David Brooks says critics of teaching gender dysphoria to young children are, unlike him, “barbarically lunatic” “cruel” “crazies” who “dehumanize” their opponents

Florida recently passed a law that leftist opponents and their collaborators in the media have branded the “Don’t Say Gay” law.

Actually, however, the law does not say “don’t say gay.” Rather, the law says:

“Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.”

Note the classrooms to which this prohibition applies – only kindergarten through third grade. And note the persons to whom it applies – only instructors, not students. And note the subject to which it applies – only sexual identity and sexual orientation, not any other sex issue.  

But using authority figures like teachers to indoctrinate kindergarteners into the wonders of transsexuality is something the left wants. Predictably, they’re PO’d about this law prohibiting it.

PBS interviewed self-professed “conservative columnist” David Brooks of The New York Times, and others, about the law. Brooks declared, “I can at least say it’s crazy. It’s lunatic. And it’s not only lunatic. It’s cruelly lunatic, and it’s barbarically lunatic.”

He likes that word “lunatic” but seems to think it’s a little wishy-washy. It requires an adjective like “crazy” or “barbarically” to strengthen it. He writes for a living, so I guess he must know.  

According to others in the PBS interview, the “crazies” and “barbarians” were engaging in “dehumanizing” behavior. Not like the interviewees themselves who had moments earlier name-called their opponents “crazy” and “barbaric” and “lunatics” and “cruel.”

Think about this for a moment. A taxpayer-supported media outlet gives a national stage to political partisans who are, to a person, on the left side of an important issue involving the health and welfare of children. These interviewees and interviewers not only express their hostility toward anyone who disagrees with them – who include some highly respected scientists and psychologists, by the way – but label them crazy, cruel, barbaric lunatics who, in being on the “wrong” side of the issue, have stooped to dehumanizing gentlepersons like themselves.

Put their position into context. This assertedly crazy, cruel, lunatic, barbaric and dehumanizing law that delays teaching young children about gender dysphoria until they’re a tad older – say nine – has been the universal practice of all humanity for the first 99.9999% of our existence and is still the practice almost everywhere else in the world including most of Europe. How on earth did we last these millions of years?

Brooks has made a career out of masquerading as a conservative for the purpose of dehumanizing real conservatives as dehumanizers. He admits as much: “If you define conservative by support for the Republican candidate . . . I guess I don’t fit that agenda. But I do think that I’m part of a long-standing conservative tradition that has to do with Edmund Burke … and Alexander Hamilton.”

Burke and Hamilton are probably the last conservative candidates that Brooks voted for.

His current employer, The Times, pays leftist Brooks richly to cross-dress himself in his conservative hat for the purpose of legitimizing his bashing and name-calling of real conservatives. I would say he’s a cruel, barbaric, crazy lunatic but he’s not that colorful, and besides, he’s not someone I would plagiarize. Mostly, he’s just a whore.

18 thoughts on “David Brooks says critics of teaching gender dysphoria to young children are, unlike him, “barbarically lunatic” “cruel” “crazies” who “dehumanize” their opponents

  1. The barbaric lunacy all comes from the side Brooks has chosen. The more he increases the volume on his preposterous remarks, the more likely it is, I think, that he feels that he must convince himself that he is right.

  2. No society can long endure sizable populations of barren sex deviants. Those who relish, promote and “groom” them, especially from our young, must be vigorously opposed for survival reasons. That is why sexual deviancy, and most certainly homosexuality (and “trans-sexuality,” had such existed in the past), has historically been abhorred and ostracized by every human civilization from time immemorial only to be tolerated on the margins, if at all. It is a basic thing. To normalize non child producing sexual practices as a valid lifestyle is a societal death wish, especially where replacement rates are already upside down. Reproduction rates below replacement level is an extinction event eventually. It is the one frivolity no society can stand. No society can long last without sufficient supplies of newborns. Ask yourself why the Shakers are no more. Hint: their beliefs and practices produced no children.

    • Perfectly stated! As I learned in 9th grade bio, we humans exist for ONLY two reasons (disregarding metaphysical, etc.!) TO EAT and REPRODUCE! A species MUST do the latter or, as you stated, they will be extinct! Some species/genera can go from a larval state to adult with NO digestive tract at all (Mayflies) and they as adults exist ONLY to propagate!

      • I have always believed that it was the Supreme Court’s decision in Griswold v. Connecticut, finding unconstitutional the limitation on purchase of birth control devices, to have set the stage for all this. Once you separate sex from procreation, you end up in a world when pleasure alone and not procreation is the object of sex. We are living with the inevitable result, I think.

      • “Aggravation”: Indeed, but that’s toothpaste we’re not putting back in the tube. So who came up with the phrase “birth control”? Sanger? It has that “macro,” euphemistically clinical sound to it, like “reproductive health care.” “Contraception” is a more honest term, putting the focus on the individual act of playing God.

  3. Excellent, as usual. It sent me to re read Corrie Ten Boom’s story about her dad’s answer to her “what is sex?” question. I do not believe either Corrie or her father were lunatics, though if calling out grooming morons like Brooks make me on, I claim it!

  4. I would like to see Brooks (and others like him) strapped to a chair and forced to answer a long interrogation. I’m not talking water boarding or electric shocks, but at least not be able to leave the table until answers are given. No room for sound bites here. No place for dodging, either. Make sure the interrogator is knowledgeable and polite and pleasant, but skilled at the task at hand
    nonetheless. Broadcast the entire proceeding live without comment. Take all the time needed with no commercial breaks.

  5. So Brooks’ reasoning that the law is wrong is because it is “crazy” and “lunatic” and “barbaric”? At any point in the interview, which I haven’t watched, did he care to explain for the benefit of viewers precisely why? Because without specifically addressing the actual offenses of the law he perceives, he is just engaging in the fallacy of Name-Calling – a derivative of the Ad Hominem fallacy. Why would anybody support a crazy, lunatic, barbaric law? This is of a piece with most mainstream media attacks on the recent federal judge’s decision to lift the CDC mask mandate for travelers – they didn’t read the opinion, they just attacked the judge who wrote it.

  6. David Brooks … the NYT boomer who has come out of the closet as a groomer, and perhaps more. The MSM frequently refer to Brooks as a “conservative,” along with Bret Stephens, and maybe one other token fig leaf. Brooks shows his true colors as a trans-leftist; a columnist who has been ideologically castrated and put onto high doses of conservative-blockers.

    It’s stunning that Brooks and his ilk denounce the Florida law as “barbarian” and “dehumanizing.” Yet, how is the prevention of permanently mutilating and/or injecting puberty blockers into kindergartners, tweens and young teens deemed barbaric, cruel, crazy, and/or dehumanizing?!?

    The medical profession once abided by the Hippocratic Oath to do no harm. Delaying puberty through blockers and/or surgically mutilating the reproductive organs of kids whose brains are not fully developed, and whom also lack the abilities to fully rationalize cause and effect consequences, ought to be classified as crimes against humanity and crimes against nature.

    All of this is the perversion of science via political ideology. The Soviet Union, that idyllic social utopian paradise that our own Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warrens and AOCs constantly pine for, performed their own weird science with super soldier programs in which apes and humans were attempted to cross breed with one another. The abominable experiments all failed, but not due to a lack of effort.

    https://www.scotsman.com/news/world/stalins-half-man-half-ape-super-warriors-2510093

    https://www.the-sun.com/news/4055022/russian-humanzee-human-ape-experiments/

    Brooks and his weird proto-grooming brethren have perhaps hitched their wagons to the even weirder trans-humanism movement. These trans-humanists are just as freakishly bizarre as anything that was being studied in Stalin’s labs. Their notions of society are beginning to look more like one of Aldous Huxley’s dystopian novels.

    Ironically, the Left and their apologists (like Brooks) seem hellbent on living up to that epiphany from that other dystopian tale, 1968’s Planet Of The Apes, in which Cornelius reads aloud The Lawgiver’s pronouncement:

    “Beware the beast Man, for he is the Devil’s pawn. Alone among God’s primates, he kills for sport or lust or greed. Yea, he will murder his brother to possess his brother’s land. Let him not breed in great numbers, for he will make a desert of his home and yours. Shun him; drive him back into his jungle lair, for he is the harbinger of death.”

    Come out here to California and see for yourselves just how much the Democrats political stranglehold on the Golden State seems to fulfill this ape prophecy.

    Anyways … to them it’s just another statue, an homage to “white supremacy” and the “patriarchy,” that deserves to be desecrated and toppled.

  7. This sexual perversion masquerading as so-called “education” is demonic. The mental illness these purveyors possess is mind boggling.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s