Indian Parents Creating Gay Babies

Sex changes by parental preference.

In the fetid swamps of "gay studies" may be found the theory that homosexuals, while appearing physically to be male, are in reality female underneath their unappealingly-hairy skin.  Some such self-proclaimed changelings actually go so far as to have sex-change surgery so as to have a physical appearance more in keeping with their chosen preference and desires.

Even for individuals whose moral compass doesn't twitch in the presence of an ordinary homosexual, such extreme body modification is often considered a bit strange, improper, or even - dare we say it? - wrong.

What these poor souls need is not surgery but therapy.  From India, however, comes appalling news of a burgeoning generation of future homosexuals who, when they say they're really girls trapped in the body of a boy, will be saying nothing more than objective medical truth.

Coming soon to India.

The Asian Tribune reports:

Baby girls are being 'converted' into boys in Indore (Madhya Pradesh) by the hundreds every year - at ages where they cannot give their consent for this life-changing operation.

This shocking, unprecedented trend, catering to the fetish for a son in India, has been reported from conservative Indore's well-known clinics and hospitals on children who are 1-5 years old. The process being used to 'produce' a male child from a female is known as genitoplasty. Each surgery costs Rs 1.5 lakh...

Genitoplasty experts of Indore say each of them have turned 200 to 300 girls into 'boys' so far. If that's not bad enough, Indian law, which has encountered nothing like this so far, allows these surgeries by its silence and grey areas.

As we've discussed on occasion in the past, the Asian preference for male offspring is storing up a world of trouble for the future.  China and India both have many millions more young men than do they young ladies; the tendency of young men with no hope of finding female companionship to cause violent trouble is well known.

There are a couple of ways to address this problem.  Korea, for example, is importing brides from poorer countries despite seriously negative racist reactions against mixed marriages in general and against the poor foreign women in particular.

Korea, however, is small.  Where on earth can you find 200 million missing women to replace those selectively aborted in China and India?  You can't.

And here are perverse Indian parents intentionally spending money to make the problem worse!  When people have choices, they won't necessarily choose as we might wish them to.

These unfortunate manufactured Indian changelings won't know what they are; a more frightful fate is difficult to imagine, and the few Western examples we've heard of are horrifying.  People who choose this drastic surgery as adults are often suicidal with regret; how much worse must it be to discover that your own parents intentionally did this to you when you could not even object?

At least these confused ex-girls will presumably be less likely to start wars than single genuine males might be, but watch out for a major rash of bloody parenticide in fifteen years or so when the sordid truth comes out.

Read other articles by Hobbes or other articles on Foreign Affairs.
Reader Comments

You certainly have a fascination for the macabre Hobbes.

I'l bet you watched the whole Casey trial as well, huh?


July 11, 2011 12:20 PM

another reason to encourage homosexuality is over populated countries...
but you are right in that this procedure, like circumcision, when done as a child without that person's consent, may leave frightening scars... literally

July 11, 2011 6:27 PM

When there are so many who are gravely unfortunate for such a huge variety of reason and circumstance, I find the fascination with homosexuals...peculuar.
Just the number of children dying of dysentery daily seems an issue, much more commendable for our thoughts.

To suspect some shadows lurking in some "conservative" minds here seems no unreasonable.

July 11, 2011 8:21 PM

No conspiracy, just enlightened self-interest. Babies dying of dysentery is off the American radar and hence of no interest to most readers.

July 11, 2011 8:27 PM

"Babies dying of dysentery is off the American radar and hence of no interest to most readers."~Fred

Yes this is so. Which brings to mind the question: "What does it mean to be well adjusted in a pathological society?"

July 11, 2011 9:08 PM

What does it mean to be well adjusted to a pathological society?

Pathos? Can this be? Consider;

It is a prima facea fact that the sentiment in the subtext of what you are saying is a rejection of all the definitions of what it is to be a humane, compassionate human being. And most certainly does not even hint at the values professed by Christianity. So I say it is beyond merely base, but a pathological position.

Do not take this personally, it is a general malaise – pandemic in western society.

July 11, 2011 9:19 PM

The word "crazy" applies to anyone whose brain is too far from the norm. Anyone who's too far from the norm can rightly be considered to be crazy. "Normal" is defined by the majority. Does that answer your question?

I don't see why it's not humane to consider with alarm the fate of girls who are carved into "boys" any more than it's not humane to consider alarm about girls whose labia are carved off. How is this not humane? Explain, please.

It's fashionable in much of the world to think girls have no value and women even less. Hobbes is trying to "view with alarm." How is this not humane?

What does Christianity say that Hobbes did not say?

July 12, 2011 6:10 AM

""Normal" is defined by the majority."

The flaw in your reasoning is that "crazy" is not simply to be "abnormal", it has certain criteria, having to do with the recognition of fact and truth verses delusion and fictions.

When the vast majority of humanity believed the sun travelled around the Earth rather than the opposit--that did not mean that the sun actually traveled around the Earth until peoples minds were changed by scientific discovery.

What the sane humane person would say that Hobbes would not say is that the US military has murdered more innocent girls and boys than are regendered by these lunatic medical proceedures.
Not merely by direct military assault, but by the imposition of this empire socially, economically and militarily.

I am not concerned here with just Hobbes story--I am conserned with the head in the sand reaction of the cast of usual readers and commentators.
The attitude seems to be shock and rage at the spilling of a glass of milk...on a floor ankle deep in blood.

July 12, 2011 1:50 PM

"is that "crazy"....has certain criteria, having to do with the recognition of fact and truth verses delusion and fictions"

Quoth the man that believes in secret societies manipulating the world from end to end - controlling all politicians, banks, corporations, currencies and markets. Though of course none of which is even remotely substantiated.

Crazy indeed.

What will be interesting to see is how many of these Indian "shims" actually wind up homosexual. If indeed, gay is the way you're born, virtually all of them will have to end up homosexual.

July 12, 2011 1:56 PM

Willy, you're right that I wouldn't say the US military has killed more innocent babies etc etc. I'll leave that to Obama, Kerry, and you. Because there is an enormous distinction that modern moral-equivalency sociopaths refuse to acknowledge, and that is INTENT.

Is there a difference between the drunk driver who smashes into an innocent family and kills them, vs a cop who is chasing a bank robber, goes into a spin, and squishes innocent pedestrians? You would say there isn't, because both times, innocents die.

I say that the difference is profound, because one made a conscious decision to do wrong, whereas the other was trying to do right and it just worked out badly.

The US military never sets out to kill innocent civilians today, and even in time past did so only as a last resort to end the enemy's warfighting capability. The bombing of Dresden killed a great many civilians - but the real purpose, which was achieved, was to destroy the war material factories and transportation infrastructure, thus directly hampering the enemy's ability to fight. The goal was a legitimate one, and the civilian deaths were unavoidable collateral damage.

Does that make them good? Of course not - by definition, war is hell. And ends do not always justify the means, or justify every means. But they do make a difference.

In the case of this story, we have parents intentionally maiming their tiny babies and ruining their future lives simply for their own gratification. That's horrifying.

With our army, well, the American military is the most casualty-conscious military force in all of human history. That's something to be proud of, and it's conclusive proof of the utter moral blindness of the modern left that they concentrate on condemning America which actually cares and tries to do right, as opposed to the dozens of intentionally murderous and evil regimes the world around. By trying to "stay unbiased," they endorse evil and oppose good, and are without excuse or defense for the vile results of their phony arguments.

July 12, 2011 2:04 PM

What is crazy? Denying that the US is the garrison for global empire. Believing that it is still a constitutional republic in light of all the glaring facts that disprove such an assertion.
Going along with “business as usual” as obvious as it is that there is no business like bull smith, and it has been that way here for a very long time.
Believing that there is a national debt owed by the people of this nation even though the money system is an obvious con job covered by a criminal syndicate posing as legitimate 'government'.
Crazy is failing to notice the increasing brutal police state that is in your face every day with taser murders, TSA gropings, increasing SWAT team murders and brutalization. Failing to notice or speak out when it is obvious the entire Bill of Rights plus Habeas Corpus have been officially suspended in the “Homeland Security State.”

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys,...
~Marcus Tullius Cicero in 42 B.C

July 12, 2011 2:33 PM

"Quoth the man that believes in secret societies manipulating the world from end to end - controlling all politicians, banks, corporations, currencies and markets. Though of course none of which is even remotely substantiated."~Ifon

Only unsubstantiated in the minds of the ignorant, the fools, the beancounters and conformists who go along to get along. In toto, those who have been brainwashed into zombie widgets by social engineering.

And as it is you would, have, and will handwave any substantiation--I will not bother with the reminder that I have offered many heretofore.

July 12, 2011 2:40 PM

And just a note: I do not like the gender whacking this story is speaking to any less than the others here. I simply meant to point out that in the larger picture it is a trivial matter compaired to the monsterous and hideous acts going on world wide today, everyday, NOW.

July 12, 2011 2:44 PM

"The US military never sets out to kill innocent civilians today...the American military is the most casualty-conscious military force in all of human history."~Hobbes

This is the same monkeyboy oinkjabber the Israelis spew. It is PR and utter nonsense.
Just the 'ratio acceptance' of "callatoral damage" of drone attacks and aerial bombardment proves that US military policy is draconian and insane. The use of depleted uranium, white phosphorus, carpet bombing, torture at "black sites"...etc etc.

It is utterly delusional to make such statements as those above.

July 12, 2011 2:54 PM

And...just a quick reminder for any of y'all who might actually consider themselves a "Christian", every word you have put down here goes into the {doowaboop...} "Book of Love."


July 12, 2011 3:23 PM

Willy, Scragged mostly gets accused of not being Christian when it talks about taking away welfare - people think that giving welfare is somehow "Christian," but what you call the Book of Love says "If any will not work, neither shall he eat." It does not says "can not work," it says "will not work."

If Christianity is defined by what the Bible says, welfare is un-Christian.

July 13, 2011 6:51 AM

'ol Redneck,

It is interesting that you would present what is called a 'strawman argument', rather than address the actual points I am making, which is upon the delusional handwaving of the global rampage of murder and torture rape and pillage by the Empire of Finance.

I suppose it is a matter of, if you can't figure out a direct answer to a critique, bring up any old script you're familiar with.

Furthermore, this statement: "If Christianity is defined by what the Bible says, welfare is un-Christian," is nothing more than YOUR interpretation of what "the Bible" says. There is enough contradictive text in that book to take any meaning on any topic from it.

I was actually referring to "The Book Of Life" wherin all of your thoughts and words and actions are written for the Day of Judgement.
I understand that document is classified, 'Eyes Only'.

July 13, 2011 3:08 PM
Add Your Comment...
4000 characters remaining
Loading question...