9 Comments

What is the matter with Scotland? Why are they so obsessed with the gender woo? I thought of visiting that lovely country, but now I never will…until they get sane again.

Expand full comment
author

It is exceptionally disheartening, it is a captured country. That said the resistance is real and we are growing!

Expand full comment

You need to grow big! There is a huge amount of money secret and otherwise behind this dangerous regressive authoritarian agenda! It’s not as bad here in the states where we have some conservatives working against this…and I was never a conservative …I’m ashamed of our Democratic leaders who are not leaders in this at all!

Expand full comment

I don't think there is anything 'woo' or 'insane' about these kinds of programs. If only it were that simple!

All western governments have signed up to the TRANSHUMAN agendas being pushed by global think tanks and organisations like the WEF. The UK government openly publishes a downloadable pdf 'brochure' on transhumanism, which discusses how the merging of man with machine is inevitable and a brilliant idea (what could possibly go wrong!?).

Artificial wombs are just a decade or two away and they are already being promoted as a wonderful 'empowering' tool which will allow women to avoid the horrors and inconveniences of pregnancy and childbirth. AI is being promoted (and in China already used) to profile kids at the earliest age and 'assign' the correct career to them based on their personality profile (presumably if you are compliant, obedient and have no moral integrity you will get offered the top jobs!).

The point being, there really is no need for 'gender' anymore. The strong family unit, with a good work ethic, loyalty and devotion, and the stupendous partnership of men and women working as a complimentary team allowed for the building of cathedrals, canals, ships, cities, factories etc. But we are in the post industrial age now. There is no need for a strong, resilient and motivated labour force.

Huxley's Brave New World paints an accurate picture of what the post industrial 'Global Citizen' will look like. Atomised, hedonistic, narcissistic, self obsessed.... the perfect consumer and worker drone ('work' now being mostly about managing the robots and operating the computers). And even though Huxley's vision had men and women (to make the book comprehensible to the reader), they did not reproduce naturally or pair bond. There were no families (the concept was taboo). They might as well have been genderless (non binary/ gender queer). That is where we are headed now. 100 new and exciting pseudo genders are being introduced, while 'male' and 'female' are being quietly ushered out the back door and bundled into a van. Even gendered terms are being criminalised in our speech. When they take away the shop sign that's a good indication it is about to shut down!

Huxley was not a 'visionary'. He was a member of the elite social engineering think tank 'The Fabian Society'. His book was a result of him eavesdropping on their plans for a future society (today's society). But even to frame this as a 'conspiracy' is not necessary. Technology itself has brought us to this crossroads, where we either consciously decide to protect our biological capacity to BE male and female (and reproduce and parent naturally)... or we hand all of these tasks over to technology, and allow technology to invade our bodies and transform them into something else (a cyborg). Maybe every civilisation in the universe has to make this choice when they reach this level of technology.

I would argue The Pill marked the beginning of the transhumanist age. What we are seeing today is just more potent drugs. The artificial womb is no different to the washing machine and other mod cons of the 20th century. They are all 'liberating' the modern woman from her natural biological role. The tractor replaced horses. Robots are poised to replace the skilled and strong labour of men. Whever we look technology is consuming biology.

I am not condemning ALL of it. But the question is how far do we want to go? Where do we draw the line?

The technocrats (the WEF etc) have made it clear they want to go ALL THE WAY. And this is why 'safe to be me' programs (and DQSH and all the rest) exist. This is why the very concept of gender is being dismantled in front of our eyes and removed from acceptable speech. In the most cynical sense, every trans identified kid is a useful lab rat for transhumanist technologies, who will drive all of those industries forward during the course of their lifetime - as they seek more and more medical interventions and technological assistance to live out their lives and construct their identities.

The question is how far do WE (as parents, as responsible adults and as normal, sane people with no investments in cutting edge technology) want technology to replace biology? Is technology the answer to everything? What about stoicism? Can suffering motivate great achievements? Is personal appearance the only way we can express who or what we truly are or how we feel? Do we always have to put 'identity' above all other considerations - including our own health?

I don't believe these kinds of programs really have anything to do with children's well being, or even gender. It's just that the 'children in distress' narrative is the perfect excuse to push this technological revolution forward, and to label anyone who offers alternative approaches and lifestyles as a 'transphobe' who wants children to suffer.

The explosion in dysphoric youth in recent years has many, many likely causes - from environmental pollution (especially EMF), to diet, to immersion in the 'non physical realm' of online digital spaces and social media, lack of exercise and unstructured play in nature (rolling about on the grass) ... and of course the ideological capture of schools, the entertainment industry and the arts.

Caring for children means addressing all of these factors. Caring for children does NOT mean using their distress and confusion to further a technological revolution which will see the end of the human race as we know it.

I am not suggesting most people who push this agenda understand where this is all heading. I think they just see opportunities to jump on a bandwagon, get a bunch of funding, and virtue signal the latest 'trendy cause'... and for a provincial ballet company like SB, they can use the agenda to give their brand an air of trendiness, cutting edge and 'relevance' (something most ballet companies are terrified of losing).

What arts organisations like SB are doing is reckless, misguided and criminally irresponsible. But it is not new. Ballet companies have been promoting technology over humanity for the last 20 years, with an endless stream of 'metallic grey', androgynous, angular, stoney faced, dysphoric ballets which all seem to convey the same message: "Being human is shit. I wish I was a robot!" ;)

Unlike, say the Royal Ballet, Scottish Ballet probably cannot afford to put on those kinds of grey techno-worshipping ballets. They need the classics to secure provincial audiences. But they got around this by recently staging Cinderella with half the performances gender flipped. They refused to tell the paying public which performances would be gender flipped. Had they done so the audience would have voted with their wallets and booked the normal version which actually MAKES SENSE as a story and is RELATABLE. Their decision to not reveal which version was being shown each night was an admission that they had no confidence in the concept. It was blatant propaganda and social engineering. It was also a betrayal of the basic trust between artist / company and the audience.

Cinderella does not make any sense (as a story in its own right, or as a narrative ballet) when you flip the genders. Men and women are not simply interchangeable for many reasons, not least the fact that men and women have very different drives, ambitions and motivations. To pretend that they are interchangeable is demoralising and annoying for the adults in the audience, and disorientating (and I would argue even traumatising) for the children.

This is not because women can't be strong or can't save or rescue men, it's just that they do it differently. Giselle would be a perfect example of this!

What distinguishes ideology from innovation is that ideology is utterly predictable, boring, nonsensical and stupid. Nowhere is this more apparent than when ideology is inserted into the arts, especially a traditional, natural and warm blooded art such as ballet.

So anyway... the video advert for this 'safe to be me' project was confusing, destabilising, disorientating and full of cognitive dissonance. It frames a serious issue and a devastating predicament in the most shallow and whimsical manner, and makes it trendy. The message of these kinds of programs is that we are all trans really, and there is no gender because gender is just self expression and self discovery.

After trivialising and over simplifying the topic in this way, children will have no trepidation about embarking on a path of medicalisation. A path which WILL cause injury, harm, loss of function and lead to a whole list of complications and suffering down the line (and increasingly regret and the equally arduous path of detransition).

Everyone (every adult) should have the right to embark on that path if they genuinely believe it is right for them, but to effectively funnel children towards that technological 'solution' with playful dancing and poetry and soothing buzzwords makes Scottish Ballet just another pied piper for the 'transhumanism industrial complex'.

On the positive side, I do feel this kind of ham fisted propaganda is forcing people to confront this fundamental question (the issue of our times): do we merge with technology and aim for that genderless, cyborg, techno-enhanced utopia........ or do we remain fully human and take delight in our natural state, and learn to transcend the suffering of this physical world (and our physical bodies) in ways that do not require drastic technological intervention?

If ballet has ONE lesson, it is that we are ALL born in the wrong bodies, and all we can really do is dance as best we can with what we have.

Sorry, got a bit carried away there :)

Expand full comment
author

I agree this is much bigger then the program itself. The sheep like following of agendas still drives me nuts though. Ballet in and of itself is (done well) a GREAT and beautiful thing for kids to learn/see. I wrote another post related to Brave New World did you see it? It's all connected. I think CS Lewis "Hideous Strength" is also really relevant. And his 'Screwtape Letters' on the banality of evil. And I agree on birth control to, it was the start (continuance) of women from her nature. And like you I am not saying conversations are not to be had about it, or that we should or should not use birth control but that it does come at a cost. And the bandwith expands. And yes I see surrogacy absolutely at the other end of that. Assisted suicide to. Just because we can, doesn't mean we should.

Expand full comment

I only just came across your SS. I wiIl explore more later ...

I was so shocked to see a voice of reason/ resistance connected to the dance/ ballet world. Ballet especially seems to full of shame and self loathing. It doens't know what to do with all of its traditional stories with such strong male/ female archetypes.

Forgive long rambling comment. I only meant to write a few lines.... And well done for holding their feet to the fire in such a cool headed and professional way :)

Expand full comment
author

Yeah there is very little reasonable chat in dance/ballet unfortunately. Really unfortunately. They are ruining a good thing, a great beautiful thing. That's why I got cancelled- for calling it out. I just saw a dance show at Tramway says they are providing fidget spinners in case attendees get triggered. I mean really? Adults. I wouldn't even let my 11 year old behave in such an imbecilic way. Mad mad mad world.

Expand full comment

Yes, this obsession with 'care' and 'safety' (trigger warnings, safe spaces etc) is just part of the manipulation and abuse. I see no evidence these ideologues actually care for children, or even see children as anything other than lab rats/ pawns for their own ideological obsessions. They just want to 'be seen to be caring'.

Having said that, I could have used a fidget spinner or a large roll of bubble wrap to get through SB's Cinderella ;)

Expand full comment
author

ha ha ha!!! I think probably "gin" is the word you are looking for ;-)

Expand full comment