Tag Archives: Williams Institute

New study finds transgenderism is contagious among the young

On August 16, 2018, the peer-reviewed PLoS One journal published the findings of a study by Brown University behavior and social sciences professor Lisa Littman on the social contagion of “gender dysphoria” among adolescents and young adults.

Gender dysphoria is defined as an individual’s persistent discomfort with their biological sex or assigned gender.

From the article’s Abstract:

In on-line forums, parents have been reporting that their children are experiencing what is described here as “rapid-onset gender dysphoria,” appearing for the first time during puberty or even after its completion. The onset of gender dysphoria seemed to occur in the context of belonging to a peer group where one, multiple, or even all of the friends have become gender dysphoric and transgender-identified during the same timeframe. Parents also report that their children exhibited an increase in social media/internet use prior to disclosure of a transgender identity.

Littman found two striking phenomena:

  1. An association and likely causal relationship between mental/developmental disorder and gender dysphoria: As many as 62.5% of the adolescent and young adults in Littman’s survey had been diagnosed with at least one mental health disorder or neurodevelopmental disability prior to the onset of their gender dysphoria.
  2. Gender dysphoria contagion: In 36.8% of friendship groups with one or more so-called transgenders, the majority of the group’s members who had not been gender dysphoric in their childhood became transgenders.

Littman gave some examples of sudden-onset gender dysphoria contagion:

  • A 14-year-old girl and three of her female friends were taking group lessons together with a very popular coach. The coach came out as transgender, and, within one year, all four students announced they were also transgender.
  • Another 14-year-old girl is part of a friend group that spends much of their time talking about gender and sexuality. After three girls in the group all announced they were trans boys and chose similar masculine names, the 14-year-old girl also announced that she was a trans boy.

You can read Littman’s article here. If the journal takes down the article, it is archived here.

Joy Pullmann reports for The Federalist that Littman’s “study was quickly yanked from Brown’s news releases after a transgender activist feeding frenzy, and the journal it was published in is reconsidering the publication.”

The dean of Brown University’s School of Public Health, Bess Marcus, issued this apology:

Brown community members express[ed] concerns that the conclusions of the study could be used to discredit efforts to support transgender youth and invalidate the perspectives of members of the transgender community.

The spirit of free inquiry and scholarly debate is central to academic excellence. At the same time, we believe firmly that it is also incumbent on public health researchers to listen to multiple perspectives and to recognize and articulate the limitations of their work.

Sudden-onset gender-dysphoria contagion would account for the rapid recent growth in “transgenders” and transgender treatment centers in the UK and the United States:

  • In the UK, the National Health Service has seen an increase of 700% over the past 5 years in transgender referrals and children wanting to change genders. (Daily Mail)
  • The graph below shows the increases in the number of transgender referrals in the U.S. since 2010. Note how the numbers sharply increased after 2014, especially for girls. (Source: The Federalist)

Gender dysphoria contagion is fueled by media propaganda and the flood of transgender books for children (and adults). As examples:

Here’s another example of gender dysphoria contagion.

Dorothy Stringer School is a secondary school in Brighton, East Sussex, England, with about 1,600 students, ages 11 to 16. The school is praised by Tatler magazine as “the coolest state secondary in town” for its “liberal vibe” and for having the “perfect balance between work and fun”.

As reported by the UK Daily Mail on November 25, 2018, a recent council survey found that Dorothy Stringer School has the highest number of gender dysphoric students of any school in the UK:

  • 76 students at Dorothy Stringer are gender dysphoric.
  • Of those, 40 do not identify with their sex at birth, 36 say they are “gender fluid”.

Given Dorothy Springer’s total student enrollment of 1,650 (according to Clash Daily), 76 gender dysphoric students mean 4.6% of the school’s students are transgender or “gender fluid” — a much higher percentage than the percentage of transgenders in the general population. A 2016 study by UCLA’s Williams Institute, using CDC data, found that only 0.6% of U.S. adults identify as transgender.

A Brighton teacher said: “What’s happening is worrying and many of us know it, but nobody wants to speak up and get shot.”

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Betty Crocker goes homo

Betty Crocker goes homo
Like JCPenney, Target, DC Comics, Archie comics, Kraft Food’s Oreo cookie, Nabisco’s Honey Maid crackers, Cheerio breakfast cereal, and fast fooder Burger King, Betty Crocker has also embraced the rainbow flag and gone homo.
Dustin Suggins reports for LifeSiteNews, July 14, 2014, that the 90-year-old homemaking company Betty Crocker says it is adjusting to the times by promoting all relationships — including homosexual couples and cohabitating couples — as equal to married couples with children.

On a website dedicated to its “Family Project,” Betty Crocker has highlighted four families, including a lesbian couple and divorcees who are remarried.
The change in Betty Crocker‘s focus became well known in August 2013, when the company – a subsidiary of General Mills, which supports same-sex “marriage” — released a video promoting same-sex couples. At the same time, it provided cakes to homosexual couples who “married” in Minnesota after the state legalized homosexual marriage.
Last month, Betty Crocker donated cakes to couples at the Twin Cities Pride Parade, and an employee group marched in the Parade. It also partnered with New America, a left-of-center think tank, to put out a survey the company says aimed “to gain a first-person point of view on what it means to be a homemaker in America today — and how those roles and descriptions have changed over time.”

Twin Cities Pride Parade 2013Twin Cities Pride Parade 2013 (CBS photo)

Betty Crocker Marketing Manager Perteet Spencer told AdAge.com, “Betty has always been a pioneer and guide for homemakers. As today’s family continues to evolve, so does Betty. Naysayers are always there, but generally the response has been really positive.” She also says that the company is not an activist for homosexual relationships, but “is an activist for the modern homemaker.”
Family Research Council (FRC) Senior Fellow for Policy Studies Peter Sprigg told LifeSiteNews that FRC has “long argued that corporate America should remain neutral in the culture wars. It is unfortunate that Betty Crocker is choosing instead to take the side of those who want to redefine marriage and family altogether.”
Sprigg said Betty Crocker’s efforts to put a positive spin on changing the traditional family “conceals the dysfunction, heartache, and harms to children which frequently result from such alternatives to the family headed by a married mother and father. Betty Crocker’s celebration of homosexual relationships, divorce, and single parenthood will undoubtedly alienate the 71% of Americans who, according to their own poll, say that they have ‘old-fashioned values’ about family and marriage.”
According to the federal government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), homosexuals make up a mere 2.3% of the U.S. population. According to a 2011 study by a gay and lesbian think tank at UCLA, the Williams Institute, homosexuals account for less than 2% of the U.S. population.
Thanks to the MSM’s propaganda and brainwashing, Americans think the number is 13 times higher.
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Joan Rivers: "We all know" Obama is gay and Michelle is a tranny

Yesterday, after officiating at a wedding of two sodomites in New York, comedienne Joan Rivers outed the president and first lady of the United States as a homosexual and transgender, respectively.

Rivers was asked by an off-camera reporter: “Do you think the country … United States will see the first gay president or first woman president?”
This is what Joan Rivers said, sounding weary and definitely not in a joking mood:

“We already have [the first gay president] with Obama, so let’s just calm down. You know Michelle is a tranny… a transgender. We all know.

We all know.

Of course, by “we,” Joan Rivers wasn’t referring to ordinary American people, aka the sheeple who pay the taxes that (barely) holds the U.S. government together, who pay the movie tickets that maintain the Hollyweirdos in their extravagant and debauched “lifestyle”.

So who are those “we” who “all know” all along that Obama is “gay” and his “wife” Michael — oops, Michelle — is really a man?

Clue No. 1

Remember that Newsweek cover of May 21, 2012, proclaiming Obama to be “The First Gay President”?

Newsweek‘s orgasmic cover was prompted by Obama’s reversal of the military’s long-standing “don’t ask don’t tell” policy and his open support of “gay marriage.”

The weekly magazine’s accompanying cover story was written by the political pundit Andrew Sullivan, a public (i.e., outed) homosexual who wrote that Obama’s support of gay marriage had brought him to tears. (Lest you get all misty-eyed sentimental, he’s the same Andrew Sullivan who once said “gay marriage” does NOT mean monogamy. As he put it oh so delicately: “there is more likely to be greater understanding of the need for extramarital outlets between two men than between a man and a woman.”)

At the time, we the sheeple thought Newsweek didn’t literally mean Obama is “the first gay president”.

Think again.

Homosexuals pride themselves on their gaydar. They have to, in order to find each other because homosexuals constitute only 3% of the U.S. population, according to the Williams Institute, UCLA’s LGBT research think tank. That means Andrew Sullivan already knew Barack Hussein Obama is a homosexual, just as another public homosexual — conservative blogger Kevin Dujan of HillBuzz — has known all along.

Clue No. 2

7 months after the Newsweek cover, Candy — the first transexual style magazine — caused a brief publicity stir when it chose for its cover a transgender model, Connie Fleming, bearing a decided resemblance to Michelle Obama. (See DCG’s post about this here.)

In the words of Daily Mail: “A striking transgender model made up to look like Michelle Obama being sworn into office has been put on the front cover of a  U.S. magazine….  Fleming is dressed in typical First Lady fashion, down to the pearl necklace. Even the hair style is reminiscent of President Barack Obama’s wife, Michelle.

For Candy to do a cover story on a transgender U.S. president is bold enough, why pick a BLACK male-to-female transgender for its cover? And not just any black MtF transgender but one who resembles Michelle? Then have the model wear a wig just like Michelle’s and a sleeveless dress just like Michelle’s, exposing Fleming’s toned muscular arms, of which Michael Obama is so proud and for which he is celebrated by all the Obama idolators in the MSM?

Clue No. 3

Fast forward 1½ years to Time magazine’s cover of June 9, 2014, proclaiming that we’re at a “Transgender Tipping Point: America’s Next Civil Rights Frontier.” (See my post, “Transgender surgery now covered by bankrupt Medicare“.)

For its cover picture, Time could have chosen any number of transgenders — male-to-female or female-to-male; white, black, yellow, brown. But the magazine chose a BLACK male-to-female transgender, an obscure actor named Laverne Cox who also bears an uncanny resemblance to Michelle Obama. As observant FOTM commenter motherbarbarian noted: “Looking at that Time cover photo, I am reminded of Michael Obama. Same sculpted arms and muscled legs.”

Wink, wink. Nudge, nudge.

Friends, we’ve been played.

“We all know.” They all know.

Joan Rivers, Andrew Sullivan, Newsweek, Candy, Time, and all the denizens of the “liberal” media and Hollywood have known all along.
See our posts:

UPDATE (Sept. 5, 2014):

Two months to the day of Joan Rivers’ outing of the Obamas, she was declared dead after she had stopped breathing during a routine endoscopy in a clinic.

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

JCPenney is still sinking

Despite finally getting rid of its homosexual-pandering CEO Ron Johnson nearly 4 months ago, JCPenney’s fortunes are still sinking.

Ron Johnson


When Johnson took over as JCP’s CEO in November 2011, he decided to “improve” the family store by pandering to homosexuals — a move that, on the grounds of simple market calculation, isn’t smart. In April 2011, Williams Institute, a gay and lesbian think tank at UCLA School of Law, released a study that found Americans grossly overestimate the number of homosexuals in the United States. Instead of the common misconception that 25% of the US population are gay or lesbian, the truth is that it’s probably less than 2 percent.
First, Johnson made Ellen Degeneres the company’s spokeslesbian. Then JC Penney featured a lesbian couple in its Mother’s Day promotion, followed by a Father’s Day ad depicting two gay men and their children.
James Covert reports for the New York Post, July 31, 2013, that CIT — the largest commercial lender in the US apparel industry — has abruptly stopped supporting deliveries from smaller manufacturers to Penney stores.
Penney shares plunged more than 10% on The Post’s report, closing at $14.60.
Insiders speculated that CIT got skittish after getting a peek at Penney’s financials, which have been deteriorating as the department store scrambles to recover from a botched turnaround bid under former CEO Ron Johnson.
“CIT met with (Penney officials) yesterday,” according to one source close to the situation. “I assume they got a thorough briefing and didn’t like what they heard.”
A second source, however, speculated that the tightening by CIT was more of an opportunistic move to raise what it charges to finance Penney accounts.
CIT’s policy move — which only affects future orders and doesn’t impact deliveries that have already been scheduled — comes despite an aggressive financing deal this spring arranged by Goldman Sachs, which raised $1.75 billion in cash backed by Penney’s real estate.
Penney CEO Mike Ullman, who took the reins from Johnson in April, has moved to reintroduce the traditional sales events and coupons that Johnson had scrapped in favor of a disastrous flat pricing strategy. But sales this summer have been “lackluster,” according to one executive at a major Penney supplier.
Penney, which stopped reporting monthly sales last year under Johnson, is slated to report second-quarter earnings next month.
David Tawil, co-founder at Maglan Capital, said CIT’s move “just shows the growing concern over performance at JCPenney since they are not giving out monthly sales data anymore. No one wants to wait until the earnings come out to make decisions for merchandise that’s shipping out for Decenber and further out.”
Tawil and other industry experts said the practical effect of CIT’s clampdown on Penney’s inventory flow could be modest, as the bulk of Penney’s stores are supplied by apparel giants such as PVH, Jones Group and VF Corp.
“The upshot could be that JCP ends up dealing without CIT,” according to a source, noting that the retailer would likely be reluctant to extend collateral to resolve the situation. “They can just start working directly with the suppliers, paying them a little faster.”
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Less than 2% of Americans are homosexuals

Americans Have No Idea How Few Gay People There Are.

That’s the title of a May 31, 2012 article by Garance Franke-Ruta, a senior editor of The Atlantic, a left-leaning magazine. Here’s the article:
Surveys show a shockingly high fraction think a quarter of the country is gay or lesbian, when the reality is that it’s probably less than 2 percent.

queernation.banner.jpg

One in ten. It’s the name of the group that puts on the Reel Affirmations gay and lesbian film festival in Washington, D.C., each year. It’s the percent popularized by the Kinsey Report as the size of the gay male population. And it’s among the most common figures pointed to in popular culture as an estimate of how many people are gay or lesbian.
But what percentage of the population is actually gay or lesbian? With the debate over same-sex marriage again an emerging fault line in American political life, the answer comes as a surprise: A lower number than you might think — and a much, much, much lower one than most Americans believe.
In surveys conducted in 2002 and 2011, pollsters at Gallup found that members of the American public massively overestimated how many people are gay or lesbian. In 2002, a quarter of those surveyed guessed upwards of a quarter of Americans were gay or lesbian (or “homosexual,” the third option given). By 2011, that misperception had only grown, with more than a third of those surveyed now guessing that more than 25 percent of Americans are gay or lesbian. Women and young adults were most likely to provide high estimates, approximating that 30 percent of the population is gay. Overall, “U.S. adults, on average, estimate that 25 percent of Americans are gay or lesbian,” Gallup found. Only 4 percent of all those surveyed in 2011 and about 8 percent of those surveyed in 2002 correctly guessed that fewer than 5 percent of Americans identify as gay or lesbian.

Such a misunderstanding of the basic demographics of sexual behavior and identity in America has potentially profound implications for the acceptance of the gay-rights agenda. On the one hand, people who overestimate the percent of gay Americans by a factor of 12 seem likely to also wildly overestimate the cultural impact of same-sex marriage. On the other hand, the extraordinary confusion over the percentage of gay people may reflect a triumph of the gay and lesbian movement’s decades-long fight against invisibility and the closet.
“My first reaction to that, aside from a little chuckle, is that it’s actually a sign of the success of the movement for LGBT rights,” said Stuart Gaffney, a spokesman for the group Marriage Equality USA. “We are a small minority, and we will never have full equality without the support of the majority, and a poll like that suggests the majority is extremely aware of their gay neighbors, coworkers, and friends.”
In recent years, as homosexuality has become less stigmatized, pro-gay rights groups have come around to acknowledging that a smaller percent of people identify themselves as gay than some of the early gay rights rhetoric claimed, based on Alfred Kinsey’s 1948 report, “Sexuality in the Human Male.” His survey research on non-random populations in the immediate post-World War II period concluded that 10 percent of men “were predominantly homosexual between the ages of 16 and 55” and that 37 percent had had at least one homosexual experience in their lives, but did not get into questions of identity per se.
Contemporary research in a less homophobic environment has counterintuitively resulted in lower estimates rather than higher ones. The Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law, a gay and lesbian think tank, released a study in April 2011 estimating based on its research that just 1.7 percent of Americans between 18 and 44 identify as gay or lesbian, while another 1.8 percent — predominantly women — identify as bisexual. Far from underestimating the ranks of gay people because of homophobia, these figures included a substantial number of people who remained deeply closeted, such as a quarter of the bisexuals. A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention survey of women between 22 and 44 that questioned more than 13,500 respondents between 2006 and 2008 found very similar numbers: Only 1 percent of the women identified themselves as gay, while 4 percent identified as bisexual.
Higher numbers can be obtained when asking about lifetime sexual experiences, rather than identity. The Williams Institute found that, overall, an estimated 8.2 percent of the population had engaged in some form same-sex sexual activity. Put another way, 4.7 percent of the population had wandered across the line without coming to think of themselves as either gay or bisexual. Other studies suggest those individuals are, like the bisexuals, mainly women: The same CDC study that found only 1 percent of women identify as lesbian, for example, found that 13 percent of women reported a history of some form of sexual contact with other women.
“Estimates of those who report any lifetime same-sex sexual behavior and any same-sex sexual attraction are substantially higher than estimates of those who identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual,” the Williams Institute’s Gary J. Gates concluded.
These numbers are significant because identity — and not behavior — is the central determinant of whether or not someone will seek a same-sex marriage. A straight woman who makes out a couple of times with a female friend in college is not going to seek a same-sex marriage, nor is a guy who fooled around once with a male friend while drunk in high school. Neither individual is demographically relevant to the question of how often same-sex marriages will occur. And it’s not clear at all what fraction of bisexuals will seek out same-sex marriages.
Overall, there have been fewer than 75,000 state-sanctioned same-sex marriages in the United States since they began to be permitted less than a decade ago, according to an estimate by Marriage Equality USA. Over the eight years since Massachusetts became the first state to legalize same-sex marriage in May 2004, 18,462 same-sex couples married in the Bay State. Another 18,000 were estimated to have wed in California during the few months before Proposition 8 passed in 2008, banning future ones; those marriages remain on the books, as the proposition was not retroactive. It’s not totally clear how many same-sex marriages have taken place in New York, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, and the District of Columbia, the other jurisdictions where it is permitted.
[…] One thing’s for sure: it’s hard to imagine the fact that so many think the country is more than a quarter gay or lesbian has no impact on our public policy.
~End of article~
Homosexuals comprise less than 2% of the U.S. population, but Americans inexplicably believe their numbers are grossly higher — from 10% to 25% (1 out of every 4 Americans!) to 30% (nearly 1 out of every 3 Americans!).
And so this teeny miniscule group wields outsized power and influence on TV and movies, comics books, public school curriculum (see here and here), retail stores (see JC Penney and Chevy), our First Amendment free speech rights (see Christian teacher removed for criticizing gay marriage), and government policy (DADT, gay marriage).
Gosh, do you think there’s an AGENDA that’s being systematically foisted on this country?
“A middle ground might be to fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society’s moral codes but rather to…radically alter an archaic institution.” –Michelangelo Signorile, “Bridal Wave,” OUT magazine, December/January 1994, p. 161.
“[Legalizing “same-sex marriage”] is also a chance to wholly transform the definition of family in American culture. It is the final tool with which to dismantle all sodomy statutes, get education about homosexuality and AIDS into public schools, and, in short, usher in a sea change in how society views and treats us.” –Michelangelo Signorile, “I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do,” OUT magazine, May 1996, p. 30. [Source]
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0