Genderwoo Media Prepares To Ignore Supreme Court Skrmetti Decision
With false framing and misinformation
A reader of The Advocate will be left with the impression that the pending Supreme Court decision on pediatric transition bans is entirely the result of one evangelical religious organization filing a single amicus brief. Altogether, 74 different organizations, entities, or individuals filed amicus briefs in the case, but The Advocate is only impressed by the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission.
The reason? Jonathan Skrmetti, the Tennessee attorney general whose name ended up on the Court docket, told the Commission recently that his role in the case was “God’s will.” When Christians say that, they are being humble. When radicalized reporters read those words, however, they receive the phrase as if Radio Rwanda has called for ethnic cleansing.
“The suit challenges the provisions of the law banning hormone replacement therapy and puberty blockers for the purpose of gender transition for people under 18 and does not include the ban on surgery,” writer Trudy Ring huffs. “Genital surgery is almost never performed on minors.”
Almost never, except on television, where it was performed on Jazz Jennings as the world watched. Almost never, except for the thousands of times ‘gender surgery’ has been documented as being performed on minors. Almost never, except for that one time that the Biden administration specifically asked WPATH to remove any age minimums for surgeries on minors specifically so that it would be easier for them to defend those thousands of pediatric sex lobotomies that almost never happen in court, some day.
Because those irreversible surgeries almost never happen, the plaintiffs didn’t even bother trying to defend plastic surgeries on kids’ genitals in the United States Supreme Court. That’s the explanation that Trudy Ring has come up with.
They/them are certainly not going to read the other 73 amicus briefs to discover, for example, that internal communications of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health have “exposed a medical, legal, and political scandal that will be studied for decades to come,” or explain to readers just what role surgical transition has played in the case.
“The federal government, ‘social justice lawyers’ from prominent activist organizations, and self-appointed experts at the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) conspired to abolish age limits for sterilizing chemical treatments and surgeries,” the brief from the Alabama attorney general explains.
“Central to their strategy was the WPATH Standards of Care 8 (SOC-8) — a purportedly evidence-based set of recommendations that would be used by their lawyers to convince courts to enshrine in law the previously unimaginable.”
Note to The Advocate: I am not sure that Trudy Ring should be on the SCOTUS beat. “Skrmetti … couldn’t make a faith-based argument in the case because of separation of church and state,” Ring says, “but Skrmetti praised the commission’s brief.” This is nonsense. Lawyers argue from facts and law rather than faith even if their work is faith-driven, otherwise they are not doing law.
If the SBC Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission brief contains bibilical references, why doesn’t Ring quote it? This is what we get instead of journalism:
Skrmetti spoke along with Ryan Bangert, senior vice president of the Alliance Defending Freedom, an anti-LGBTQ+ legal nonprofit that is assisting in the case. “I would be ready to have good conversations with your congregants, good conversations with your fellow church members about what this case means not just from a legal perspective. But from a broader cultural perspective,” Bangert said. “I would be ready to have that conversation: ’God willing, the law has been upheld. What do we do now?’”
Indeed, reader, if the Supreme Court upholds the Tennessee ban, then what actually is next? Perhaps that crowd will decide to support detransitioners, which would be a great move. Or perhaps they will just move on to another issue. What the LGBTQAlphabet+ fears most, of course, is that this all-powerful evangelical group will escalate quickly, and start planning concentration camps for drag queens.
Spiritual abuse is a serious problem for gay and lesbian people. To be young, and hear that you are damned and evil for feelings you do not control, is extremely damaging. Ask Gareth Roberts, or Ben Appel, or Benjamin Morse, or Carol aka “Sour Patches,” to name just four homosexual people who have addressed this point to me. Trudy Ring might also ask any group of detransitioners, since some of them are bound to be same-sex attracted people.
Indeed, the awful truth that The Advocate and the professional alphabetical organizations desperately want to avoid disclosing is that homosexual kids have always been the vast majority of ‘gender nonconforming’ children, so they are the first to be medicalized as ‘affirmation.’ That’s right, they are transing the gay kids.
In the original ‘Dutch protocol’ study that set off the pediatric transition craze, 68 of the 70 experimental subjects were same-sex attracted. While the word ‘trans’ has expanded in meaning, so that it sweeps in every vulnerable kind of child, most of the thousands of children subjected to surgeries are still same-sex attracted.
The Advocate was founded during the Civil Rights Era, so it is just one of the mainstreamed alphabetical institutions that have failed the LGB community by refusing to examine ‘gender medicine’ with any skepticism. ‘Gender’ ruins everything it touches.
Editors at The Advocate cannot be bothered to have news writers do any reading because all the necessary wisdom to understand the pending Skrmetti decision has already been received. They know the talking points, such as “gender surgeries almost never happen on minors,” and believe them, evidence be damned.
Gay men and lesbian women are frequently primed to think there is a vast, right wing conspiracy against them, and that after the puberty blockades are banned, they are next. It all makes sense to them because they are used to opposition from the Christianity of Jonathan Skrmetti. Their lived experience is a split from the God of conservatives.
They are much less used to challenge from unexpected directions: J.K. Rowling telling them that genderwoo magic isn’t real, Democratic women and detransitioned people insisting that they themselves are real, atheists and skeptics who rubbish the intrinsic religiosity of ‘trans’ identification.
Such people do not fit The Narrative. The other 37 amicus briefs supporting Tennessee’s legislation do not fit The Narrative. The Advocate ignores them all because that is easier than coping with the truth, or reporting facts.
Imagine the anguish of nonprofit staffs, the sheer agony of editors and authors at formerly-respected gay and lesbian publications, if they all had to admit that Donald Trump was right about this, while they were wrong. Imagine the tears that would flow if people had to stop hating the Evil Orange Man long enough to thank him.
No, the LGBTQ+ media will just pretend the Skrmetti decision is evangelical Christian hate and tell themselves The Legend of the Southern Baptist Brief, because lying like that is easier.
The Gender Journey Of Simone Biles
Gymnast Simone Biles exploded onto the scene in 2013 at sixteen, the age when most American girls are just old enough to get a driver’s license. She was already world champion before her outstanding performance at the 2016 Olympics in Rio de Janeiro. Her biography included time in foster care as a child, so from the beginning, Biles was presented to the public as the tough-luck kid who had overcome the odds.
I used to know Richard Rouillard, editor-in-chief of “The Advocate” in the 80’s.
https://www.nlgja.org/blog/2010/05/richard-rouilard/
He was scathingly funny and brilliant, warm and very non-PC as we said at the time. He had an amazing art collection (Richard Tipping pieces in the pool house were very funny), and played the Harp in his office at his house just off Laurel Canyon. His husband was a VP of finance at Paramount, and had the body of Schwarzenegger.
The most controversial set of articles I recall him presiding over were vacuum pumps for men’s genitals - very humorous dinner conversations to say the least. Their biggest problem in the AIDS era for The Advocate was the “pink pages”, because advertisers didn’t want their name associated with a magazine publishing personal ads for gay men to have sex.
Men had sex even in the late 80’s. I have not been able to read an issue of the magazine for around 20 years. It’s irrelevant to lesbians and gays today, and lost touch with its roots as a bar magazine and H.E.L.P. - men and women were being put in prison for meeting in bars.
It’s sad. Very sad.
The separation of religion and state is fundamental to maintaining a just and inclusive society that respects the diverse beliefs of all citizens. When religious doctrine becomes intertwined with governmental authority, it inevitably leads to the privileging of one faith tradition over others, creating a system where citizens who hold different beliefs—or no religious beliefs at all—become second-class members of their own society. This violation of religious freedom undermines the basic principle that government should serve all people equally, regardless of their personal spiritual convictions. History provides countless examples of theocratic systems that have persecuted minorities, stifled intellectual progress, and restricted individual liberties in the name of religious orthodoxy.
Furthermore, the governance of a modern, pluralistic society requires decisions based on reason, evidence, and secular ethical principles that can be debated and evaluated by citizens of all backgrounds. Religious doctrines, while deeply meaningful to believers, are often based on faith claims that cannot be empirically verified or universally accepted, making them inappropriate foundations for public policy that affects everyone. When religious authorities or religious law become the basis for civil governance, it corrupts both institutions—religion loses its spiritual focus and becomes a tool of political power, while government loses its legitimacy as an impartial arbiter serving the common good. A secular state protects religious freedom more effectively than a religious state ever could, allowing faith communities to flourish while ensuring that no single religious perspective dominates the public sphere.