Astronomers this week were shocked and perplexed by the discovery of a very round, pale and reflective bald object hovering many miles above Ireland.
No, it’s not a Chinese spy balloon – it’s People Before Profit TD Paul Murphy, who appears to have completely left earth and detached himself from any semblance of grounded normality.
And this was demonstrated by his revelation this week, where he announced that he is raising his newborn baby boy, Juniper, without a gender. He says he chose that name because it is “gender-neutral.”
As reported by the Irish Times:
“Murphy is not “gendering” Juniper. “We’re not gendering it. So we’re not describing Juniper as a boy, we’re describing Juniper as a baby, but it is male.
“We live in a deeply sexist and gendered society which creates certain expectations for boys and certain expectations for girls. And those things are changing in a positive direction, but there’s a very, very long way to go.”
At this point it’s probably worth noting the fact that he’s literally referring to his own baby as “it,” which is about as dehumanising as it gets. And it’s worse than that, because in the same article Murphy explains that he won’t be challenging people if they “misgender” his child and use “he/him” pronouns outside the home.
It’s hard to think of anything that would be more confusing to a child than such an arrangement. When you’re outside, people address the boy by “he” – but when he’s at home, Mommy and Daddy call him “they” or “it.” How is this child supposed to make sense of its own identity? It is, as Senator Michael McDowell put it recently, “linguistic chaos.”
Regardless, the article goes on to explain the reasoning for letting this baby boy “decide for themselves” what gender they want to be:
“…we don’t want to limit the kind of future they will foresee for themselves, the role that they will perceive for themselves, the type of play that they will perceive for themselves by saying ‘you’re a boy or you’re a girl’. Just let them decide for themselves.
“You want to dress in pink? Fire ahead. You want to dress in blue? Fire ahead. You want to play football? Brilliant. You want to go dancing? Amazing… it’s just not to limit.”
What’s really amazing about this, when you think about it, is that absolutely none of the things Murphy listed have anything to do with gender. If a woman decides to wear a blue dress, for example, she is no less “female” in any conceivable sense. Similarly, if a man wears pink, it has no bearing on whether or not he’s actually a man.
American gangster rapper Cam’ron, from the group Dipset, is known for wearing iconic pink fur clothing – it’s basically his trademark or brand. And yet he’s still a man, whose presentation and music is hyper-masculine.
Mercedes Benz Fashion Week '02 Cam'ron wore a pink fur jacket, matching hat & phone #BlackHistoryMonth #HBDKilla pic.twitter.com/SsgYm9dOAn
— 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐊𝐧𝐮𝐗 (@TheKnuX) February 4, 2016
Nobody thinks that just because a man puts on a pink polo shirt that makes him a woman. And the same applies to football, and dancing, and any other similar activity that Murphy could name. A man who likes dancing does not suddenly become a woman, nor does a woman who’s into sports suddenly become a man.
You could tell your child to pursue their own preferred style, hobbies and interests without ever once questioning their gender. A girl who has short hair and likes rugby could easily be what we used to call a “Tom Boy” – it doesn’t mean she’s a man and needs to go get hormone blockers and a double mastectomy.
Similarly, a boy who likes fashion and pastel colours could just be a creative type with a flare for aesthetics. Or maybe he’s gay. But there’s absolutely no reason at all to assume that he’s really a girl trapped in a boy’s body. Murphy could tell his boy to pursue all his little dreams to his hearts’ content, without recklessly confusing the child about its fundamental identity.
Ironically, as woke as Murphy is, he seems to be of the opinion that there are “male” and “female” pursuits in life – that sport is an inherently male thing, and if your little girl takes an interest in it, then she must really be a boy. The idea of a girl liking boxing or soccer is apparently unfathomable to him. That seems like a fairly old-fashioned and backward position, one would have thought.
He even absurdly added that by “gendering” your child, you increase the likelihood of them adhering to that gender identity in the future:
“But it is true that if you put the label, boy or girl on your child, you definitely increase the chances of them going down one road or another.”
Now actually stop and think about what he’s saying here for a minute.
What he’s effectively saying is, if you have a boy, with XY chromosomes and a penis, and you raise him as a boy, he’s probably going to grow up to think of himself as a boy. And that’s a bad thing apparently, though we’re never told why. I don’t see how it’s a problem that a male thinks of themselves as male, but apparently this is a disaster which needs to be avoided.
Alternatively, if you have a boy, but you raise him with no gender, using neutral pronouns, and you spend his earliest years pumping his mind full of deranged gender propaganda, he might grow up confused. He might start thinking of himself as something other than what he is physically.
Well, believe it or not Paul, we actually all guessed that particular piece of wisdom for ourselves. It turns out that confusing children means they’re more likely to be confused – now who could have seen that one coming?
What’s really twisted about all this is, we know that male and female brains are different on a physical level. Parts of a man’s brain develop in different ways to a woman’s brain.
As read on Stanford Medicine’s website:
“Adjusted for total brain size (men’s are bigger), a woman’s hippocampus, critical to learning and memorization, is larger than a man’s and works differently. Conversely, a man’s amygdala, associated with the experiencing of emotions and the recollection of such experiences, is bigger than a woman’s.”
Many more examples of such differences can be found in the article linked above, including behavioural differences from the youngest ages. Notably, these findings were consistent with observations made in Rhesus monkeys:
“In a study of 34 rhesus monkeys, for example, males strongly preferred toys with wheels over plush toys, whereas females found plush toys likeable. It would be tough to argue that the monkeys’ parents bought them sex-typed toys or that simian society encourages its male offspring to play more with trucks.”
Unless Murphy wants to argue that monkey society is overly “gendered” too, I’d say that’s fairly conclusive. You don’t teach male or female behaviours – they come naturally based on one’s physical sex. But you can sure as hell confuse your child and warp their self-image with weird, unnatural political agendas.
Murphy adds that he’s happy to let his child decide their own gender, and change their gender as they see fit:
“Murphy says if Juniper decides at the age of three that they are a boy “then we’ll say he and we’ll just say, ‘oh yeah cool, you’re a boy, excellent. And you’re free to change your opinion and you’re free to change your gender identity in the future if you want.”
From this we can only assume that Murphy is abdicating all parental responsibility to his newborn, and allowing a literal baby to make its own significant life decisions. Although in fairness Paul seemingly has a similar IQ and problem-solving abilities to a newborn, so maybe they’re matched in the wisdom department after all.
Regardless, the point of being a parent with decades of life experience is to guide your young child to objectively correct and healthy conclusions about the world. Your job is to explain to the child when they’ve fallen into error – particularly in an area that’s important.
I’m guessing if Paul’s baby said he felt like an alien, the Murphy family wouldn’t be on the next flight to Roswell New Mexico or Nevada to check the kid into Area 51. Any responsible parent would calmly explain to the child that they aren’t actually an alien, but a human being.
A three-year-old doesn’t even know what a male or female is. Most three-year-old boys probably don’t even know what girls’ parts are, and they almost certainly don’t know where babies come from or anything about sex. So for a toddler to say “Daddy, I think I’m so-and-so gender” is completely meaningless – they don’t even know what they’re saying or what it implies. It is the babblings of a confused infant – much like Paul Murphy’s tweets.
These ideas are not without consequence, either. The heartbreaking and extraordinarily high suicide rate in the transgender community has been well documented in the past.
For example, according to one study, 56% of young transgender people have attempted suicide, with many more contemplating it.
While trans activists would like to attribute this to bullying that transgender individuals receive, consider the following: the suicide rate in the Nazi concentration camps is estimated to have been around 25% – less than half of the attempted transgender rate.
Whatever level of abuse transgender people receive in our society (and sadly there is almost certainly some), no honest person could seriously argue that it’s worse than the treatment of an inmate at the Auschwitz death camp. Which implies that whatever is driving the trans suicide rate cannot largely be due to abuse, and must be for another reason.
Is it not possible that confusing people about who they are on the most fundamental level leads to catastrophic mental health outcomes? I’m no psychologist, but it seems worthy of consideration.
Ultimately, whether Murphy is sincere about this or simply using his child as a political prop, this whole thing is twisted and really beyond the pale.