Is There a Doctor In The House? | Black Sheep News
Is There a Doctor In The House? | Black Sheep News
Gender lobotomies, celebrating death, and the need for a cure.
Just because you’re a black sheep willing to go your own way doesn’t mean you don’t want to know what’s happening in the world. Uncover the patterns you care about and catch the rays of hope—that’s what Black Sheep News is for.
Remember Lobotomies? The Gender-Affirming Surgery Craze Feels Familiar
A mother wanted to check for safeguards against misdiagnosing kids with gender dysphoria and fast-tracking them to sex-change surgeries—she found none.
This undercover citizen journalism refutes the argument used by trans activists, by which they claim misdiagnosis doesn’t happen and sex-change surgeries are hard to obtain. Trans activists have demonized all questioning of their approach, demanding that everyone adopt the same extreme, un-nuanced views or be condemned for an irrational hatred of trans people—including any trans people who disagree. This essay from Reality’s Last Stand proves what more people have been ringing the alarm bells on: questioning is crucial when navigating an unprecedented process like surgical sex transitions for minors.
But when the herd has set their mind to believing something, even tangible proof of a problem will be dismissed.
This is the importance of black sheep who dare to keep questioning. Highlighting the truth with enough determination eventually helps reach a critical mass where even the herd starts to acknowledge there’s a problem.
The most fascinating part of this essay isn’t just the fact that it proves a major health organization has no method to discern confused young patients from those genuinely in need of sex-reassignment surgery. What stands out about this essay is the reception: the immediate backlash from trans activists and gender ideologues all repeating the same rebuttals in lockstep. Over 400 quote tweets are almost all the same: avoidance of the problem by fixating on whether the author committed insurance fraud to go undercover or confusion over why the author’s transition being affirmed by medical staff at every step is a problem.
The last point is the worst because it shows a fundamental inability to understand the logic driving people’s concern over so-called gender-affirming care: rigorous diagnostic criteria are crucial to provide accurate treatment because patients often don’t know what they’re sick with.
But such is the cost of motivated reasoning, where people are determined to reach a set conclusion, regardless of whether it’s true.
The Death-Eaters Among Us
In uniquely terrible news, we now know that if a 25-year-old protests an international conflict between two foreign nations miles away via suicide by self-immolation, debate will ensue on whether or not this is a good thing. Maybe you’re like me and trust the gut feeling that watching a young person set themselves on fire is a deeply disturbing tragedy. If you’re like me, you’re probably also disturbed by the people praising this act of self-destruction. Trust your instincts.
Green Party candidate Jill Stein and public intellectual Cornel West rushed to celebrate the self-immolation of a 25-year-old. Mental health is an important problem today—that is, unless you shout the correct political slogans while killing yourself.
There are two important elements to examine in this event: the role of the individual under collectivism and the rhetoric of a death cult.
When notable people praise a young person for killing themselves to symbolically support a cause, they are showing us what they believe the individual’s value is—as a means to the collective’s ends. Individualism believes that each person is valuable as they are, not merely in so much as they are of use to a cause. To individualists, Bushnell had a better chance to help Palestinians while alive. To collectivists, the ritual of self-sacrifice “for the cause” reinforces their belief that individuals are disposable for the right goals.
Equally, when people praise a young person for killing themselves, they are praising death itself.
Many left-wing activists praised Bushnell’s suicide, calling him a martyr. Islamic fundamentalist fighters also praise the death of their soldiers and celebrate martyrs. Celebrating the destruction of a young life is undergirded by the belief that life itself is unworthy of preservation. This is common for death cults, who believe that existence is irredeemably tainted by the evil in our world, thus destroying existence is a rejection of that evil. For people like leftwing activists whose worldview is built upon the idea that their country is fundamentally evil and all human interactions are predicated on a combative, unjust power struggle, the leap from there to believing existence itself is evil isn’t far.
The Book That Diagnosed A Sick Culture Becomes a Film
There will now be a movie based on one of the books that first opened my eyes to the strange sickness growing in our culture. The Coddling of The American Mind is required reading for everyone, but especially people who want to understand the fundamental flaws causing today's negative cultural changes.
This book used scientific research and proven psychology to explain some common destructive behaviors today, like using accusations of bigotry instead of reasoning during disagreements and conflating disagreeable speech with physical violence. A friend of mine and lovely, clear thinker—Kimi Kaititi—is one of the interviewees in this film. I spoke with Kimi about her experience getting pulled in by critical social justice and leaving it behind for a healthier mindset in our popular conversation.
I’ll be watching this movie even though I already read the book because clarity about what’s causing our cultural strife is needed even more today. I’ve never rented a movie through Substack before (Substack is debuting the feature with this film), but now that we’ve seen how easily censorship creeps into any platform, I’m happy whenever there’s another option for sharing unpopular or unknown ideas.
Major Historical Medical Ethical Lapses in the United States
The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment
The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment stands as one of the most infamous racist and ethically controversial studies in the history of medicine. Spanning over four decades, from 1932 to 1972, the experiment conducted by the United States Public Health Service had far-reaching implications and consequences.
The experiment involved enrolling a total of 600 black male participants, with 399 of them having syphilis and 201 serving as a control group. However, what made the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment particularly egregious was the fact that the infected participants were deliberately left untreated, even after effective treatment options like penicillin became available in the 1940s. The subjects were never adequately informed about the true nature of the study and were instead misled into believing that they were receiving free healthcare for “bad blood.” One hundred died needlessly.
Lobotomies for Mental Illness
Lobotomy, a surgical procedure that involves severing or damaging connections in the brain’s prefrontal cortex, was introduced in the early 20th century.
The use of the procedure increased dramatically from the early 1940s and into the 1950s; by 1951, almost 20,000 lobotomies had been performed in the United States. Many of the patients were gay men but overall more lobotomies were performed on women than on men: a 1951 study found that nearly 60% of American lobotomy patients were women.
One of the major ethical concerns surrounding lobotomies was the lack of informed consent. Many patients and their families were not adequately informed about the irreversible nature of the procedure or the potential side effects.
While some patients experienced temporary relief from their symptoms, many others suffered severe cognitive and emotional impairments. The procedure often left individuals with significant personality changes, reduced cognitive abilities, and difficulties in functioning.
The Eugenic Sterilization of Black Women
The forced sterilization of black women in the name of eugenics represents a distressing chapter in the history of racial discrimination and reproductive rights.
In the United States, eugenic sterilization laws were implemented in various states, primarily between the 1920s and 1970s. Black women were disproportionately affected by these policies, as they were subjected to coerced or forced sterilizations without their full consent or knowledge. From 1950 to 1966, Black women were sterilized at more than three times the rate of white women and more than 12 times the rate of white men.
The eugenic sterilization of black women stands as a stark reminder of the systemic racism and discrimination embedded in the history of reproductive healthcare. It underscores the importance of vigilance in safeguarding individual rights, ensuring informed consent, and challenging biased practices.
Sterilizing Children through Gender-Affirming Care
Gender dysphoria, a condition where one’s gender identity differs from the sex assigned at birth, can be experienced by children and adolescents. Gender-affirming care aims to alleviate distress and support individuals in their gender identity by providing a range of treatments, including puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgical interventions such as double mastectomies and the removal of reproductive organs which results in permanent sterilization.
An ethical question arises when discussing the ability of children and adolescents to provide informed consent for sterilization procedures. In most jurisdictions, the legal age of consent for medical procedures is typically higher than the age at which gender-affirming care is initiated. This raises concerns about the capacity of minors to fully comprehend the long-term implications of sterilization and to make informed decisions considering its long-term negative consequences. Protecting them from potential harm is a challenging ethical endeavor.