Posts Tagged ‘VTM’

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!

https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-itm-001&hsimp=yhs-001&hspart=itm&p=videos+of+chines+eating+bats#id=1&vid=502828e15128492e7438df73001eaf28&action=click

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

https://www.livescience.com/44870-bats-viruses-flight.html

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!

https://curiosity.com/topics/the-big-bang-wasnt-actually-the-beginning-of-the-universe-curiosity/

https://www.livescience.com/65254-what-happened-before-big-big.html

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

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

 

March 5, 2020

Go to H#** Conservatives!

Here ya go with more Democrat Buffoonery.

V. Thomas Mawhinney, 3/5/20

 

 

 

.F. Branco · Mar. 3, 2020

 

 

Sex Robots = Psychological Damage

March 1, 2020

Sex Robots = Psychological Damage

Years ago, I wrote a series of blogs abstracting the findings of my professional research into the damaging effects of the legalization of pornography in America. There was both data-based evidence of coming damage to our population, as well as strong theoretical support for prediction of very bad outcomes of the PORNIFICATION of America’s socioculture.

Today the technological pornification of America (and elsewhere) appears nearing its zenith and, once again, I and other psychologist are warning of even worsened psychological damages.

Uncontrolled human sexuality can be a very powerful force negatively impacting a modern socioculture’s population and its viability to evolve into the future. The pornification of a society is capable of contributing to the destruction of stable family relationships. Including damaged two parent families; increased rates of sexually transmitted disease; increased rates of sexual abuse of children; increased rates of rape and other sex crimes; including murder; decreased birth rates, below population replacement levels; and increases in  bizarre and pathological sexual appetites and behaviors within our population.

The elementary principles of conditioning and learning, especially among our young, can easily contribute to an increase in sexual activities that are classified as the “Paraphilias”. It is important that you know about the Paraphilias because their increase threatens the psychosexual health of America.

Please research the following. See what psychologists are warning us about, as a result of technological and marketing advances relative to the production and mass sales of all manner of Sex Robots.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_paraphilias

Now, please consider the following article documenting that robot adult sex dolls have now morphed into robotic child sex dolls, published by “The Daily Beast”. Note that this is not new new’s!

I judge that, from a human conditioning and learning perspective, this technological development and open-market sales poses an unconscionable threat to us all.

________________________________________________________________________

A congressman has introduced legislation to ban child sex dolls and robots, while some pedophilia experts are torn about whether they can help or harm. (Warning: Graphic content.)

Stop Abuse Campaign

Three words (“child” + “sex” + “doll”) that should never appear together are suddenly—and disturbingly—making headlines around the world every week, as is the debate surrounding their implementation or banishment to either curb or reinforce pedophilia. The Stop Abuse Campaign has launched a new campaign designed to grab your attention. “Children play with dolls,” it reads. “Sex abusers should not.”

Most recently: A 33-year-old Essex man was found not guilty of importing a 3-foot-tall child sex doll in the United Kingdom. Meanwhile, a case in Canada that began in 2013 with the intercepted “controlled delivery” of one such doll is still being prosecuted five years later. And in the United States, Rep. Dan Donovan (R-NY) just introduced legislation to ban the dolls, in a bill named Curbing Realistic Exploitative Electronic Pedophilic Robots, otherwise known as the CREEPER Act.

Unsurprisingly, heated controversy surrounds the subject, with some advocates suggesting child sex dolls could be used to deter the real-life fulfillment of pedophilic urges. Most notably, Juliet Grayson, chair of the Wales-based organization the Specialist Treatment Organization for the Prevention of Sexual Offending (StopSO), told The Independent that the prescription of child sex dolls might potentially curb assaults against human children.

However, in an email interview with The Daily Beast this week, Donovan shot down the notion that child sex dolls could be used to prevent abuse with a simple analogy.

“You don’t give an alcoholic a bottle of liquor to stop their addiction, so why would you provide a pedophile with a tool that would further normalize harmful actions?” Donovan asked. “Once a child sex abuser tires of practicing on a doll, it’s a small step to move on to an innocent child. This isn’t just speculation. Psychologists and researchers believe that these dolls reinforce, normalize, and encourage pedophilic behavior, potentially putting more children at risk to harm. It is absurd to argue that permitting sexual abuse against a realistic portrayal of a child somehow stops pedophiles from viewing real children as sexual outlets for their sick desires.”

— Rep. Dan Donovan (R-NY)

With both the AI revolution and the cultural awakening that’s been coined the post-Weinstein effect, there is an intense focus right now on the best way to protect our most vulnerable populations against sexual abuse. Incidentally, conversations about pedophilia that once were shrouded in darkness are now being brought into the light. For example: Is it possible for pedophiles to get help before offending? How does grooming of children happen? What is the extent of child sexual abuse online? Should there be preemptive imprisonment for pedophiles at risk of molesting a child?

And now the latest debate: what to do about the forthcoming influx of child sex robots (and current reality of child sex dolls)? Writing convincingly of the need to clamp down on the “shadow trade” in child sex dolls and robots, professors Marie-Helen Maras and Lauren Shapiro present a meticulously researched argument for banning them in the December 2017 issue of the Journal of Internet Law.

  • “Sex dolls and robots promote (the acceptance of) non-consensual sex and rape…”
  • “Those who would argue against societal harm from the expression of aggression against life-like dolls and robots need only look at what happened in Austria at a technology expo where Samantha was exhibited. Despite being ‘molested’… when asked politely ‘How are you?’ Samantha responded, ‘Hi, I’m fine.’”

There can’t be a discussion of banning child sex dolls and robots without examining the landmark Supreme Court 2002 decision that struck down two key provisions of the 1996 Child Pornography Prevention Act as being too chilling on free speech: 1. porn that “appears to be… of a minor,” or 2. porn that “conveys the impression” that it is of a minor.

So could there be a danger of the same issue happening with the CREEPER Act?

“Let’s be clear, these dolls aren’t related to free speech,” Donovan responds to the question. “They are used to act out sick fantasies.”

In the United Kingdom, where a similar ban exists to the one being introduced by the CREEPER Act, authorities seized 128 child sex dolls last year, and 85 percent of the men who imported them were found to also be in possession of child pornography. Child sex dolls are already here, with child sex robots hitting the market soon—causing heated legalethical, and scientific debate around the world.

Still, the topic inspires a merry-go-round of researcher versus researcher. On the one end of the spectrum, legal scholars Maras and Shapiro dismiss the possibility of potential therapeutic use of child sex dolls, writing, “Scientific evidence contradicts these claims as nonsensical and irrational.” On the other end, noted pedophilia researcher and Sexual Abuse Editor in Chief Michael Seto disagrees that such definitive evidence exists yet.

“I don’t understand why the authors can be so confident in their opinions given the lack of research on this topic,” Seto explained in an email to The Daily Beast. “I conduct research on pedophilia and sexual offending against children and I am not aware of any research on the impacts of access to child sex dolls or robots. The study that is cited in the article discusses factors that are important in the treatment of identified sex offenders to reduce offending. I know this research, and it does not address the impact of child sex dolls or robots, which are relatively new inventions.”

In a passionate piece for The Hill, Donovan made his case for the CREEPER Act, which has 18 congressional co-sponsors, explaining, “During my 20 years as a prosecutor, I put away animals who played out their disgusting fantasies on innocent children. What I saw and heard was enough to make anybody sick. Now, as a legislator in Congress, I’m introducing a bill to ban the newest outlet for pedophiles: child sex dolls. These lifelike, anatomically accurate recreations of young children include ‘accessories’ such as false eyelashes, wigs, warming devices, and cleaning tools.”

Donovan tells The Daily Beast his work as a prosecutor is linked closely to this current legislation: “Every case has stayed with me—there is no situation where a child was hurt or victimized that doesn’t leave your thoughts. As a former DA and current legislator, but more importantly as a father, I will do everything possible to stop crimes against children.”

After moving through the proper committees, Donovan says, “I hope to see [the CREEPER Act] considered quickly on the House floor. We must protect our nation’s children. I know the American public want this done—there is more than 160,000 signatures on a Change.org petition supporting my legislation.”

Maras and Shapiro assert in their recent editorial that the introduction of the CREEPER Act is a “step in the right direction,” but they also advocate for additional prohibitions which would “criminalize the manufacture and possession of both child sex dolls and child sex robots,” such as when criminals “find ways to evade criminal sanction by, for example, creating these child sex dolls and sex robots themselves (for example, using a 3D printer).”

Donovan responds, “Right now, the proliferation of these dolls is being pushed by manufacturers in international markets—not through 3D printers. We, of course, should be forward-looking to ensure that the law continues to keep up with technology—but my focus is stopping the ‘here and now.’ For example, ICE has already confiscated one of these dolls in the U.S. that was imported from abroad.”

So child sex dolls are already being imported into America?

“I have been in touch with ICE and know that a child sex doll was found during a bust,” explains Donovan. “While I can’t speak more on ongoing cases, I can say that this situation shows that these dolls are being shipped here now. The ability to obtain child sex dolls needs to be stopped immediately.”

But can the law even keep up with the technology?

“Writing legislation for technology we don’t yet know will exist in 10, 20-plus years time is a difficult task,” observes Emily C. Collins, a robotics researcher at the University of Liverpool and member of the Foundation for Responsible Robotics. “But it is not fruitless to attempt to do so… When a machine is built, the builders, in my opinion, should be asking, ‘How will this robot impact its users?’”

But how will child sex dolls and robots affect their users? Are pedophiles who have purchased the child sex dolls in fact “virtuous”?

Last year, 72-year-old David Turner, a church warden with local school oversight, was convicted of importing a child sex doll. In a landmark decision for this new form of sex crime against children, the judge ruled the importation of the item “obscene.” Authorities who later searched Turner’s home found two other child sex dolls and more than 34,000 child pornography images.

The pictures showed victims ages 3 to 16.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Finally, to learn more about my own research into the generally harmful effects of the pornification of America please, type “pornography” into the search box on the top right side of my blog page.

Wake-Up America! 

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D., 3/1/20

Professor Emeritus of Psychology, Indiana University South Bend.

Practicing State Certified Psychologist (46 years)

 


%d bloggers like this: