Archive for March, 2020

How to Flatten The Curve!

March 29, 2020

How to Flatten The Curve!

Wake-Up Americans! Don’t Kill Yourselves!

Protect your love ones and old folks.

Watch the following video to understand the threat to you and your loved ones…..and how to avoid catastrophe!

V. Thomas Mawhinney, 3/29/20

Communism = Starvation = Bizarre Foods

March 28, 2020

Communism = Starvation = Bizarre Foods

This should be a no-brainer!

Of course, there are other causes, but historically, Socialism and Communism have yielded poverty, starvation, death and disease.

Poverty and starvation, over many generations can yield very bizarre appetites and eating habits the among surviving populations.

So, why would anyone expect that bizarre “foods” would not populate their market places?!

They do. See for yourself!

10 bizarre foods of China.

10 Bizarre Foods to Eat in China

Also, they really do eat bats in China!

See why eating bats is a very dangerous thing for humans to do.

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D., 3/28/20

America’s Picture Today!

March 27, 2020

Why Vote For Trump?!

Do not be blinded by Trump’s crass words and unpleasant mannerisms.

Focus upon his unprecedented problem solving actions and their successful outcomes!

At this moment in American history, The following picture is absolutely true, and it IS worth a thousand words!

The only thing standing between our American Constitutional Republic and its promised”TRANSFORMATION” to socialism is Donald Trump and those who support his efforts.

Vote Conservative values and Trump!

America’s Picture today.

Thanks to Lynn and Lee Hornack for sending me this artistic depiction of our American reality!

V. Thomas Mawhinney, 3/27/20

Not-So-Funny Cartoons

March 22, 2020

Not-So-Funny Cartoons

VTM, 3/22/20



Coronavirus: The Beginning of the End?!

March 20, 2020

Coronavirous: The Beginning of the End?!

A friend of mine recently wrote me. He was ending his vacation in a nice warm place a couple of weeks early. He wanted to return home to isolate himself and his wife from the Coronavirus.

He likes to tease me. So he asked: “Is this the beginning of the end?!”

I like to tease him back. So I wrote: “No, that happened with the Big Bang!”

At first, I thought is was just a fun answer, that I had never thought too much about.

However, I began to think my “clever” repartee just might, in fact, be true!

So, I decided to research the idea that the Big Bang was the first thing to happen in what we now call the Universe.

I hope you enjoy the following two articles about the Big Bang. From now-on, I will call this cosmological theory the Big Gordian’s Knot Theory. There is far less certainty about the birth of our universe than I had though!

I admit to getting somewhat lost in the details of these two articles, though I do get the big picture.

From all that I can tell, the experts have informed me that we know a heck of a lot less about the so-called Big Bang, than I thought we did. . It may not be the first thing to have happened in the evolution of our universe.

I am working to be a better psychologist than I am a cosmologist….Oops!

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D.,  3/20/20

Laugh Away Your Troubles!

March 15, 2020

Laugh Away Your Troubles!

V. Thomas Mawhinney, 3/15/29

America’s Youth: What’s Wrong?!

March 14, 2020

America’s Youth: What’s Wrong?!

Well, a lot is wrong. America’s many problems are too numerous and complex to discuss in one blog. However, I have discussed a great many problems in previous blogs and I strongly endorse the content of this wonderfully honest video. 

Prager University has generated the following video that identifies what they (and I) consider to be some of the most vital socio-cultural deficits leading to America’s great decline.

As a professor of psychology and practicing psychologist, during the past 50 years, I have painfully witnessed the American decline identified in this video. I can assure you that it is real, given the many employees, teachers, police/firefighters, parents, children and families that I have treated.

I hope you will view this important video and understand that President Trump, putting politics second to America’s general welfare,  has done more to address these deficits than any modern President. He must have four more years to continue his herculean effort.

Then, in future elections, America must elect other leaders that will follow his lead to continue this absolutely essential efforts. 

This is your reality America: Work to change it or continue to suffer the hellish consequences.

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D., 3/14/20


Why Vote for Trump?!

March 13, 2020

Why Vote for Trump?!

Presented without comment, VTM, 3/13/20


Increasing Teen Transgender Identity

March 8, 2020

Increasing Teen Transgender Identity

The following article was published by Psychology Today.
There will be more blogs on this topic in the future.
I will make the following points for you to consider before you read Dr. Veissiere’s very good Psychology Today article.
  • The author is careful to state that what he writes “should not—imply a moral judgment of transgender individuals”. I will agree and recommend that you also agree. However, I judge that it is very much a moral issue that physicians would perform irreversible sex-reassignment surgery on children and adolescents and prescribe drugs for them that suspend sexual development with uncertain consequences for normal health and general development. All of this, when the majority of developing children and teens change their views on their transsexuality and self-proclaimed gay and lesbian sexual orientations when they mature.
  • I also judge that it is immoral for America’s schools to sponsor transsexual or transvestite individuals as readers to grade-school children, or for middle schools and high schools to sponsor Lesbian, Gay, Bi, Transsexal, Queer (LGBTQ) clubs. All of this his done under the guise of teaching the ethics of diversity or providing social support to LGBTQ kids, when peer pressure and recruitment to these identities and life-styles are a likely outcome.
  • The author discusses research to show that Gender Dysphoria and Transgender Identity have greatly increased within America (and elsewhere). He notes that there is research to suggest that Gender Dysphoria is now emerging in ways different from the past. This is not surprising in light of the changing nature of  our media (i.e., media LGBTQ recruitment, XXX cyberspace pornography and the “softer” pornification of our general entertainment media). Then consider the transformations of America’s nuclear and extended families (i.e., drug use by parents, divorce, parental abandonment (particularly by divorced or never married fathers). There is good research to support that in father-absent homes boys too often tend to be significantly more feminized or aggressively more masculinized; girls without fathers too often tend to become significantly more solicitous of male attention or very uncomfortable with male companionship…there is much more to this picture. The psychology of conditioning an research and learning theory would have much to suggest about these outcomes.  Sigmund Freud is likely “rolling in his grave” about all of this.

The author concludes that reported increases in transgender dysphoria and its outcomes are “Sociogenic” in origin. I do not disagree with the social nature of these influences. Rather, I wish to expand the scope of known and potential influences by using the concept of Behavioral Contagion. Behavioral contagion includes all documented social, psychological and biological influences. It is is essential to select-from the full-range of known Biopsychosocial laws and principles for the theoretical analysis of any data related to the evolution of sociocultural phenomena.

To learn more about this important concept, type “Behavioral Contagion” in my search box (upper right on main page). Here you will find my explanations of this term as well as a variety of clear examples.

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D.
Health Services Provider in Psychology
Professor Emeritus of Psychology, Indiana University South Bend
Now the article:

Samuel Paul Veissière Ph.D.    

My apologies! I am unable to fix the gap between the author’s name and his following article.

Why Is Transgender Identity on the Rise Among Teens?

A new study of social contagion raises important clinical and ethical questions.

Posted Nov 28, 2018

Transgender identity* is characterized by experiencing distress with, or an inability to identify with one’s biological sex, usually prompting a desire to live one’s life as the opposite sex.

In the DSM-5, the standard classification of mental disorders used by mental health professionals, this condition is known as “gender dysphoria.” Note that classifying gender dysphoria as a disorder does not—indeed, should not—imply a moral judgment of transgender individuals. Depending on the degree of social stigma associated with it, transgender identity can be accompanied by very significant distress. The point of the mental-health outlook is to help reduce stigma and assist transgender individuals in leading good lives. The role of social norms in this picture, however, remains unclear and hotly debated.

The historical and cross-cultural record indicates that conditions akin to what we now call “transgender identity” have been known to occur in all societies, with varying degrees of acceptance, suppression, or even encouragement. The widespread acceptance of individuals who were born males and dress and live as females, such as the hijra in Indiakatoey in Thailandbakla in the Philippines, and travesti in Brazil, for example, long predates the current transgender movement in the West.  Despite a longstanding recognition of their existence, transgender individuals in those countries continue to face some discrimination. Among the Kuna (also known as Guna) of the San Blas Islands in Panama, transgender identity appears to have been fully accepted since precolonial times. As a rare example of a matriarchal and matrilineal society, names and properties are typically passed on from female to female among the Kuna, leading to a cultural preference for having girl children. In this context, male children were sometimes raised as girls, thereby conferring families with a distinct social advantage. This gave rise to a rare example of absence of cultural stigma around transgender identities.

These examples are telling because they point to the importance of different social norms in mediating gendered preferences and behavior. They also introduce another piece in our puzzle: all the culturally recognized incidences of pre-modern transgender individuals mentioned above involve natal males who transition to female. In the DSM-5, prevalence rates of gender dysphoria are estimated at 0.005 percent to 0.014 percent of the population for natal males, and 0.002 percent to 0.003 percent for natal females. The higher prevalence of males exhibiting the condition is likely related to a higher percentage of male homosexuals worldwide (3 to 4 percent) as compared to lesbians (1 to 2 percent). While these rates are the subject of debate, the higher ratio of male homosexuals as compared to women is a consistent finding across surveys.

As attested by current controversies, rates of transgender identity appear to be on the rise, particularly among young people. Increased social acceptance of a previously stigmatized condition likely plays a role in this process, but other findings are clearly puzzling: Transgender identity is now reported among young natal females at rates that clearly exceed all known statistics to date.

In a recent survey of 250 families whose children developed symptoms of gender dysphoria during or right after puberty, Lisa Littman, a physician and professor of behavioral science at Brown University, found that over 80 percent of the youth in her sample were female at birth. Littman’s study reported many other surprising findings. To meet the diagnostic criteria for gender dysphoria, a child typically needs to have shown observable characteristics of the condition prior to puberty, such as “a strong rejection of typically feminine or masculine toys,” or “a strong resistance to wearing typically feminine or masculine clothes.” Again, 80 percent of the parents in the study reported observing none of these early signs in their children.

The plot thickens again: First, many of the youth in the survey had been directly exposed to one or more peers who had recently “come out” as trans. Next, 63.5 percent of the parents reported that in the time just before announcing they were trans, their child had exhibited a marked increase in Internet and social media consumption. Following popular YouTubers who discussed their transition thus emerged as a common factor in many of the cases. After the youth came out, an increase in distress, conflict with parents, and voiced antagonism toward heterosexual people and non-transgender people (known as “cis” or “cisgender”) was also frequently reported. This animosity was also described as extending to “males, white people, gay and lesbian (non-transgender) people.” The view adopted by trans youth, as summed up by one parent, seemed to be that:

“In general, cis-gendered people are considered evil and unsupportive, regardless of their actual views on the topic. To be heterosexual, comfortable with the gender you were assigned at birth, and non-minority places you in the ‘most evil’ of categories with this group of friends. Statement of opinions by the evil cis-gendered population are consider phobic and discriminatory and are generally discounted as unenlightened.”

Parents further reported being derogatorily called “breeders” by their children, or being routinely harassed by children who played “pronoun-police.” The observation that they no longer recognized their child’s voice came up time and again in parental reports. In turn, the eerie similarity between the youth’s discourse and trans-positive online content was repeatedly emphasized. Youth were described as “sounding scripted,” “reading from a script,” “wooden,” “like a form letter,” “verbatim,” “word for word,” or “practically copy and paste.”

Littman raises cautions about encouraging young people’s desire to transition in all instances.  From the cases reviewed in her study, she concluded that what she terms “rapid-onset gender dysphoria” (ROGD) appears to be a novel condition that emerges from cohort and contagion effects and novel social pressures. From this perspective, ROSD likely exhibits an aetiology and epidemiology that is distinct from the “classical” cases of gender dysphoria documented in the DSM.

Littman hypothesizes that ROGD can be cast as a maladaptive coping mechanism for other underlying mental health issues such as trauma or social maladjustment, but also for other exceptional traits like high IQ and giftedness. The peer support, prestige, and identity leveraged by the youth who proudly come out as trans certainly appears to be protective in their circles. As Littman’s study shows, this social signaling strategy also comes with strong disadvantages, particularly as it increases conflict between trans youth and the “cis” majority of the population, which, tellingly, includes a majority of the LGBT community.

The notion reported by parents that the ROGD appears to be “scripted” is also telling. Medical anthropologists describe the process of outsourcing negative feelings to cultural narratives and systems of beliefs as “idioms of distress.” These beliefs can be partially grounded in science and biology (as is the case with current brain-based mental health culture), or not at all (as is the case in cultures that explain mental illness through the idiom of spirit possession). When extreme forms of distress and coping arise through novel social pressures and spread through implicit imitation, strange epidemics of “mass psychogenic illnesses” have been documented. These have extended to dancing plaguespossession epidemics on factory floors, fugue states, or epidemics of face-twitching. These conditions are described as “psychogenic” (originating in the mind) when no underlying physical cause can be determined. But the term “sociogenic,” which highlights the social context in which these conditions occur,  is a better description.

Risk factors for proneness to mass sociogenic illness remain hotly debated. Tellingly, for our investigation, it is broadly recognized that females, perhaps due to their higher sensitivity to social cues on average, are overwhelmingly more prone to such phenomena. Once more, this should not be read as a moral story. Medical sociologist Robert Bartholomew, one of the world’s leading experts on mass sociogenic epidemics, has long argued that phenomena that are still unjustly termed “mass hysteria” should be renamed “collective stress responses.”

It is clear from Littman’s study that the rise of rapid-onset gender dysphoria, which seems to predominantly involve natal females, points to a complex web of social pressures, changing cultural norms, and new modes of distress and coping that warrant further investigation. For parents, educators, and clinicians alike, caution is warranted in dealing with this growing phenomenon.

* Note: An earlier version of this post used the term “transgenderism” which, while often used to describe transgender individuals, is now considered out of date and stigmatizing by many in the LGBT community. “Transgender identity” is the community’s preferred term.  The author thanks the Human Rights Campaign for pointing this out.

*** Note 2: I have received numerous private comments from readers about this article. Some readers pointed out that I did not mention the controversy and significant public backlash that ensued after the study was first published in August 2018. You can read my discussion of this backlash in this next post.

*** Note 3: You may also read my third post, in which I call for dialogue (not debate) and compassion between the different sides of the ROGD debate.

About the Author


Into The Darkness

March 6, 2020

Into The Darkness

She had walked about three miles in the dark and was lost for a time before she found my office. It was cold and sprinkling rain as she walked through the “wrong side of town” to seek my help. Her journey took her through tough streets where rapes, robberies and gang shootings happen all too often.

She was a very slight waif of a young woman and she hid in an over-sized hooded sweat shirt, her head and face were well recessed into the protection of that dark hood. She had withdrawn from the world around her.

I expressed my concern that she had walked at night through a dangerous area of our city. She said that she wasn’t afraid because when she “walks at night no one can see her”. She sat in my room with her head bent down and the hood making it impossible for me to see her face, unless I bent low from my chair to look into its recesses. There I saw an expressionless mask with wide eyes that gazed at the floor.

With my hearing aids on their highest setting, I strained to hear her voice. At times she made sense, but often she did not. She said that she wanted to get better and to be normal. She said that she used to cut herself and that she had tried suicide many times. She said that she had been in mental hospitals frequently and that she was afraid of those places.  She said that she is always nervous and can not come out of her house during the day and that she gets confused and scared and wants to feel better. At times she was whispering. I asked if she was hearing voices: She said “yes, but there are many voices talking at the same time and I can’t make out what they are saying”.

My heart sunk and I felt a little sick as I told the lady that she appeared to be suffering from schizophrenia. I said that I could not help her through counseling until she was on anti-psychotic medication. Her voice became louder and very firm as she stated that she was not crazy and did not need any medication: “I just needed someone to talk to”.

I tried to explain that it would be unethical for me to provide-long term counseling to her for a condition that required medication before counseling would be any benefit. I told her I could not participate in prolonging her illness that was harming her. She began to mumble about cutting herself and she fumbled in her purse for something: I was fearful she was looking for a knife.

It was a tattered intake form that she had meticulously filled out and brought to give to our receptionist. She continued to slouch within her hooded sweat shirt as she shuffled slowly from my office. She lingered near the reception desk for a time and finally walked out the front door into the dark, cold, and rainy night.

I normally do not loose sleep over my client’s problems. However, I did not sleep well that night and I cannot get visions of this poor and pathetic young woman of my mind.

Both the poor lady and I were caught in the results of a terrible mistake that America made following the discovery of anti-psychotic medications in the 1950’s. At that time close to six hundred thousand patients were confined in public mental institutions. The new anti-psychotic medications frequently ( but not always) helped to control the active symptoms of many forms of psychosis. However, the medications did not cure the conditions, which were prone to return when the patients encountered stressful conditions, and  with near certainty if they had stopped taking their medications.

During the 1960’s, in the name of “humane treatment of mental patients”, the U.S and other nations began the process of letting these patients out of hospitals. This process has been called deinstitutionalization. By the year 2001 there were less than 60,000 patients confined to mental hospitals on any one day. Also, strict patient’s rights laws were past by our federal government forbidding the hospitalization of mental patients against their will, unless they were a clear a danger to themselves or others. This led to the insane practice of letting severely mentally ill citizens being given the choice to be hospitalized or not.  In other words, people who were not in contact with reality were (and are) being asked if they think they need to be hospitalized: tragically their answer is very often: No!

This has led to the increase in the social horrors which we all plainly see, such as mass murders in our schools, or killings and attempted killings of high profile entertainers and even U.S. presidents and others, by people who are very severely mentally ill.

Just as painful to see,  are the severely mentally ill who are cold and starving in the streets, who seek shelter under bridges and train trestles, or in boxes and other make-shift shelters all over America.

I will never forget a documentary I watched showing mental health workers putting sandwiches on a bench in a city park hoping that a starving psychotic man, who thought people were trying to poison him, would finally eat. As often is the case, the man ran away from them and would not talk to them. No one had the power take him to a safe environment where he could have been medicated, and cared for. My perception was of a cultural practice, which is as psychotic as the starving man who though it was t“trying to poison” him.

One final thought. The psychotic woman who I could not help and who walked out into the darkness from my office, had told me she had two children.

Think about this: schizophrenia is a biogentically-based mental disease that is heritable. After deinstitutionalization in America, the reproductive rate of schizophrenics came to approximate that of the rest of the population. Therefore, we should realize that serious mental illness has been growing in proportion within our population. This sector of our population has exponentially increased America’s homelessness problem. Furthermore, the children of schizophrenics are at greater risk of that and other psychological disorders.  

The truth is that there is nothing humane about the way we treat hour severely mentally ill citizens–and/or their children. I see our treatment of these suffering people as being negligent and abusive and I see the true motive for this abuse as being financial in nature. Deinstitutionalization saves money in the short-term, pure and simple.

This is another example of America’s short-term avoidance of short-term expenses and trouble, at the expense of long-term self-abusive and destructive outcomes.

V. Thomas Mawhinney, 10/30/09, now 3/6/20

P.S. I am republishing this writing now, in 2020, as countless hundreds of thousands of people are living in boxes and make-shift tents on the streets of America’s formerly great and beautiful cities, now bastions of grotesquely liberal-leftist administrations.

It is estimated that there are approximately 500,000 thousand of people in America homeless each night. How many are actually living on the our streets is very hard to estimate. 



%d bloggers like this: