A Jungian Analysis of the Transgender Lunacy of Some Progressive Females

The following comment by Vito B. Caiati on an earlier post of mine deserves to be brought to the top of the queue.  Minor edits and bracketed content added; otherwise verbatim. The above title is mine. Vito would probably not use the polemical word ‘lunacy.’ Comments of mine are in 10-point below.

Consider for a moment the fact that the personae of so many progressive women are structured around solidarity with designated marginalized groups, such as biological men suffering from gender dysphoria who identify as females and demand the right to participate in women’s sports and share women’s private spaces.

In this case, persons with egos of some strength are able simultaneously to hold onto (1) the observable fact that human sexual dimorphism results in marked disparities in strength, speed, and endurance between the sexes and that (2) opposing discrimination against marginalized groups is a worthy public policy position. Thus, a healthy ego rejects any resolution of this tension by simply effacing the rights of women in sports or private spaces.

Both (1) and (2) make a strong claim on our acceptance, although the nature of the discrimination mentioned in (2) needs to be spelled out. And yet the two propositions are in tension: although the merits of each ought to be acknowledged, they cannot both be accepted.  How resolve the tension? A sane (non-lunatic) solution is by holding fast to what is empirically evident, namely, (1), and then reformulating (2) so as to make it logically compatible with (1).  That is what I would say, and I am sure Vito would agree. The question then arises: why don’t our opponents on this issue agree?  Read on.

For progressive women, however, once the status of marginalized groups is elevated inside their personae to a sanctified status, then any acknowledgement of sexual differences, however empirically evident, appears as a betrayal; such perceptions are thus repressed or relativized (“sex is a spectrum,” etc.). These repressed perceptions pile up in [what Carl Gustav Jung calls] “the shadow,” where they are intensified and distorted, and are projected onto critics, who are viciously attacked, their arguments denounced as “hate,” rather than countered rationally, as in the case of J.K. Rowling and so many other advocates of women’s rights. This all ends up in enantiodromia, and the abandonment of earlier, hard fought for, feminist goals. [‘Enantiodromia’ is Jung’s term for the tendency of any extreme to produce its opposite.]

In the above paragraph, Vito is doing two things. He is first of all giving a Jungian psychological explanation of why our opponents will not accept what to Vito and to me  is obviously the case, namely, the fact of sexual differences between men and women, differences that make it unfair to allow biological males to compete against biological females in sporting events.  One could ask, of course, whether the Jungian psychological explanation is the best explanation. Might there be a better one?  There is also the meta-question: Is it ever logically kosher to refute a proposition by psychologizing those who advance the proposition?

The second thing Vito is doing in the above paragraph is pointing out that the extreme transgenderist  position of feminists who traditionally demanded equal rights generates its opposite, namely, the violation of the rights of women and girls to privacy and fairness.

“O the mind, mind has mountains; cliffs of fall / Frightful, sheer, no-man-fathomed.” (Gerard Manley Hopkins, “No Worst, There is None”)

Academentia at Bates College

A DEI hire sees through the wokisme and quits the tenure track.  A must-read in The Atlantic:

In a consultant-led meeting I attended near the end of my time at the college, one month into Donald Trump’s second term, the small group of professors and senior administrators present was asked to share what it saw as Bates’s greatest strengths and weaknesses. One of my colleagues said that the college’s greatest strength was its commitment to DEI. Another said that the college’s greatest weakness was that it could be even more committed to DEI. Someone lamented that our ties to the Wabanaki Nations could have been stronger.

As snow turned into slush, I walked by a flyer pasted to a campus building announcing the college’s annual sex week. The technicolor poster proclaimed that Bates would be hosting a game of “dildo ring toss” and would provide “exploration tables” replete with sex toys. Once, I might have seen in that poster a symptom of everything wrong with the college—money wasted on weird bullshit, organized by bureaucrats whose jobs nobody could explain. Now I found it all oddly refreshing. What was Bates if not a place devoted to risk-free ideological masturbation? For a week, at least, we could be honest about it.

Months later, I joined The Atlantic as a full-time staff writer.

No Ammo to the Enemy: Defund the Left — and the RCC

Here:

“For fostering a true consciousness in liturgical matters, it is also important that the proscription against the form of liturgy in valid use up to 1970 [the older Latin Mass] should be lifted. Anyone who nowadays advocates the continuing existence of this liturgy or takes part in it is treated like a leper; all tolerance ends here. There has never been anything like this in history; in doing this we are despising and proscribing the Church’s whole past. How can one trust her at present if things are that way?”

Joseph RatzingerGod and the World: A Conversation with Peter Seewald (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2002), p. 416.

This is precisely right.

However, there are bishops who do despise the Church’s whole past. They want the past erased and buried. They want a new morality, especially. That way they can be popular. 

Bowman also quotes Edward Feser:

Preference for the Traditional Latin Mass is massively correlated with orthodoxy. This is precisely why certain people want it suppressed. They call the TLM “divisive” but the reality is, it’s TLM ‘s opponents who want to divide the Church from her liturgical and doctrinal past.

Unlike my friend Feser, I have serious reservations about elements of traditional RCC doctrine. But I have far stronger reservations and outright objections to the destructive Left, in particular, to their trademark erasure of the historical record. Pedant that I am, I will point out once again that the past cannot be erased or  buried, for it remains, tenselessly, what it was.  But the past can be sent into oblivion which is, practically speaking, the same thing: what has been sent down the memory hole can no longer inform or guide our action in the present.

The RCC should stand as a bulwark against the leftist insanity all around us.  So, to the extent that it becomes just another piece of leftist cultural junk, the RCC must be defunded. You are therefore a fool complicit with the forces of the anti-civilizational Left to the extent that you contribute to the RCC monetarily, in the same way that you are complicit fool and a useful idiot if you continue to contribute to those of your alma maters who refuse to  renounce publicly the destructive DEI agenda.

But what if the particular church you attend needs repairs, a new roof say, and a collection is taken up within that church for the funds needed. Go ahead, make a contribution despite the theological ignorance of the priests, their homosexual vibe, and the defective Novus Ordo liturgy.  If you need services on Sundays, Novus Ordo is better than nothing. If you take a harder line, and shun Novus Ordo, you may convince me.

Mamdani and the Elimination of Misdemeanor Enforcement in NYC

I'm back on the rant at Facebook.  Latest:

Madman Mamdani, the Islamo-Commie, wants to eliminate misdemeanor enforcement in NYC. Why not? It worked so well in California:
This incident could happen at any Walgreens in San Francisco: A man strolls into the store walks over to the hair display, grabs an armful of shampoo bottles, and simply walks out the door. He felt no need to rush, had no fear, and didn't bother looking back.
Instead of actually doing something, people stood by and recorded the scene on their phones, shaking their heads; they knew nothing would happen, as he'd simply disappear into the crowd. There's no point in calling the police; they wouldn't come, store clerks wouldn't bother, and the DA wouldn't prosecute.
In California, petty thefts valued at less than $950 are typically not worth the paperwork involved.
It's this future that mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani is dangling in front of New York City.
Article here.

Trump Admin to Cut Off HEAD START for Illegals

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration will restrict immigrants in the country illegally from enrolling in Head Start, a federally funded preschool program, the Department of Health and Human Services announced Thursday. The move is part of a broad effort to limit access to federal benefits for immigrants who lack legal status.

Translation: Illegal aliens will no longer be allowed access to taxpayer dollars to which they have no right.

Dems will scream in protest and start doing what they reliably do, namely, lie. They will claim that the Administration is eliminating the Head Start program just as they are supposedly eliminating Medicaid.

I would begin to have some respect for our political enemies if they stopped lying and simply stated their adamant opposition to the USA as she was founded to be, and owned up to the fact that their goal is the "fundamental transformation" (Barack Hussein Obama) of the USA so as to bring it in line with what they think a nation ought to be.  But they will not come clean. That is why I label them 'stealth ideologues.'

The Dems, True to Form, are Lying

About so much. About gutting the 'safety net' for example. WSJ rebukes the mendacious shites.  (Ought we be polite to such brazen liars?)

As for multi-'colored' Kamala, she is like unto Traitor Joe not just in her moral obtuseness, but also in respect of her intellectual vacuity, as explained here.

Here and here for two more examples of leftist lunacy.

More proof this Monday morning (7/7/25) of the praeternatural mendacity  and wrongheadedness of the intracranially feculent Democrats.  GOP mega-bill structurally racist!  Camp Mystic is whites-only!

And now, for a dose of sanity, I present Victor Davis Hanson who exposes Madmani Mandami for the destructive fraud he is.

Recently, Trump said he would "watch over" Mandami, and this morning he said the Feds would work "close" with Texas authorities.  We of the Coalition of the Sane and the Reasonable do not support him because he is articulate in his word-slinging, although he does manage to get his meaning across. We support him because he is a great leader who knows what has to be done and more importantly does it. 

You say the man has no class? I agree. That's what Jack Kennedy said about Dick Nixon in 1960. But how important is class in a world such as this one? Far more important is the ability and willingness to 'kick ass.' That he has done, and not just to the benefit of the USA, but the benefit of the whole world. 

Besides, Trump does not need class; the First Lady has more than enough for both of them.

Noisome Newsom, Legal Know-Nothing, Rebuked

California's obstructionist crapweasel and narcissistic pretty boy was handed a massive loss, to the delight of the sane and reasonable and to the dismay of hate-America Dementocrats. 

California Gov. Gavin Newsom just got a brutal lesson: the president of the United States is the commander-in-chief, not the governor of California. Second, he doesn’t need your permission to federalize your state’s National Guard units. It’s insane that a district court even entertained this wacky notion. 

President Trump federalized California National Guard units to be deployed in Los Angeles to quell the unrest from leftists upset over raids executed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The US Marines were also deployed. Newsom tried to block this move via emergency motion, which was denied. Then, Judge Charles Breyer decided to grant this motion, which the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals later stayed. And even these judges were disturbed by how Breyer tried to usurp the powers of the executive in these matters, which are clearly defined. Another hearing was held on Breyer’s order, which is now indefinitely blocked; Newsom won’t get control of the Guard anytime soon. 

I am a native Californian.  California once earned its descriptor, "Golden State." Leave it to leftists with their anti-Midas touch to transform what is golden not merely into something base, but into something feculent. 

Slop Talk

'Due process' is a term of legal shop talk.  Those of us who know something about the law — I know a little — know how to use it correctly. And those of us who think that words ought to be used responsibly in serious discussions should take offense at the 'slop talk' use of 'due process.' Trey Gowdy knows a lot more about the law than I do. But a couple of Sundays ago he  asked how much 'due process' Laken Riley's assailant showed her. Sean Hannity is another who has asked this question.

That got me thinking about what sort of 'due process' Ibarra should have shown Riley. "You have the right to plead, to pray, and to protest your upcoming rape and murder; you have in addition the right to avail yourself of the services of any well-armed Good Samaritan who might come along."

What were Gowdy and Hannity driving at? That wide-open borders are a recipe for disaster? That the very notion of legal due process needs to be re-thought? Unclear. Commentators who want to be taken seriously  should say what they mean and mean what they say.

Democrats are slop heads in the main; we expect incoherence, inanity, and slop talk from them. Conservatives ought not ape them.  Does my use of 'ape' make me a racist? What if I were to use such words as 'niggardly' and 'denigrate'?

The WAPO fentanyl 'mystery' is another good illustration of how contemptibly stupid our political enemies can be. Karoline Leavitt has fun with it.  In other news, her intersectional and highly 'wokified' predecessor has quit the Dems, and like 'Fake Jake' Tapper and others will endeavor to tap into the money to be made from telling tales of dementia and dysfunction in high places.

Further examples are easily multiplied beyond all necessity. "Tampon Tim" Walz is a bloody good source of them.

Dems and Deportation

Democrats upset over deportations ought to look in the mirror. Prior to Biden-Harris they did little to secure the nation's borders, and by supporting Biden-Harris they embraced the  destructive open-border policy of that administration. That nations need enforceable and enforced borders not merely to flourish, but to continue to exist, is well-nigh self-evident.  Those in a nation who blind themselves to this self-evidence are reasonably viewed as wanting the destruction of the nation they are in.

Promotion of illegal immigration being the Democrats' greatest crime, Donald J. Trump's securing of the border is his greatest achievement so far, as is recognized by most of the populace.  But the Biden-Harris mess will be with us for a long time to come.  Deportation of illegal aliens must proceed if the rule of law is to be upheld.  There will inevitably be mistakes and injustices. The law must be enforced, but the enforcers are finite and fallible, and a small minority of them are as bad as the criminals they are charged with protecting us against. This obvious point I am making will be resisted by those with an authoritarian personality structure, but leftists, who tend toward the opposite extreme, that of the rebellious protester who reflexively takes the side of criminals and underdogs, regardless of their criminality, ought readily to accept it.

There are bad cops. We all know this. You do not have to be a member of a minority to have experienced bad behavior from law enforcement agents. Give a man a gun, a badge, and a uniform and it may go to his head. It's not that power corrupts; the problem is that we are all more or less morally corrupt inherently so that any power we acquire is subject to misuse.  

So I say to Democrats, you have brought about this situation by your support of perverse and deleterious policies. Blame yourself first for any excesses. 

Finally! An End to Taxpaper Subsidization of NPR and PBS

We conservatives have been talking about this for years, but it's all been talk. Until now.  A re-post from 10 December 2014:

National Public Radio and the Tit of the State

"If the product is so superior, why does it have to live on the tit of the State?" (Charles Krauthammer)

One answer is that the booboisie  of these United States is too backward and benighted to appreciate the high level of NPR programming.  The rubes of fly-over country are too much enamored of wrestling, tractor pulls, and reality shows, and, to be blunt, too stupid and lazy to take in superior product.

Being something of an elitist myself, I am sympathetic to this answer.  The problem for me is twofold.  NPR is run by lefties for lefties.  That in itself is not a problem.  But it is a most serious problem when part of the funding comes from the taxpayer.  But leftists, blind to their own bias, don't see the problem.  Very simply, it is wrong to take money by force from people and then use it to promote causes that those people find offensive or worse when the causes have nothing to do with the legitimate functions of government.  Planned Parenthood and abortion.  NEA and Piss Christ.  Get it?

And then there is the recent anti-Christian nastiness.  Just in time for Christmas.  What a nice touch.  Would these 'liberal' pussies mock Muhammad similarly? 

Second, we are in fiscal crisis.  If we can't remove NPR from the "tit of the State," from the milky mammaries of massive Mama Obama government, what outfit can we remove from said mammaries? If we can't zero out  NPR how are we going to cut back on the waste, fraud, and abuse of 'entitlement' programs such as Social Security?

Ah, but no one wants to talk about a real crisis when there is Ferguson to talk about.

Don't get me wrong.  I like or rather liked  "Car Talk" despite the paucity of automotive advice and the excess of joking around.  I even like the PBS "Keeping Up Appearances" in small doses.  But if frivolous flab like this can't be excised, what can?