Transgender Teen’s Suicide Note and Leftist Thinking

Alcorn 1

Last weekend a young teenager, Josh Alcorn, committed suicide by apparently throwing himself in front of a moving truck. Alcorn was convinced he was a girl “trapped in a boys body”. As a boy “trapped”, he was in need of obvious help, and that help of course meant others – not just understanding or accepting him – but completely committing to the conviction that his lifestyle was as normal as any other. Leftward thinking people truly do whatever it takes when it comes to convincing others that their lifestyle – and other lifestyles – are simply equal expressions of human life. “What’s the big deal” they ask. I will return to this momentarily and look at some of the things Alcorn said in a suicide note. As for now, let us begin with some important foundations.

America, as a diverse or plural society, has neutralized the notion of a common culture. Historically, a Alcorn 2nation possesses a rich union with a particular people group, which ushers a nation into existence, and this group of people and their way of life gives that nation a name and so an identity. The result of America’s now absent identity means each individual must meet America on their own particular (and peculiar) terms, and once this happens America’s identity – no longer seen to have an existential or historical relationship with a group of people – is defined in terms of very individualistic sentiments and tastes. “American” simply means what you want it to mean. A way of life is then no longer something common; it is plural or diverse varying from person to person. A “right” is the kind of thing granted to us by diverse and plural societies that act as safeguards against people, like myself, who would think that a common culture is an integral part of any nation. There must be these safeguards in diverse societies, otherwise people begin philosophizing about, questioning, and “judging” other people’s life choices. Without these safeguards, people will of course throw themselves in front of tractor trailers; after all, a life is not worth living if the entire society does not respect your decisions as equal as their own. Thus, a diverse society needs these “rights” which will protect the human being as a self-determining agent and protect them from other human beings that would question their “creative spirit” as the artist of their own self.

Let’s take a look at some of Josh Alcorn’s final words. Alcorn 3Josh, who demanded others call him “Leelah”, left behind a suicide note last weekend before his death. Shannon Coolidge, from, writes “In life, Leelah Alcorn felt alone. Born male, she feared she would never be the woman she felt like inside.In death, the transgender 17-year-old – born Josh Alcorn – wanted to make sure others never felt the way she did.” But how did he feel? Just Alone? Surely he did not throw his entire life away believing that in doing so nobody else would ever feel lonely again. No, he felt misunderstood, judged, and out of place as a transgendered person. Alcorn said: “The only way I will rest in peace is if one day transgender people aren’t treated the way I was, they’re treated like humans, with valid feelings and human rights”. There’s that word “right” again. Josh uses this term as I described above: as a sort of safeguard that protects his will ( or his self-determining feature), his “journey” of self-creation (his journey from man to becoming a woman), and his “creative spirit” that authors this self into existence. All progressive minded people hold to this view of the self with varying degrees of intensity (Josh more intensely than a lot of others). People are born with “predetermined descriptors” according to the Progressive. This means people are born and then, according to the standards of society, described and conditioned as specific things – males or females,  or heterosexuals; they are part of families that function this way and not some other way, their race is a part of this culture and not that culture. And so on and so forth. These descriptors bar us from true, unadulterated freedom says Liberalism. A “journey” of self-creation begins by casting these descriptors aside and determining what we are for ourselves – this is the only way we can be truly free people. It is no surprise that news outlets keep saying this about Alcorn: “Leelah Alcorn, who was born Josh Alcorn…”. You see, this human was Leelah Alcorn because that’s what was determined and created through that particular human spirit and will; that particular human was merely born as Josh Alcorn. Being born a certain way has no bearing on what you are, unless you are gay of course (a typical double standard of Liberals), and in most cases must be cast off so that you define and create your self – a new identity – and thereby truly experience real freedom.

Alcorn said this to his parents in the suicide note: “Fuck you. You can’t just control other people like that. That’s messed up” and responding to his parent’s Christian disapproval he said “Even if you are Christian or are against transgender people, don’t ever say that to someone, especially your kid. That won’t do anything but make them hate them self. That’s exactly what it did to me.” Her parents said that she was just “going through a phase”, that “God doesn’t make mistakes”, and “She would never be a girl”. Alcorn’s decision and behavior is so inconsistent that it is has to be addressed: Josh tells others that you “can’t control people like that”. Like what? Is disapproval a sort of control? I would ask if parenting is a kind of control, but it is all too clear Liberals now think it is and kids should have more and more freedom from their parents – a clear indication why so many vicious little cretins are running around the world today. “Discipline”, “direction” and “guidance” are just code words that controlling parents use. Get with the times people! Like I suggested above, people that inherit this leftward attitude think anything that in any way truncates their lifestyle as anything less than equal to other people’s lifestyle is a form of control. Why? Disapproval is allegedly a form of control when it makes us feel, as it often does, like we’re wrong for thinking and believing certain things. The only way to win approval is to fall in line with the worldview of the one disapproving, otherwise we must find away to live as we wish regardless of what other people think of us. Imagine that. But Josh couldn’t do that, because he held the mentality most liberals possess and that is the only way one is truly loved, truly respected, and truly an equal member of society is if their choices and lifestyle are not only equally respected but equally validated as other lifestyles. Each life style must be seen as an equally valuable form of human expression, otherwise you fall into oppression and control.The only way to guarantee this does not happen, by liberal standards, is initiating a diverse or plural society (mentioned above).

The inconsistency here is Josh’s disapproval not only of his parent’s lifestyle but his disapproval of a world where people like him could make decisions that might be subjected to scrutiny by others. He simply could not fathom this great mystery. Therefore, his death needed “to mean something,” and that meaning depended on bringing change; people, especially transgendered people, could live in a world where their decisions were not scrutinized, where their lifestyle was not questioned, and where others did not imply his life in this particular way was in any way less meaningful or valuable than another person’s life . According to Josh 1) People should not control others, because they are self-determining agents capable of choosing their own identity and self, and controlling them through disapproval creates resentment, anger, clearly depression, and causes them to hate themselves. People’s way of life should be equally respected and accepted. 2) My death must mean something – it must have such a significant impact that people who do not think like me end up thinking just like me, at least about these things. The inconsistency seems pretty clear to me.

It is remarkable how leftward thinking works on the mind and spirit of human beings.It reminds me of Islamist thinking – but that’s me. While Liberals continue to define human beings as unique things that cannot be categorized and as they continue teaching people they are self-determining agents who decide just what they wish to be, human beings continue to defy this by questioning and judging the choices of others. Human beings seem to have a real knack for judgment – not “judgment” in liberal terminology where questioning other people and their lives is feigned as immoral behavior – but researching and observing qualities that are good or bad in others, like when we decide who is worth hiring, worth marrying, worth considering for our team, or worth a scholarship for example. As more kids, like Josh Alcorn, become immersed in diverse societies and believe every way of life is equally valuable and true, they enter a struggle between how people commonly are and their philosophical predispositions of reality and human nature. Being unable to reconcile these things, they interpret the world as “nasty” and full of “hateful, bigoted people” that subject decisions and lifestyles to scrutiny. What’s left for some of them is suicide. The only benefit of this goes to Liberalism, who inherits a child-martyr that draw attention to their cause, while people lose a friend and a family loses a son. This is just another small piece of evidence of liberalism’s attack on common culture – and the acceptance of a pluralistic society where everyone supposedly determines their own self according to the many options a pluralistic society provides –  will only breed continual confusion for our youth and other citizens.

6 thoughts on “Transgender Teen’s Suicide Note and Leftist Thinking

  1. Well-articulated. Liberal thinking is so extremely flawed and hypocritical. This is a sad story, but it should be viewed as you are describing it– the product of liberal-let’s-take-morality-out-of-everything thinking. You’ve struck a chord here.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Also, I think the real issue – although I understand what you are getting at here – is not so much liberals taking morality out of everything as it is liberals marrying morality to egalitarianism. In this consummation, we see – not the absence and removal of morality – but so many different kinds of morality that are seen as equal ways to perfect the human person; however, these different ways must compliment the person as a self-determining agent. The idea of one, over-arching morality as dominant, true and good means anyone operating outside of this would strictly be seen as “wrong” – and certainly less than living up to an expectation. We cannot do this to people anymore, for this suggests that there is something far more fundamental than a standard or principal outside of us or outside our will. If we begin with the human will as most fundamental, as a kind of source out of we see other things, it is no longer hard to see why every will is given equal precedence in determination – determining things like morality, religious beliefs, culture and nationality. Beginning with a standard – whether it is wrong or right is not the issue here – means a systematic structuring of a way of life out which traditions, holidays, mannerisms, and expectations will arise. Operating outside of these seem strange, right? But, beginning with the will, like liberals do, means all what we get today – a “respect” and “tolerance” of every will and every self. If you question this, you are wrong according to the liberal line of thinking today. So, it’s not so much the removal of morality as it is liberals saying EVERY morality is good; every morality is equally valuable as perfecting the human person and is just another path or avenue towards the good life.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I understand what you are saying. Honestly it’s humanism at its core. Trying to create an absence of moral code that rises above the individual will is stepping swiftly towards a chaotic, immoral society.

        To another point you make above, regarding “respect” and “tolerance”…truthfully, for most liberals it’s not enough to be tolerant of their world view, they expect that you accept and embrace it. If we evolve into a nation that requires the citizens to accept and embrace ways of life that we disagree with, then some of our most core freedoms become irrelevant. Freedom of speech…freedom of religion.

        OK, now I need a nap 😉

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Thanks for you response, Grace. I too read your blog as well. I penned a response to your post about a supposed culture of violence and deal with the notion in
    Nothing said in this post is an attack on you. As I mentioned, I think you are well intentioned in your fight against many things, like violence for example. But I pick up in my blog the very notion of a supposed “culture” of violence.

    I will read your blog and then formulate a response when I have some time.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s