Capturing the American Psychological Association: The Engineering of Human Sexual Evolution


“Transgenderism” is a eugenics project driven by Big Pharma, the state, and billionaires in order to engineer human sexual evolution. The lion’s share of reproduction will be given over to the techno-medical complex in the future and our sex will become obsolete.


Arcus Foundation (AF), the largest LGBTQ+ non-governmental organization in the world, was established by trained architect Jon Stryker, founding board member of Greenleaf Trust (a wealth management firm) and heir to the Stryker Medical fortune. Jon Stryker has built—with money from his medical riches—an interlocking web of support for engineering human sexual evolution, which drives the ideologies of “gender identity” and “transgenderismaround the world. These ideologies promote the normalization of body dissociation in the real world. They dissociate humans from their sexed reality and present it as another way to be human.


One of the institutions captured by AF is the American Psychological Association (APA), the leading scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States. The APA boasts more than 118,000 members and has received $650,000 in direct funding from AF. It’s not a huge leap to understand that Jon Stryker is poised to benefit from driving the ideology that he spreads, considering that its theories often lead to unnecessary drugs and surgeries that profit his medical corporation (in 2020 alone, 8,548 breast amputations were completed in the U.S., on young women’s and girls’ healthy breasts). There does, however, seem to be more to the story than mere profiteering. Why, after all, tie an ideology of disembodiment—one that promotes the idea that anyone can change their sex—to a human rights movement for embodied same-sex attraction?


In 2001, with the help of AF funding (pdf) the APA established INET (International Psychology Network for LGBTIQ, later called IPsyNet). Prior to its addition of “gender identity,” the APA INET focused on LGB issues (pdf). In 2005, the APA created the Task Force on Gender Identity and Gender Variance. In its 2009 report, the APA acknowledged the reasons and broad cultural contexts for the creation of this task force, highlighting three aspects (p. 9):


· Increased public awareness of “transgender” issues

· Decentralization of assessment and treatment for people with “gender identity” concerns

· The influence of community activism


Arcus Foundation helps to manifest these aspects by supplying hundreds of thousands of dollars per year to various institutions around the world—including the APA—to drive the ideology of “gender identity.” The purpose is to create a structure that organizes new terminology and new categories of humans based on an expanded definition of human sex, including people’s individual interpretations of their sex. “Gender identity” ideology allows for the opening of markets in identities based on sexual orientation and expressions, as it violates the physical boundary between male and female. So far, this violation is cosmetic only, a façade only made possible with modern technology, drugs and surgeries. With advances in medical technology—especially regarding genetic manipulations such as CRISPR—and the normalization of this breach, potentially greater encroachments to human sex, and humanity itself, loom large.


With the emergence of IPsyNet, psychologists were encouraged to "modify their understanding of 'gender,' broadening the range of variation viewed as healthy and normative." IPsyNet received a $300,000 grant from Arcus Foundation in 2015, which it used "to develop guidelines to assist psychologists (pdf) in the provision of what it deemed culturally competent, developmentally appropriate, and 'trans-affirmative' psychological practice with 'transgender' and 'gender nonconforming' people." What exactly happens when terms such as “gender,” “gender identity,” and “transgenderism” are conflated with each other and with biological sex, and then are rapidly driven into the cultural lexicon, the law, and the global market?


The APA “gender identity” task force report, in describing the new terminology for “gender identity” ideology, states that sex “refers to attributes that characterize biological maleness and femaleness” (p. 28). The report uncouples "gender" from sex, stating that "gender" “refers to the psychological, behavioral, or cultural characteristics associated with maleness and femaleness” (p. 28). The report continues: So-called "gender identity" refers to a person’s “basic sense of being male, female, or of indeterminate sex” (p. 28). This conflates sex with "gender." How does one feel like the female or male sex, or neither? They simply are male or female. One can’t know what an oppositely sexed body feels like any more than one can know what it feels like to be a dolphin. The report describes “transgender” or “gender variant” as “behavior, appearance, or identity of persons who cross, transcend, or do not conform to culturally defined norms for persons of their biological sex” (p. 28). Since “cross-dressing” served us well before, why are these confusing terms, and a wide array of others, being foisted on an unsuspecting public?


The writers and researchers of the APA’s gender identity report conflate “transgenderism” with transsexualism and transvestitism (p. 37) and falsely evolve it into the necessity of medical care (p. 38). Though the report acknowledges that disorders of sexual development (intersex) are part of this spectrum of new identities, and the LGBTQ+ acronym, the assessment was that it was too complex to add to the report.


The Q in the LGBTQ+ acronym stands for queer. To queer something is to deconstruct it. LGBTQ Nation reports that being "queer," pertaining to sexuality and partly drawing on "queer" theory, is “a person whose sexual orientation or 'gender identity' falls outside the heterosexual mainstream or the 'gender binary'.” They also state that the definition of "queer" is itself a bit "queer," that it may be possible for some straight people to be "queer." It’s difficult to comprehend what exactly is being “queered” or deconstructed when they declare, “Rather than accepting that everyone is either male-or-female, masculine or feminine, gay or straight, 'queer' theory sees our sexual/'gender identities' and choices as a fluid, fragmented, and dynamic collectivity of possible sexualities that can change at different points in a person’s lifetime.”


Are the social ideas about dressing ourselves and liking things that are generally seen as culturally appropriate for the opposite sex (sex stereotypes) what is being "queered?" If so, why has the surgical and chemical manipulation of our sex characteristics come into play along with compelled language? Why do we need to deconstruct that which evolution has managed to do well for millions of years and the language that has represented it since language was invented? Where do our biological roots fit into any of this?


What happens to families in this banquet of “queerness”? What happens to sexual reproduction when sex is dissected, so that penises, vaginas, breasts, eggs, sperm, and wombs are removed from the entirety of our being? What happens when sexual expression is unmoored from the normal confines of intimate expression and is granted social acceptance as fetish and objectification?


It serves us to contemplate the answers to these questions because the Goliath apparatus built by Jon Stryker and the other global LGBTQ+ and “trans” organizations—as they are entwined with the techno-medical complex—are heavily invested in dismantling human sexual dimorphism.


This does not look anything like inclusivity and acceptance in the way we are being manipulated to think about them. It looks like grooming to accept eugenics and the engineering of human sex.




Image Credit: Public Domain https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=135048

2,058 views