people just give up on pursuing the debate any further when I bring up these issues. I’ll answer your questions individually:

        Yes, I am a man. I identify as a man because I am one. I was born with male parts and hopefully will have them for the rest of my life. I intend to marry and have children someday, and I can only do this as a man with a heterosexual woman. This fact is the bedrock on which the rest of manhood is based. Many men in today’s world remain little boys emotionally because they don’t have this as a goal. Male parts define a man, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t everything I’ve just described on top of it. Without biological sex, how can you possible have a definition of male and female that isn’t circular? How could male and female mean anything without a fixed definition on which to anchor them? In theory, I could call myself a woman and not change anything else (still wearing men’s clothes, not taking hormones, getting surgery, or changing my name or anything), on the grounds that being a woman is what I say it is. At that point, “man” and “woman” mean nothing, precisely because they can mean anything. If gender identity is undefinable, why should people make irreversible decisions based on it? Why take hormones and get surgery based on something undefinable?

        I wasn’t equating gender with species, but equating children’s different desires with one another. One boy wants to be a dog, another a pirate, another a girl, another a knight. Or one wants to be one of those things one day and another the next. That’s how children are. Let them play around without deciding for them that they must choose what they will be. As Bill Maher said, “Genderfluid? Kids are fluid about everything. If kids knew what they wanted to be at age eight, the world would be filled with cowboys and princesses. I wanted to be a pirate, thank God nobody took me seriously and scheduled me for eye removal and peg leg surgery.” And since when do children know what’s best for them? If I could have decided for myself, I would have spent all my days eating cake and playing Nintendo.

        The people who made the decision to transition, whom you hold up as examples of how good it is, were adults. I don’t pretend to understand it, but their brains were fully developed; even if the decision turned out to be a stupid one, we hold adults responsible for their stupid decisions. (Transitioning, as the statistics show, doesn’t reduce the likelihood of suicide.) We’re not talking about adults. We’re talking about children. At least 80% of children who identify as transgender and don’t transition develop into normal (what you call “cisgender”) adults. The rest, if they still want to transition when they’re grown, can make that decision for themselves, even if it’s not one I agree with. As an analogy, adults are free to decide whom they sleep with, but that doesn’t mean children should be sexually active.

        I absolutely believe that there are people who believe that they are somehow “really” the opposite sex. I’ve met some of them. How do you make the leap from this fact to the idea that this belief is accurate? To describe a headache by saying I feel as if someone is hitting my head with a hammer is one thing, but claiming that there is an actual invisible person hitting my head with an actual invisible hammer is quite another, especially if I’m calling people who disagree hateful and bigoted.

        I’m guessing you’re not a Christian. If If I’m right about that, I have a question: How is it that you dismiss my claim that Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the grounds that I have no evidence (actually, there’s plenty of evidence, as seen in books such as The Case for Christ and Who Moved the Stone?, but that’s another subject), but when a man claims he’s a woman or vice versa, you believe him without question? You’re accepting such a claim on faith, and that’s why I say it’s a religious view. Science involves repeatable experiments; for example, Eratosthenes proved that the earth is round and measured its size by observing the difference in the angle of the sun at the same time of day at different latitudes. What experiment proved that women can have male bodies and vice versa? Such an experiment would need to be able to define what a man or woman is before it could make such a conclusion, and you admit that without using biological sex as a definition, no such definition can be made. Therefore I submit that such an experiment could not exist, and therefore your claim that men can be women and vice versa is as unprovable as my belief that the bread and wine at the altar is really Jesus Christ, and is therefore a religious view. It is your belief, not mine, that is ludicrous, tone-deaf, completely at odds with reality, and hilariously inept.

        It wasn’t too long ago that the idea of a woman with a penis was rightly considered a joke. I’m old enough to remember a time when my friends and I made jokes like that and laughed ourselves sick over them. How is it that nearly all of humanity throughout history was in error about this? If you go against the understanding of nearly all of human history, the burden of proof is necessarily on you.

        By the way, I’m surprised that you’re attacking Susan for her poems and not me for mine, since I’ve written far more controversial poems. Go ahead, type my name in the search bar and see what I’ve written; if Susan’s poems make you react like this, I can’t wait to see how you react to mine. I’d blame misogyny, except that you don’t even know what a woman is.

      • Mike Bryant

        I glanced at the study… reductions in depression and suicide ideation “over the first year,” when they are in the thrall of the medical “care-givers.” But what happens in the second year and the rest… that’s why the mutilations are “experimental.” We’ll have to wait years to get good data. Why not just stop mutilating children? I’ll tell you why… there is really good money in it. Also, you can lower your malpractice insurance since you cannot be sued. It’s a win, win, win! Unless you are that minor who is being neutered.
        Children are being used, abused, mutilated and then forgotten when the last check is cashed.

      • Brent W

        @Joseph Salemi- So… because I have a stance, it means I’ve never questioned it? I don’t know what to tell you, beyond the fact that I arrive at my opinions by doing my best to educate myself using reputable sources, and then engage in rigorous reflection where I approach things from multiple different angles and consider different opinions. Which is why I am confident in believing the facts and evidence (and common sense) that telling children they are disgusting, or broken, or can’t be trusted to know who they are, is deeply harmful and wrong. I have questioned myself, and while there is nuance to this conversation, I am confident that my position advocates for the most good for the most people. Have you ever truly questioned what has been fed to you?

      • Brent W

        @Joseph Frank- That is merely your opinion of manhood, as one individual. I am a man and I have no intention of having children. I am no less a man, nor is any man who is incapable of having children. Your opinion on manhood applies to you, and you alone, and that’s fine. Interestingly, you stumbled into a more radical concept regarding gender: that it doesn’t exist at all. It is meaningless. Knowing a person’s gender tells you literally nothing about them. It doesn’t tell you what they look like, sound like, how they dress, what they like or dislike, what they believe, what their values are, and regardless of whether you like it or not, in today’s world, it doesn’t even tell you what body parts they have. You can make a case that gender doesn’t exist at all, but regardless, in society today it does pervade many facets of life. It affects clothing, entertainment, mannerisms, expectations, careers, etc. And so, we live with it. For many non-binary people, the uselessness of gender is a strong contributor to their views on it. But for those who do wish to engage with gender, it is readily available everywhere in life. And that is why many trans people seek gender-affirming care, because gender is so prominent in society and they wish to fit in with the gender that they feel most comfortable with.

        You seem to be conflating choice with identity. Nobody chooses to *be* trans. Indeed, if you listened to trans people speak, you would hear that so many of them knew what they were long before they had the words for it. So many of them knew that they identified a certain way before the word “transgender” ever entered their vocabulary. Some kids might hear about it and want to try it, sure. Nobody would ever seriously recommend those children get puberty blockers or take other serious steps; there’s a very obvious difference between “I heard about this thing and want to try it” and “I hate looking at myself in the mirror because the person I see looks nothing like how I see myself.” There’s this bizarre idea among some people that doctors and psychologists are just haphazardly throwing around drugs and surgeries to anyone who asks for it. If you take even one second to think about it, that is obviously not true. These things are only done after a team of doctors and caretakers, along with the child and their family, look at the child’s case and all come to a conclusion on what the best course of action would be for the child’s well-being.

        Again, gender transitioning in children is usually limited to social transitioning, where they’re allowed to wear different clothes and try a different name or pronouns. Things like puberty blockers and hormone therapy come later and are not implemented lightly. I already cited an NIH study in another post showing that gender-affirming care, at least in the cohort studied, reduced depression by about 60% and suicidal ideation by >70%. Your quote about “80% of children who identify as transgender and don’t transition develop into normal (what you call “cisgender”) adults” comes from a study that is contested and outdated, with the author himself even arguing that it shouldn’t be used to provide statistics around so-called “desistence” because that wasn’t the intent of the study. More recent work indicates that trans identities are more persistent: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/transgender-kids-tend-to-maintain-their-identities-as-they-grow-up-study-suggests.

        To very quickly touch on the Christian thing: I was raised Roman Catholic, so I’m very familiar with those teachings, but I chose to leave it behind in high school. That said, you saying that Jesus rose from the dead is not at all comparable to a person asserting their own identity, why would you even suggest that? You’re making a claim about something 2000 years ago that you were not involved in, versus a person here in the present making a claim about their own lived experience. Very strange argument to try to make. And, again, science seeks to explain observable phenomena. The question is not “can people with male physical traits be women?” The question is “how do we understand people with male physical traits who identify as women?” And the answer is “by separating biological sex from gender identity.” One question seeks to explain observable phenomena, the other doesn’t really do anything.

        Just because you made jokes about trans people when you were younger does not mean that they were ever joke-worthy. Another very bizarre claim to make. Also, I doubt you’ll look it up, but your question “How is it that nearly all of humanity throughout history was in error about this?” is also just objectively wrong and there are so, so many examples of it. For just one, the Talmud, an ancient compendium of Jewish legal statutes, recognized no fewer than eight distinct gender identities. Indigenous peoples around the world recognized multiple genders. These ideas have arisen independently, across the world, throughout history. So arguably, you’re the one standing against nearly all of human history.

      • Mike Bryant

        Another quote from my source above:

        “It is unlikely that the Rabbis of the Talmud had any concept of the distinction between sex and gender (the distinction is fairly recent even by contemporary standards) and they instead viewed gender roles as merely a consequence of one’s sex.”

      • Joshua C. Frank

        My name is Joshua, not Joseph.

        It seems that all you want to do is evade my questions and resort to insults such as “why would you even suggest that?” Since you were once a Christian, what you’re saying is that you once knew the truth and chose to turn your back on it; to use Biblical language, you’re “willfully ignorant.” Come back when you can have a reasonable, civilized discussion and actually respond to what I say instead of merely repeating your sophistry and fallacies. Learn basic logic, learn what the major fallacies are, and come back when you can make your case with logic and without fallacies.

        By the way, the invitation to read my poetry still stands: https://classicalpoets.org/?s=Joshua+C.+Frank

      • Mike Bryant

        Joshua, notice that this troll did not address his lies about the Talmud. I suggest we stop answering him and delete all subsequent comments. He is not being honest.

      • Joshua C. Frank

        Seriously, how old are you? 12, or maybe an immature 15?

        You don’t get to come into a group of conservatives and dictate terms, such as: “Also, any argument coming from religion is completely invalid here. Your religious beliefs are none of my concern, nor do they have any bearing on my life, because I do not share those same beliefs. Keep them to yourself.” You’re the one trying to invade our space, what the hell do you expect? How about you do the whole world a favor and keep your damned liberal beliefs to yourself? You liberals don’t have a leg to stand on with regard to morality as long as you support the murder of unborn children and the mutilation of the genitals of the ones you couldn’t persuade their mothers to kill.

        Second, you have not answered my questions; go back and read through them. I’ve already made my case through logic, not just faith, but you ignored it. All you have done is resort to the fallacy known as shifting the burden of proof. The burden of proof naturally falls on the one who would upend the order that has existed since man was created, and I will not accept you shifting it onto me. When you can make your case logically, I’ll be happy to debate. Also, I’ll be interested in seeing your reply to my comments lower on this page.

        I was hoping you’d click on the link and read my poetry, but since you declined, I decided I’d post a few poems here anyway:

        Normal

        A man pontificated with great show:
        “It doesn’t matter if a man likes men
        Or women, or all genders. Once again:
        It’s all about what makes your motor go.”

        I said, “I’m glad, because I wish to wed
        A woman who will love and fear the Lord,
        And we’ll raise many children in accord
        With everything the Catholic Church has said.”

        He stared at me, then said, all stiff and formal:
        “A dream like that, young man, just isn’t normal!”

        https://classicalpoets.org/2023/04/13/the-little-knight-and-other-poetry-by-joshua-c-frank/

        What Is “Pro-Choice”?

        If my child were sent to die,
        Be chopped to pieces like a pig,
        To spare him death, I’d plead and beg,
        His life with mine to buy.

        Yet pregnant moms demand their “rights”
        To chop their children in their wombs
        In hit-men’s bright and sterile rooms,
        As if they’re parasites.

        To liberals, if a pregnant woman
        Wants the baby, it’s her child.
        If not, it’s vermin, it’s reviled;
        It somehow isn’t human.

        To you who call yourselves “pro-choice:”
        Your unborn victims have no voice.

        https://classicalpoets.org/2022/06/13/what-is-pro-choice-and-other-poetry-by-joshua-c-frank/

        The Banned Barbie

        For a little girl’s birthday, I shopped at the mall
        With my mother to pick the most suitable doll.
        We went to the Barbies and searching we started;
        Pink boxes stood high like the Red Sea when parted.

        A doctor, a teacher, an athlete, a nurse,
        A corporate executive, options diverse,
        The bewildering array still was missing one other:
        I noticed that Barbie was never a mother.

        No baby, no stroller, no pregnancy belly,
        No children around but a sister named Kelly.
        The boxes said, “You can be anything,” but
        The noblest career as an option was cut!

        Yet I’d love for a little girl somewhere to learn
        That her motherly wishes aren’t cause for concern
        Or a childhood phase she’ll be leaving behind,
        But a dream to encourage, and how she’s designed.

        https://classicalpoets.org/2023/05/14/the-ballad-of-the-heroic-mother-and-other-poetry-by-joshua-c-frank/

      • Joshua C. Frank

        Mike: I was working on my reply while you posted that comment, so I didn’t see it until now. Yes, that sounds like a good idea. Let’s do as you suggest.

      • C.B Anderson

        At any rate, Brent, we are all thrilled that you have no intention of having children.

  16. Joseph S. Salemi

    To Brent W —

    Do you know that you’re an authority-monger, and much more of a conformist than those whom you attack?

    Your first paragraph: You say “Research suggests…” What research? Whose research? Then you say “The actual qualified medical and scientific professionals…” Do you really think that spouting this kind of pretentious, empty jargon is going to convince any of us here?

    Your last paragraph: You refer to “dozens of relevant professional bodies…” Again, who might they be? And why should anyone listen to you sing their praises when you don’t even deign to identify them?

    Brent, you’re a brainless follower. You blissfully believe every piece of left-liberal propaganda that Mainstream Media blares at you, and that your like-minded friends tell you. And you’re upset that we don’t conform to that paradigm of groupthink.

    Reply
    • Brent W

      I didn’t bother to list off the organizations because a) you can find them yourself, and b) don’t worry, I know that pointing to actual qualified professionals won’t convince you. You can’t be reasoned out of an opinion you didn’t reason yourself into. But for the sake of addressing your concerns, see below:
      At least one study on early influences of gender identity and roles in children: Zosuls KM, et al. The acquisition of gender labels in infancy: implications for sex-typed play. Dev. Psychol. 2009;45:688–701

      Organizations that have made one or more public statements in support of gender-affirming care:
      American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
      American Academy of Dermatology
      American Academy of Family Physicians
      American Academy of Nursing
      American Academy of Pediatrics
      American Academy of Physician Assistants
      American College Health Association
      American College of Nurse-Midwives
      American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
      American College of Physicians
      American Counseling Association
      American Heart Association
      American Medical Association
      American Medical Student Association
      American Nurses Association
      American Osteopathic Association
      American Psychiatric Association
      American Psychological Association
      American Public Health Association
      American Society of Plastic Surgeons
      Endocrine Society
      Federation of Pediatric Organizations
      GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ Equality
      National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women’s Health
      National Association of Social Workers
      National Commission on Correctional Health Care
      Pediatric Endocrine Society
      Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine
      World Medical Association
      World Professional Association for Transgender Health
      Source: https://transhealthproject.org/resources/medical-organization-statements
      Granted, this is a website promoting health equality for trans people, but all they did was collect publicly-available statements from these organizations. If you go to that link, it contains links for each organization showing exactly what they said.

      Reply
      • Joshua C. Frank

        You don’t understand our side at all. The whole world could be in favor of transitioning children, yet we would still know it is wrong because we worship a God who created gender, and we know it is a serious mistake to mess with His plan. So don’t bother trying to convince us of your hateful agenda.

      • Brian A Yapko

        Fascinating. Generating even more medical approval than the recent promotion of “gender-affirming care” (by the way “gender-affirming is equally gender-destroying”) was the medical /psychiatric view on lobotomies. A daunting number of medical associations, medical schools and prestigious physicians approved lobotomies in the 1940s and 1950s. In fact, in 1949, Dr. Egas Moniz won the Nobel Prize for pioneering the use of lobotomies. And then… somehow, for reasons I simply cannot fathom, lobotomies, though once extensively performed, fell into disfavor and are no longer performed.

      • Joseph S. Salemi

        Brent, you are really showing your utter intellectual complacency. First off, the study you mention, and the organizations that you list, all accept without question the factitious distinction between “sex” and “gender.” IT DOESN’T EXIST. This distinction is a purely political construct of feminism, and nothing else. If you’re born with a penis, you’re a boy. If you’re born with a vagina, you’re a girl. Period. End of story. Nothing left to discuss.

        Second, you seem innocently certain that professional medical and health organizations are always honest and unafraid and dedicated to the absolute truth. If you can still seriously think that after the Covid debacle and hysteria, you really are naive, and in a class by yourself. These organizations follow a strict party line, and they expel or disavow any member who declines to follow suit.

        You are an authority-monger, like every loyal Nazi and Communist was in the past. Authority speaks, and you jump.

      • Mike Bryant

        Brian, I have a feeling that lobotomies have made a comeback, judging by some of the idiocies that are now accepted as fact.

      • Brent W

        @Joseph Salemi- What is your factual basis for arguing that there is no distinction between sex and gender? How do you explain the existence of trans people? If sex and gender are the same thing, the only thing I need to do to disprove that is to find one person whose sex and gender are not the same, which is obviously easy to do. So what is your reasoning? That they’re lying? To what end, for what purpose? What do they gain by having people like you hate and harass them? Is it mental illness? Mental illness is only diagnosable if it causes the person significant distress or significantly impairs their ability to function. Many, many trans people who have received gender-affirming care and live as their authentic selves no longer feel the distress that they experienced before they transitioned. In this way, it no longer qualifies as mental illness according to modern psychiatric standards.

        What are your qualifications for making these black-and-white statements about human psychology? Cuz frankly, it seems to me that you literally do not know what you’re talking about, and that makes your opinion invalid. You are of course free to hold your opinion, but it is literally invalid compared to anyone who actually knows enough to talk about these things. That’s not authority-mongering, it’s common sense. I’m not going to come to you for childcare or psychology just like I wouldn’t go to a neuroscientist to fix my car.

      • Mike Bryant

        Brent, your evangelism is touching… unfortunately you have been swept up by a cult.

      • Joshua C. Frank

        Brent, why are you so eager to have children’s genitals mutilated beyond repair, effectively spaying and neutering them like dogs? And why do you, who clearly have no interest in classical poetry, come here to harass us with your hatred? Is it because your puny, perverted worldview can’t bear the thought of people like us existing?

        Let’s discuss your own Darwin. Since devout Christians, Jews, and Muslims are having the most children, Darwin would be the first to say that such conditions select for belief in those religions. Your worldview is a Johnny-come-lately and an evolutionary dead end. Even if you were somehow right, you still couldn’t compete against a worldview that favors large families, and by extension, traditional sex roles based on biological sex (you’ll see both defended quite a bit in my poetry).

      • Joseph S. Salemi

        To Brent W —

        Sex is a primary reality, sensibly apparent to everyone, and patently visible in the flesh. “Gender” is an idea, a theoretical construct, a debatable abstraction. This abstraction was invented as a convenient talking-point by feminists as a way to avoid the blatantly obvious fact of physical differences between men and women, and what those differences implied and demanded.

        By creating the nebulous and unprovable idea of “gender,” feminists could transfer the debate on sex and traditional sex roles away from the fleshly reality of the human body into a realm of propagandizing and accusation. Homosexuals latched onto this switch because they saw in it a path to blurring and confusing sexual identity, and thereby to strengthening their own claims to public acceptance.

        You speak illogically when you say that if we can find one person for whom sex and “gender” are not matched, this proves that sex and gender are not the same. I already stated that “gender” is a factitious category, so you are trying to beg the question (the fallacy known as “petitio principii”). Gender is just a con-game to escape facing the reality of one’s sex. When a man says that he is not happy with his male “gender,” he is not talking about anything other than his sex. Why do you think he opts to have his body mutilated by surgery?

        How do I explain the existence of “trans people”? Very easily. There ARE no trans people. There are simply deluded or deranged men who want to be women, and similarly ignorant women who want to be men. Their “feelings” or “desires” or “urges” — no matter how strong — cannot change the brute fact of their sex. They can mutilate their bodies, they can wear clothing of the opposite sex, they can parade around as freaks and change their pronouns, but they are what they were born — men or women. You say that “they are not lying.” No one has claimed that. We say that they are deluded and probably in need of psychiatric care. They certainly shouldn’t be celebrated and catered to, as is currently happening in Western society.

        What are my qualifications for making these statements? I am intelligent, well read, and perceptive, and not subject to trendy idiocy and mindless jargon. Try to spread politically correct chickenshit here, Brent, and you will be smacked back hard.

        By the way, we are not cowards here. We use our real names. Are you willing to do the same, Brent W? Or are you just here as a troll to cause trouble?

      • Mike Bryant

        Someone said that truth is the daughter of time. Today the lies have been piled so high that you have to be very well “educated” to believe them. In time, they will all fall to the the hard ground of truth.

  17. Yael

    For what it’s worth, here is why the notion of a distinction between male and female and everything this entails is purely religious and a matter of faith:
    Genesis, the first book of Torah, defines the origin of the human male and female in the very first chapter. Genesis 1:27 and 5:2 are quoted by both Matthew and Mark in their gospels. The Biblical concept of male and female extends to the animal kingdom, for example in Genesis 6:19, as well as in other books and chapters of the Bible.
    Other than every person’s own physical observations, tests and anecdotes (science being any system of knowledge that is concerned with the physical world and its observable phenomena), this Biblical definition is all we have when it comes to male and female. It is a religious definition which anyone who places their faith in Torah and/or the rest of the Bible will accept on pure faith alone. Anyone who claims that male and female is something other than what is defined in Torah is therefore also making a faith based religious declaration, albeit one from a different religious faith. Because who is to argue that any one person’s or group’s tests and observations of physical phenomena (the “science”) are more valid, true or objective than anyone else’s?

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      Yael, thank you very much for your comment and for the link you provided below. Your words have given me plenty to think about. For me, our current situation – the sexualizing and neutering of minors, hospital homicide, injurious and murderous shots, the theft of freedom, and the daily deception from our governments – has eclipsed the realm of the purely political and descended into the dark depths of depravity. You touch upon this in your comment when you mention the distinction between male and female as being purely religious and a matter of faith… to my mind, this boils down to faith in God or faith in government-funded, “Science”. You either believe that God has created you for a purpose, or that humankind can fashion you into whatever suits the ideological whim of the era. There’s a lot of wisdom in the classics – Mary Shelley’s vain Victor Frankenstein springs to mind. Didn’t he think he could create the perfect human? The creature of his making ended up holding him responsible for the less than perfect outcome. Many children (now adults) who were coerced into making painful and drastic life-altering changes by agreeing to be experimented on, are now queuing up to warn others of the horrific and barbaric procedures they’ve undergone… all while they were too young to realize what they were agreeing to. The victims of this abuse are out there. You’ll never hear their voices in MSM… liars are allergic to the truth… it dries up funding.

      Yael – thanks again.

      Reply
  18. Susan Jarvis Bryant

    Brent,
    To answer your questions:

    As far as an age at which someone is “allowed to begin to develop their own identity” – I think the words “allowed” and “identity” are where the issue lies. From my personal perspective (as a confused child and a wise mother) children develop their identity as they grow and mature. There’s no “allowed” about it. It’s a natural progression fueled by curiosity, imagination, and knowledge gained through experience. Those experiences can be embarrassing, hazardous, and (above all) enlightening. It’s all part of becoming an adult who can make a rational decision. That’s why we differentiate between adults and children with the restrictions mentioned in my poem. If a kid is too immature to smoke, drink, or vote, a kid is too immature to take life-altering puberty blockers or to decide to be operated on. Neither route is reversible.

    Now we enter the realms of the loose-baggy-monster word “identity.” It would appear that choosing to identify as a “superhero” at the age of four is a bad idea. The child may feel he/she is superman. The child may think flying is possible. Only time and experience (if lucky enough to survive the plunge from the window ledge) will dictate that choosing to identify as superman is likely to come with perilous consequences. That is why children are “allowed” to engage with their imaginations but not “allowed” to make life-altering decisions. The words “allowed” and “identity” have more than one interpretation.

    You ask: “Does it not make sense for [children] to begin to determine, from that young age, whether or not they wholly fit into the roles and expectations that others place upon them? YES, it does make sense, which is why the majority of parents don’t turn a hair when their daughter wants to go hunting, collect insects, play football, climb trees, and help build a wall, while her little brother is in the kitchen dancing in mom’s high-heels asking if he can bake a cake and learn to crochet. Caring, knowledgeable parents understand the natural curiosity of children and embrace it without making one hell of a fuss about it and deciding that their daughter and son are in the wrong bodies simply because they are not conforming to stereotypes. And that is exactly why my brother and I were “allowed” to grow up to embrace our “identity” instead of being coerced into making a decision about it before we were physically and mentally ready to do so. We both went on to have families of our own… a joy now denied children as non-conformist as me and my brother.

    Each and every child should be able to gain personal wisdom… wisdom they’re allowed to acquire in their own time at their own speed without the intervention and scrutiny of “experts” with only one agenda, and that agenda has nothing to do with the care of children. It is to grow extremely rich at the expense of the vulnerable and innocent. Perhaps you should stop conforming to their ideals and follow the money for the obvious answers to this growing catastrophe.

    Reply
  19. Brian A Yapko

    I suggest, my friends, that you are spinning your wheels by struggling to convert someone who is operating from a completely different paradigm than you. You are not going to convince him of anything. Zealots cannot be budged. Move on to where you can actually make a difference.

    Reply
    • Joseph S. Salemi

      Brian, I don’t think Brent W is coming back. He seems to have been rattled by my challenge that he reveal his full identity rather than hiding behind an initial.

      I think we should keep in mind that, as the SCP grows in popularity and more serious poets decide to submit material, the left will try harder to get a foot in the door here, and colonize the place for their own purposes. That is why there has been a flurry of left-liberal trolling here recently. It’s no accidents, and it is probably coordinated.

      There is an iron law governing the political complexion of all institutions or enterprises in today’s world, and it is this: Any public body that is not explicitly and vociferously rightist will in the course of time slowly but surely drift leftwards. Moderates, RINOs, faux conservatives, and a great many pietistic types have never understood this fact.

      Reply
      • Joshua C. Frank

        You’re absolutely right about all of that. Eventually, we may have to have comments approved before posting. None of us have time to fight off as many trolls as are probably coming.

      • Brent W

        Lmfaoo yall are wild. I took a break because standing alone against a tide of ignorance and blind hatred is mentally and emotionally exhausting. I’m also still not giving my full name because I don’t feel like it, so, cry about it some more. Also, interesting point about things drifting leftwards, as though that’s a bad thing. Tell me, when in history do we look back on people being dehumanized and discriminated against and say “Yea that was good, more of that please.” You’d undoubtedly be the kinds of people trying to keep black people segregated not that long ago. Hell, you might still hold those views but avoid expressing them because they’ve rightly become unacceptable in common discourse. Racism is, after all, a pretty common companion to other forms of hatred born from ignorance and fear.

        Also, needing comments approved before posting? I thought you far-right zealots loved braying loudly about freedom of speech and the feeling of being silenced? Or wait, I forgot, you only truly stand for things when they’re convenient for you and work exclusively in your favor. Same applies to most of your religious beliefs, oddly enough. Bible says a lot about slavery, oppressing women, and corporal punishment, not to mention what foods to eat and which clothes to wear, but those aren’t really convenient in modern society, so I bet you’re pretty quiet about those in day-to-day life.

        I take comfort in the knowledge that your dog-shit opinions are actually deeply unpopular and are slowly dying out. To reference Marting Luther King, Jr., the arc of the moral universe is long but it inevitably bends towards justice, and treating all people with dignity and respect for who they are is undoubtedly just. That said, I feel no need to show as much respect for people who choose to be bigots.

        I’ll not be engaging with this conversation again, so feel free to wail and moan amongst your little circle-jerk here. It’s Pride Month and I’m going to spend it having so much queer sex, fighting for trans rights, and celebrating with all my queer friends. If you want to die mad about it, I’ll not mourn you.

      • Mike Bryant

        Conor Kelly, Ron Lockley, Brent W, or whoever you are today,

        If you think that anyone here at SCP cares a whit about what you do this, or any other, month, then you are hopelessly disconnected from reality. Read the poem and comments a few more times and try to get this simple message through your skull,

        LEAVE THE KIDS ALONE!

        Is that clear enough?

      • Joseph S. Salemi

        We’re glad you’re gone, Brent W. Try not to get infected during your Pride Month orgies.

      • Joshua C. Frank

        Brent, are you friends with Conor Kelly? He called us a circle jerk too. Which is funny because the whole trans-affirming agenda is quite the circle jerk in itself. You fawn over men in dresses and call them women, following this with all kinds of fake compliments. Saying these men are men and will always be men isn’t bigoted. Saying they should all be shot (which we don’t believe) is bigoted. Calling them men is simply stating a fact.

        What, if I may ask, is so horrible about Susan saying that department stores shouldn’t be hawking products that encourage children to go transgender before they’re old enough to make decisions for themselves? Yet you people go postal over parents teaching their religions to children that age. Encourage your sons to try to method-act their way into girlhood and you’re a hero, but teach your children to sing “Jesus Loves Me” and you’re a hate-monger, dehumanizing others?

        It is you liberals who are the kings of dehumanizing. When we point out that abortion is murder and therefore you people have more blood on your hands than all the tyrants of human history combined (1.7 billion dead worldwide since 1980 alone, not counting deaths by failure to implant caused by various birth-control methods), your immediate objection is that an unborn child is somehow not a human being. Somehow, you don’t call that dehumanizing, but it is. If the Nazis were wrong to say Jews aren’t human beings, then you’re wrong to say the unborn aren’t human beings. If you get to decide for yourself who is and isn’t human, then so did Hitler. You can’t have it both ways.

        Your opinions are not only worse than mere “dogshit opinions,” your opinions are worse than those of the Nazis for the Abortion Holocaust alone, let alone the rest, which would take an encyclopedia to list. As I said elsewhere, you liberals don’t have a leg to stand on with morality as long as you believe in abortion “rights.” So, yes, drifting leftward is a very bad thing. You people are the most bigoted bunch I have ever had the misfortune to meet. You call yourselves tolerant because you affirm people in their errors, yet your hatred toward Christians and others who go against liberal ways (for example, stay-at-home mothers) makes the hatred of the stereotypical white supremacist seem like nothing. And, again, your hatred of the unborn knows no bounds; Hitler would go green with envy over your hyper-efficient, worldwide, baby-killing machine. So don’t hold yourselves up as compassionate; you are nothing of the sort. (True, some conservatives are hateful, but it’s not because they’re conservative, any more than the reason a black person commits a crime is because he’s black.)

        I’m guessing you don’t know much about the Bible, but are just repeating what your liberal gurus tell you about it. The Bible doesn’t command those things you describe; the verses that can be construed toward this are taken out of context. We could address your concern that it seems inconsistent one by one, but I don’t think you’re interested in the answers, because you’d have to give up “queer sex” if you accepted its truth. People who become Christians give up vices (not by coercion but from a loving relationship with God); people who leave Christianity take up vices.

        The arc of history doesn’t bend toward justice; it’s cyclical. Hard times make good men, good men make easy times, easy times make bad men, and bad men make hard times. That’s not a religious thing (though the Bible does show examples); secular historians say the same. As I said before, your worldview can’t survive natural selection, because we’re the ones populating the future.

        I don’t know about anyone else here, but I take comfort in being hated by the liberal culture; since it hates all things good, holy, and true, my bad reputation means I’m on the right track. I consider your insults and hatred to be praise. If you hate me now, just be patient; I’ve got lots more material where that came from. There are thousands of topics I haven’t even touched on yet.

  20. BDW

    I appreciate Ms. Bryant’s targeted poems. This morning I hear from ALX: “In case you need clothes for your Gay or Trans 3 months old, Kohl’s has you covered.”

    Reply
    • Susan Jarvis Bryant

      BDW, thank you for your appreciation – these clothing ranges are sick to the very core and represent all that is wrong with our increasingly dark times.

      Reply
    • Joshua C. Frank

      Please tell me that’s satire and not an actual Kohl’s advertisement.

      Reply
  21. BDW

    “Boycott Target” by rapper Forgiato Blow, with Jimmy Levy, Nick Nittoli, and Stoney Dudebro, shot up to #1 on the iTunes “most popular chart”; though it came down quickly due to woke Apple? Though one may not like rap (slam poetry), the message reverberates.

    Reply
  23. ABB

    In trying to keep this recording under a minute, I discovered that the tongue-twisting wordplay of Susan’s work is particularly suited to speed-reading:

    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/XzZnovUX1cw

    The Dante bust in my library was not supposed to be part of the background, but since Hell and Satan are mentioned in the poem, his accidental presence seems auspicious.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Captcha loading...

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.