As with many topics, identity politics can be approached on any number of levels, such as intellectual, spiritual, and emotional.

Yet, too few Americans actually talk about what we’re really talking about when the subject of the “LGBT community”/identity politics comes up. LGBT represents only four letters — thus, 4 identities.

What are the terms of this expanding identity politics phenomenon, and what is the long range impact going to be on our society and culture? What is the nature of human identity, and has God had something to say about it? What’s the proper response to those with deep feelings about who they are? Like the old Almond Joy/Mounds candy bar commercial — sometimes they feel like a nut, sometimes they don’t.

Many people are writing about the increasing difficulty of taking all of this seriously. New York City now recognizes over 30 “gender” identities. Here is Jazz Shaw writing at HotAir.com:

If the government is willing to not only recognize but mandate the acceptance of a person’s desired gender rather than their actual sex, why should there be any barriers at all. What about people suffering from Cotard’s Syndrome? They fervently believe that they are undead… literally zombies walking the Earth. Can Uncle Sam declare them dead just to honor that belief and force the medical community to treat them as corpses? While that may sound like an extreme comparison, it’s actually the same thing. There is precisely as much scientific evidence that a man identifying as a “transgender woman” is actually female as there is that a Cotard’s sufferer is actually a zombie.

Over at First Things, Katherine Kersten writes about “gender conforming” and “gender-nonconforming.” She writes:

The Judeo-Christian vision, which shaped Western civilization for 1,600 years, holds that God created man—body and soul—with purpose and meaning in an ordered universe. But the post-Christian worldview fast replacing it has no place for God, and perceives no purpose in nature. Christian man has become “psychological man” and the soul has become the self, in the words of Philip Rieff. The free-floating self—unconstrained by reality—is now believed to forge its own “identity” through a creative assertion of will.

Post-Christian man views his body as a tabula rasa—a canvas on which to express his identity and exert his will. In fact, the more contrary to nature one’s new self is, the more “authentic” it can claim to be. The recent mania for tattoos and piercings is a case in point. The desire to be free of the human condition and its limitations has ancient roots.

“Today,” Kersten writes, “transgender advocates are creating a Potemkin Village—built on hormones, surgery, and chest-binders—to solidify the illusion on which their magical reality is based.”

In the near term, transgender ideology will further polarize society and diminish the shared civic space where liberals and conservatives can fruitfully coexist… Longer term, it will mount an escalating attack on the family and religious institutions, the perennial targets of totalitarian forces.

So identity politics is not just about the confused emotional life of “progressives.” Instead, it is a threat to family and religious institutions, the very building blocks of Western Civilization. Again, here is Katherine Kersten:

As we enter the world of fantasy—when reality ceases to matter—it is impossible to predict where our society will crash against nature, as it inevitably will.

It’s time for our paraphilia of the day, and it’s one I’ll only introduce today and revisit with more next time: transgenderism. Wikipedia’s “transgender” page has been rewritten since I cited it a few years ago — and the first section runs four paragraphs. Here is just the first one:

Transgender people are people who have a gender identity, or gender expression, that differs from their assigned sex. Transgender people are sometimes called transsexual if they desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another. Transgender is also an umbrella term: in addition to including people whose gender identity is the opposite of their assigned sex (trans men and trans women), it may include people who are not exclusively masculine or feminine (people who are genderqueer, e.g. bigender, pangender, genderfluid, or agender). Other definitions of transgender also include people who belong to a third gender, or conceptualize transgender people as a third gender. Infrequently, the term transgender is defined very broadly to include cross-dressers, regardless of their gender identity.

Got it? Let’s close with our next question: Will the expression of disapproval of transgenderism be deemed bullying or hate speech? Of course we already know the answer to that is yes.

Up next: Transgenderism a Choice or Disorder?

Articles in this series, from oldest to newest:

Identity Politics and Paraphilias: Introducing a Series
Identity Politics and Paraphilias: Incest
Identity Politics and Paraphilias: Body Integrity Identity Disorder
Identity Politics and Paraphilias: Impact & Transgenders
COMING SOON: Identity Politics and Paraphilias: Transgenderism a Choice or Disorder?
COMING SOON: Identity Politics and Paraphilias: Why the Term “Sexual Orientation” is Nonsense
COMING SOON: Identity Politics and Paraphilias: Man’s Search for Meaning
COMING SOON: Identity Politics and Paraphilias: LGBT is Not a Color

Please subscribe to the IFI YouTube Channel to get timely
video reports & other special presentations!

You can bet your bottom dollar that if there’s a way to use public money to promote leftwing political or educational theories, District 113 (Highland Park and Deerfield High Schools) will find it.

Superintendent George Fornero and Director of Diversity Andrea Johnson have managed to waste thousands of taxpayer dollars to promote Critical Race Theory/Critical Pedagogy under the guise of “Equity and Excellence.”

Last month District 113 — along with many other school districts around the country — used public money to send district employees to yet another “White Privilege Conference,” this time in Minneapolis.

In an article for the Minnesota Star Tribune, Katherine Kersten, offers this description of the conference:

To find out (what parents and taxpayers can expect), we can peruse the keynote address for the 2009 conference. It was delivered by “social justice educator” Paul Kivel and appeared in the conference journal, “Understanding and Dismantling Privilege.”

Kivel begins with what passes these days as a prayer: “I want to acknowledge the creative spirits in the world that nurture and sustain us and that connect us to each other and to the plant and animal life around us.”

Then he winds up for a fire-and-brimstone sermon. We Americans “are completely dependent on U.S. imperialism and war to sustain our daily lives.”

Our schools, too, are riddled with racial bias. “Our school system has been set up … to perpetuate white supremacy and white privilege.” Poor and minority students “do not drop out — they are pushed out.”

What’s gone wrong? For one thing, Christianity has far too much influence. It “has played a key role in developing and justifying sources of oppression” such as “violence and genocide,” Kivel tells us, and is “the beginning of modern or biological racism.”

But don’t despair, he counsels. We must look beyond our “declining empire” to “exciting progressive developments” in Hugo Chavez’sVenezuela — among them, “land reform and redistribution of wealth, neighborhood committees, recognition of women’s unpaid labor, end of spanking.”

In addition to Kivel, who spoke again this year, here are just a few of the other 2011 speakers whose livelihoods we taxpaying chumps subsidize and whose feckless ideas permeate public school curricula:

Z! Haukeness (yes, that’s actually his name): Haukeness is a “transgender” who admits to looking “pretty masculine” and asserts that he is “gender queer, gender non-conforming.” He explains that he became involved in working for racial justice after having a radical seventh grade teacher who told his class that “All of you are racists and your parents are too.” (Read more HERE.)

Jessica Vasques Torres: According to diversity consultant Jamie Utt, who loved the conference, lesbian Torres asked “Why do we, as queer folks want to join an institution with a 50% failure rate? Shouldn’t our goal be to deconstruct the very destructive, sexist, and heterosexist institution of marriage itself?” (Read more HERE.)

Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz: According to Utt, Dunbar-Ortiz said that “‘The colonists who came to this country might as well have been wearing Nazi uniforms,'” in that “Their effect was the same on the indigenous people of this land.”

Waziyatawin: Utt learned from Ms. Waziyatawin that “Many people don’t want to hear the truth about what has been done to black, brown, and red people on these lands because it challenge the very system of supremacy on which our lives are built. The United States itself is built upon oppression. That can’t be reformed. The only antidote to a colonial government is to end the colonial government.”

In a speech given in another context, Waziyatawin argues that Minnesota’s celebration of its sesquicentennial was “really a rationalization for pretty horrific crimes” including “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing.”

Since I’m a District 113 taxpayer, I emailed the administration with a few questions about district participation in this conference, and demonstrating their usual commitment to transparency, the administration told me I would have to file a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in order to get my questions answered. I complied.

What I learned is that District 113 applied for a grant through the federal “Title II Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting Fund” which provides “funds to increase student academic achievement by elevating teacher and principal quality through recruitment, hiring, and retention strategies and to hold local educational agencies and schools accountable for improvements in student academic achievement.”

In the application, Diversity Director Andrea Johnson wrote that the district’s goal was to “work toward eliminating the racial predictability of which students fall into the highest and lowest achievement categories by continuing our Equity and Excellence work.”

In answer to the question on the grant application regarding how the district will evaluate the success of the programs on which they spend federal funds, Johnson wrote: “Through classroom walk-throughs, equity audits, and focus groups, we will assess our progress toward this goal. Additionally, we will administer the Intercultural Development Inventory assessment and collect data on the cultural competency of our staff who have gone through the training.”

Remarkable. The administration received a grant to increase student achievement, and yet there is no evaluation of student achievement whatsoever. Instead, they will test staff on their “cultural competency.” For the uninitiated, that means the district will test staff to determine their ability to regurgitate Critical Race Theory/Critical Pedagogy assumptions.

They will also walk through classrooms, perform equity audits (whatever that means) and have focus groups in which they will “assess” their progress. In the 1970s, I think that was called navel-gazing.

My FOIA revealed that the district received $10,000 for “Equity Staff Development Stipends” and $7,227 for “Equity Conferences” like the “White Privilege Conference.” It also revealed that one of the four district employees who was sent to the White Privilege Conference in Minnesota was the secretary for the Counseling Department, Judy Tentes. Someone needs to explain how — even in theory — having a secretary — who has no instructional responsibilities — attend a White Privilege Conference will improve student academic achievement.

Since District 113 has over the course of a decade spent well over $100,000 of taxpayer money on Critical Race Theory — I mean, “equity and excellence” — isn’t it about time to provide some objective data to prove it has closed the racial achievement gap? The administration doesn’t need to test employees for their “cultural competency.” The administration needs to prove that the money they’ve spent promoting Critical Race Theory and Critical Pedagogy through Peggy McIntosh’s SEED program, Lee Mun Wah’s Stir Fry Seminars, Glenn Singleton’s Courageous Conversations, and the White Privilege Conferences has had a measurable impact on student achievement (I can’t help but wonder what the Hispanic parents of District 113 students would think of the district spending over $100,000 of money that is intended to help their children score better on standardized tests to instead teach staff and faculty that whites, males, and heterosexuals are oppressive and often genocidal).

It should come as no surprise that a district so enamored of Critical Race Theory and Critical Pedagogy that it would annually ship employees all over the country to attend the White Privilege Conference would also have a teacher who presents at it. Deerfield High School English teacher and Critical Race Theory disciple Christine Saxman has been a presenter at the 10th, 11th, and 12th White Privilege Conferences.

To my knowledge, none of Deerfield’s or Highland Park’s many well-educated community members demand any evidence to justify years of expenditures on workshops, conferences, seminars, meetings, and “diversity” consultants. Thousands of dollars of public funds have been swallowed up by efforts to convince district employees that the racial achievement gap is centrally caused by the whiteness of white people. While skipping along the primrose path to “equity and excellence” Nirvana, our Critical Race Theorists stuff their pockets with the hard-earned money of people whom they accuse of being racist, sexist, homophobic oppressors.

One curious phenomenon continually overlooked in District 113 — a district that prides itself on fostering critical thinking, tolerance, diversity, and intellectual rigor — is that not once has the administration offered a professional development opportunity to staff and faculty in which they study the work of scholars who criticize Critical Race Theory, Critical Pedagogy, or the intellectual assumptions of what’s euphemistically called “teaching for social justice.”

“If a million people believe a foolish thing,
it is still a foolish thing.”
~ Anatole France

Forward this email to a friend.