Home Blog Page 582

Hostility to the Human Body

Parents of Australian school students will most likely be surprised, if not a little shocked to discover that their children are being taught that “genitals and [the human] body don’t actually reflect anything about a person’s gender at all.”

This is what some of the material from the so called ‘Safe Schools Coalition’ is teaching children without the knowledge or consent of their parents.

What is most concerning is the deeply flawed thinking that is leading to this belief and the indoctrination of children.

Needless to say, as human beings, we are embodied and enfleshed. We do not live as spirits detached from the material world. Indeed, our nature as embodied beings is a good thing.

While I would strongly state that a human person and his or her worth is not ‘reducible’ to the mere physical, we are to a large extent shaped and defined by our bodies and physical nature. That we are to a large extent shaped and defined by our human bodies has been an accepted basic tenet of anthropology, philosophy and theology for centuries.

You cannot separate mind from the body. Religious cults such as the ancient Gnostics however did assert a sharp body/mind dualism, and such distorted thinking led to some rather bizarre and extreme practices, whether it be brutal asceticism or unrestrained hedonism. Regardless of the particular extreme practices Gnosticism promoted, what was held in common was a radical devaluing of the body and of one’s mortal life.

From rudimentary biology, we know that combining an X and Y chromosome produces a male. Combining two X chromosomes produces a female. Believing that I am something in defiance of what my physical body exhibits is delusion. It is not coming to a deeper knowledge of one’s true self, on the contrary, it is to live in self-deception and ignorance about oneself.

Believing and wishing that I am a racing car driver doesn’t make me one. Using my body to race a car in a competition is what will make me a racing car driver.

Similarly, an obese person who believes they are in fact a skinny person is incongruent. Identifying as a tall person doesn’t make me tall.

In the disease anorexia we see one of the most tragic conditions where often young women (and increasingly young men) believe things about their bodies which are untrue. Sadly, these distorted beliefs are sometimes held to the point that it kills them.

Our identity comprises aspects of both development and discovery, and as such growing to adulthood is often a confusing and fraught period for young people. What’s more, many of us do not develop a firm sense of gender identity and sexual orientation we are in our early to mid 20s. Intruding into this critical process during childhood by the Safe School Coalition is not only unhelpful and misguided, but potentially very damaging to our children and the next generation.

 

Photo by Rose Morelli

3MBS and Mendelssohn outshine ABC Classic FM

1
9607018102_942f5e458b_Felix-mendelssohn
Felix Mendelssohn, 1809-1847.

Today, Melbourne community radio station 3MBS (103.5) has been holding its annual “Music Marathon” at the Hawthorn Town Hall. Previous years have celebrated the work of Beethoven, Brahms, and Schubert – today was the turn of Felix Mendelssohn.

The Beethoven marathon of 2013 was extraordinary – all 32 of his Piano Sonatas were performed in the one day, to a packed BMW Edge Auditorium at Federation Square, by the cream of Australia’s pianists. A highlight for me was seeing Michael Kieran Harvey perform
Sonata No. 16 in G major, Op. 31, No. 1 – the difference in power compared to the other pianists was immediately apparent, with the sound wave of the fortissimo chords hitting me in the chest like the beat of a bass drum at a rock concert. Later, it was announced that “Mike” would be the page-turner for one of the other performers… a little over-qualified…

It is remarkable that a community radio station, financed by memberships, small business sponsorship, and donations, and run with a great deal of help by volunteers, has been able to stage a popular, world class event (amongst others, including the 3MBS Young Performers Award, and a National Composers Award,) year after year. Sure, 3MBS can be a little amateur – today the presenters unwittingly conversed over the second movement of Mendelssohn’s String Quintet in B flat Op. 87, and my favourite 3MBS moment occurred late one night a few years ago when the old codger running the show dropped his notes, stammered for a moment, then just pressed play on the next piece.

Melbourne has another “classical music” radio station – the national broadcaster’s ABC Classic FM. It comes in handy when 3MBS is playing opera, (except when Classic FM is also playing opera,) and that is about it. Classic FM’s prime time drive show has been plagued by programmers who feel it is their responsibility to “challenge” the listener with Spanish guitar, arrangements of popular works for marimba, and light adult contemporary folk. And the otherwise excellent midday interviewer Margaret Throsby too often sounds panicked when one of her guests challenges her elitist inner-city mindset..

The point of all this is that a privately run radio station with a classical music format can not only survive, it can thrive, and it is not only popular, but is loved. 3MBS is well and truly a key player in the Melbourne classical music scene. If anybody tries to tug at the heartstrings by suggesting that Melbourne would lose a classical music station if the ABC was defunded, just remind them of 3MBS.  (In fact, Classic FM was only established once 3MBS demonstrated that there was a viable audience for it.) It may even open up room for a new competitor in the marketplace. Heck, they could even turn a profit.

So, while we are on the subject of Felix Mendelssohn, here is a recording of Mendelssohn’s Rondo Capriccioso Op. 14, by young Canadian virtuoso Jan Lisiecki. For those of you who have never heard it before, I will say very little, so as not to spoil the surprise – re, what is meant by “Capriccioso”.

I hope you have a lovely Sunday evening.

Photo by Bergen Public Library

People too Scared to Speak: John Howard

Former Prime Minister of Australia, John Howard has expressed concerns that the culture and standards of Australian society are being threatened by an increasing intolerance Robert D. Ward [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commonstowards those who do not subscribe to a range of progressive views, such as same-sex marriage.

“I think the problem is that too few people are prepared to call it for what it is,” he said.

Furthermore, “I think people are cowed because they think, ‘I can’t say that because I might lose votes or I might offend somebody’.”

In relation to gay marriage, Mr Howard said: “There is nothing homophobic about supporting traditional marriage. Everybody did in the parliament in 2004.”

Now we are in the very situation where some of those who supported traditional marriage back in 2004 or more recently have changed their minds, and now believe that they have a license to slander and demonise those who still hold to the view.

Mr Howard identified the outrageous situation in Tasmania where anti-discrimination laws were being used to attack the Catholic Archbishop of Hobart and take him to court over articulating the traditional Christian view of marriage.

Mr Howard was also disappointed that the Abbott government had back-flipped on its proposed free speech changes to section 18c of the Racial Discrimination Act after winning an election mandate on the issue.

Branding the current climate of repression as “pernicious”, Mr Howard said there was “almost a fear” among people to speak the views he was expressing because of concern they would “offend our multicultural ethos” or be “branded as intolerant.”

Mr Howard is right. There is a growing culture of repression and slander toward those who are not deemed to hold the ‘correct’ (progressive) viewpoint.

The XYZ will continue to stand against speech suppression. We will encourage debate on important issues and we will fearlessly speak and air the views that the progressive opinion makers seek to slander and suppress.

 

The Karate Kid Meets Safe Schools – 2017 Style

A new remake to classic film the Karate Kid is being made in Victoria next year.

4613236306_1b874f1034_karate-kidThe plot line has been modernised to address contemporary issues and attitudes.

After suffering a bullying attack after relocating to Footscray with his single mother who is a handicapped lesbian, a young boy is befriended by an intersex social justice warrior.

Taking pity on the young boy, the SJW teaches the hero to protect himself through use of techniques such as shouting “bigot”, “racist”, “homophobe” and other equally hilarious and heart warming words.

After encountering the bullies, the hero suffers a setback despite use of his newfound anti-bullying techniques.

Unperturbed, the now-penised social justice warrior helps the hero embrace the fluidity of his gender, leading to a fantastic montage sequence whereby he pees sitting down in the girls toilets, goes dress shopping and learns to cry on demand.

At this point, the film moves toward a final climax whereby the hero is confronted as he leaves the girls bathroom by the gang of homophobic boys. Emboldened by the late night teachings of his now penised, boobed and dark skinned social justice warrior mentor, the Karate Kid proves that love conquers violence. Taking on the entire gang of boys, he helps them realise their homophobia is due to their shamefully and needlessly repressed gender fluidity, which is released one by one as the film climaxes.

The film will be compulsory viewing for children in all primary schools.

Photo by Maryam Abdulghaffar مريم عبدالغفار

Fuhrer Merkel on the Migrant Crisis – Quote of the Day

0

Fuhrer Merkel has given one of her most candid and revealing speeches on the migrant crisis, sex crimes, integration issues and cultural marxism. The XYZ does not judge, but she seems to have let the mo grow a bit.

 

Boosting Australia’s Defence Capability

This week, the Australian Government released its latest ‘White Paper’, outlining the nation’s defence strategy for the next two decades.

9369798089_01b7f30500_Royal-Australian-NavyThe White Paper aims to return Australia’s defence spending to 2 percent of GDP by 2020-21, providing an investment of approximately $195 billion over 10 years. Many will be pleased to hear the government’s commitment to return the budget to 2 percent of GDP after the Gillard Government’s slashing of defence spending in 2012, reducing it to an historic low of 1.56 percent.

The White Paper states that there will be a re-posturing of Australia’s defence to one that is “more active and internationally engaged.”

Above all, the new defence strategy focuses on boosting Australia’s maritime capability. With the three new Hobart Class destroyers on their way, the government is proposing to increasing our submarine fleet from 6 to 12 as well as commissioning nine new ‘future frigates’. While this step represents a needed boost to Australia’s naval capability, some defence analysts have expressed concerns that the boost to the Navy will come at a cost to the other divisions, especially the Australian Army’s land forces.

The Asia-Pacific region is expected to experience significant population and economic growth over the coming decades, and with it, no doubt, a range of new strategic challenges.

The ongoing problem of terrorism, disputed territories of the South and East China seas and the increasing tensions and militarisation of this zone means it is important for Australia to have the capability to protect our national interests as well as playing a key role in maintaining stability and peace in our region.

From this early point, it appears that the White Paper takes a step in the right direction regarding Australia’s strategic and defence needs.

Photo by DVIDSHUB

XYZ Quote of the Day: Hypocritical Bill

15856653272_e0421b069a_Bill-ShortenToday’s XYZ Quote of the Day is too big a task to leave to just one person, so we thought we would give you a taste of what the XYZ staff had to say about Bill Shorten’s immature and, dare we say it, offensive, attack on Liberal Senator Cory Bernardi. Firstly, to give you a summary of the Quote of the Day-worthy stoush which has sparked all of this off:

Bill Shorten: “We see this ridiculous, absurd obsession by the right wing of the Liberal Party about Safe Schools,”

Cory Bernardi: “That’d be me. That’d be me. At least I’m honest, Bill, but you’re a fraud, mate!”

Bill Shorten: “At least I’m not a homophobe either mate.”

Classy. Here is what Ryan Fletcher had to say on the matter:

“Bill Shorten yet again showing himself to be a loathsome little w—–, hell bent on berating anyone not supporting his love affair with social engineering. Bugger Billy boy!”

Elizabeth Couchwoman:

“Shorten was having a go at Bernardi (Shorten may disagree with the Libs on this, but that doesn’t make their position ‘absurd’) & he deserved the “at least I’m honest” quip.

And to be frank, Shorten is a fraud on this. Ten years ago the Labor party was consistently against gay marriage (heck it was barely on the radar! [Gaydar?])

“They’re being intellectually dishonest – seriously, has the whole labor party “evolved” Obama style?

“..The retail Union.. were ‘Left’ on a lot of issues, but openly against same-sex ‘marriage’. Shorten’s Union background tells us where his views probably really lie.”

Keating:

“This ties into my point yesterday. They instinctively get it. If you are not with us you are against us. You are a (insert PC bullying term here eg bigot, homophobe). Note: that’s a very divisive term by Shorten. He demeaned trans, intersex with his slur.”

Seen on Catallaxy files:

“The Labor Party officially backs the sexual grooming of children.  From the party of Keith Wright, Bill D’Arcy and Bob Collins, this should surprise nobody.”

And finally, Vic Timms:

#JeSuisBernardi

From all of us here at The XYZ, happy hunting.

Photo by John Englart (Takver)

XYZ admits error in reporting: Some media still make sense

imageAn XYZ apology:

Yesterday we said the media had gone full retard – and then we read this today. XYZ would like to acknowledge an error and issue a correction. The ABC has gone full retard. The media is akin to a bus full of window lickers, however there are a few voices of reason, sadly drowned out by the deranged progressive tourettes of the left.

Editor’s note:

For those of you without a subscription to The Australian, and thus with limited access to Janet Albrechtsen’s brilliance, here are some of the highlights:

“Like a virus that takes hold of host cells in the human body, multiculturalism’s self-loathing virus started invading Western societies more than 40 years ago. Like a form of cultural cancer, it has weakened our ability to defend our most fundamental values and, worse, it has meant the only culture open to critique and question is our own.”

On multiculturalism vs integration and assimilation:

“When migrants arrived in postwar Australia, there was a sense of obligation to the new country… The traditional three-way contract was simple: majority tolerance, minority loyalty and government vigilance in both ­directions.

“Becoming a citizen meant ­accepting responsibilities in return for clearly understood rights and privileges. A migrant renounced “all other allegiances” to swear loyalty to Australia.

“More than 40 years later, asking for minority loyalty is regarded as a sign of intolerance.”

Source:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/janet-albrechtsen/multiculturalism-has-proven-divisive-not-coalescent-so-lets-ditch-it/news-story/f29ed6f5fa55a20c90972af13e7d8589

Myth: The sliding scale of sexual preference

Telling a heterosexual adult that they are not in fact “heterosexual” but that they merely identify with a sexual preference along a sliding scale, is annoying, intellectually dishonest and slightly invasive. It is also nothing new. Telling it to a heterosexual youngster is a form of bullying and abuse.

There is nothing about accepting people’s sexual preferences for what they are that requires one to to accept this sliding scale of sexual preference myth. Some people are gay. Get over it. Some people are straight. Some people are “other.” Get over it. Take the conveniently amorphous term “gender identity” and apply the same principle. Signed, god.

Yet the ground is shifting so that the idea of “difference” is the new identity fascism.

ABS statistics consistently show that the proportion of the population who are something other than straight hovers around 2%. But even the falsely exaggerated figure of 10% appears to be not enough, because either way, gay people are in the minority, which by definition means they are outside the norm.

Thus, the sliding scale concept of sexual preference and “gender identity” belies the “everybody is different” message it purports to uphold. Nobody is different, everybody is the same – we are just at different points on the sliding scale, no-one is truly straight, no-one is truly gay. The ground has shifted from the demand to accept difference, to the new catch-cry that nothing is “normal.” The term “normal” has become problematic, divisive, exclusionary, politically incorrect. We see the genesis of the idea that heterosexuality is a social construct, (in fact, it is the idea that heterosexuality is a social construct which is the social construct,) and the appearance of the extremely silly term “cis-gendered” (Google it for a good laugh.)

e031b60c2afd1c3e81584d04ee44408be273e7d31bb8134394f4_640_StraightIt should be easy, a piece of cake, even, to raise children and adults to be tolerant toward people’s sexual preference and “gender identity.” Teach them the Golden Rule, “Treat others as you would like to be treated,” and inform them that this applies to these fields as well. Because, you know, everybody is different. Accept that this won’t be 100% effective, because some people are jerks. Move on.

If some people are straight, some people are gay, and some people are “something else” and everybody tolerates everybody else, imperfectly, that should be the end of it. But the sliding scale principle has at its core the obsession to break down these distinctions. It is as though, having won the battle for homosexuals to be accepted and tolerated, having won acceptance for their difference, the goal posts have been shifted, so that we can no longer classify ourselves as different from them.

Now that the battle for same sex marriage has been not so much won as it was forfeited by the other side, concepts of sexual preference and “gender identity” are, and will be, the new identity politics battleground. And this is where we cross the line from tolerance to totalitarianism. We cross the line from changing the way we define others, to mandating the way we define ourselves.

Do this to heterosexual teens – I guarantee you chaos, hatred, and violence.

Want Safer Schools? Ditch the ‘Safe’ Schools Program

eb30b70d2efc1c3e81584d04ee44408be273e7d31bb3174592f6_640_safe-schoolFinally some good news.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has sought a review of the controversial tax payer funded ‘safe schools’ program.

The program, whilst marketing itself under the guise of an anti-bullying program, is only focused on one issue: Indoctrinating (I mean ‘educating’) children on the finer points of Queer Theory. All of this without seeking the consent of parents.

Bullying is an issue at schools, and it is appropriate that schools address this problem. What is not appropriate is for school programs to meddle in the sexual and gender development of children and to furthermore mislead parents, teachers and the broader community by claiming that this is simply about making schools ‘safe’.

One wonders how safe schools will be for children who simply cannot subscribe to the Queer Theory that this program utilises to shape and form children. To hold a belief that boys are boys and girls and girls is not bullying. And it doesn’t make schools ‘unsafe’. Indoctrinating children, what’s more without the knowledge or consent of their parents is profoundly unsafe, and unethical.

Should the program remain in some shape or form following the Prime Minister’s review – the name ‘Safe Schools’ program needs to be dropped. It is at the very least dishonest, if not misleading about the true purpose of the program.