LGBTQ – Dr. Jeff Koloze

Photo credit: Goodreads.com

No need to read: just another pro-abortion novel marketed for teens with an LGBTQ twist thrown in.

Doris Steele, the main character of Mia McKenzie’s effort, could have been much more interesting, besides identifying herself as a “colored girl in rural Georgia […] in 1960” (4), if she were not merely dead set on abortion from the beginning.

While some spice in the novel comes more from two areas (first, Doris’ Protestant fundamentalism and, second, Coretta Scott King’s collaboration in Doris’ abortion), prolifers can still count this novel as more evidence of the close-mindedness of abortion-minded people.

On the first area, Doris suffers incredibly from her Protestant fundamentalist upbringings. Although she frequently quotes Scripture, and because she was raised in a Protestant Christian environment devoid of thinking of Scripture in a critical way, Doris is quickly able to reduce any fundamentalist interpretation as nonsense. This accounts for her eventual loss of faith.

Perhaps because of her fundamentalist background, Doris is unable to see that the same Scripture which she cites argues against her decision to kill the unborn child.

For example, when she says, “The Bible says to give thanks in all circumstances. Jesus don’t like ingratitude” (58), Doris is blissfully unaware that the reproductive capacity with which God has blessed her works, despite her misusing it by engaging in fornication. She is unaware to be thankful that a new life has been created by God, despite its being tagged as one living under the label provided by human beings as “an untimely / unplanned pregnancy”.

Similarly, when she says, “I don’t drink. Liquor is the devil’s tool [….] Leading us astray from God’s path” (121), Doris cannot connect that belief with the obvious fact that she is willingly leading herself away from God, the Creator of life, by killing the unborn child.

Doris’ warped spirituality even has her praying to Jesus to ask forgiveness for aborting the child the next day: “Lord, while you at it, please forgive me for the sins I’ve committed. And for the one I’m planning to commit tomorrow” (76). Doris’ mental prayer continues twenty pages later, emphasized for some reason in all italics: “I know you don’t approve of what I’m doing, Lord. But I pray for your mercy, anyhow. I can’t have a baby. Not now, Lord. Not yet. I aint ready. And I don’t know how to get ready. I don’t know how to make myself want this” (94; italics in original)

Not only is Doris blind to the personhood of the unborn child whom she happens to carry; she is also blind to the possibility of any other alternative to killing the child. Giving birth to the child and keeping him or her is a choice which she rejects because she is poor. Giving birth to the child and surrendering him or her to adoption must also have been rejected in her mind, but this option is never entertained in the novel.

In the space of less than half a page at the beginning of the novel, Doris decides on aborting the child: “I have to get rid of it” (8; italics in original). Even though she calls abortion “Baby-murder”, Doris says after a brief paragraph of reflection, “But none of that stopped me from wanting it gone” (13). The common pro-abortion dehumanization tactic of reducing the unborn child to an “it” is reinforced when Doris uses the other common dehumanizing term (“thing”) to refer to the unborn child: she “thought about the squishy something clinging to my womb” (17).

It doesn’t help Doris, either, that the women surrounding her (almost all of whom, it will be revealed later, are lesbians) are as close-minded as she is about other choices besides the fatal abortion one. For example, Doris’ teacher, Mrs. Lucas, to whom she confided that she was pregnant, has another rich friend who “has a lot of money and she likes finding new ways to spend it. Funding some poor girl’s abortion is probably more exciting for her than buying another television set” (23).

When Doris does think about reasons for abortion, her rationale is as ephemeral as contemporary pro-abortion activists. Doris identifies specific conditions under which an abortion is acceptable:

“’If the woman got forced. Or it was incest,’ I said, without having to think about it. Those were the big ones that most folks agreed on. ‘Maybe if you know the baby gon’ be sickly and die early, or just be in pain and miserable all its life. That’s it, I reckon. Anything else selfish'” (47).

Educated readers can reduce her litany to justify killing the unborn child as the rape, incest, and life of the mother exceptions which most unthinking people use to justify the killing, with Margaret Sanger-style eugenic abortion thrown in for good measure.

After talking with the pro-abortion Coretta Scott King (the second area of “spice” in the novel), Doris exclaims:

“That’s when I realized this was what I’d been afraid of all along. This was why I wanted an abortion. From the first moment, this pregnancy had felt like God forcing me into more obligations. And in that moment, deep in my soul, I rejected it. I rejected it even if it meant rejecting God” (227; italics in original).

What remains if the main character is not concerned about other people? Doris is clear about her self-interest: “I don’t want to hear nothing else about who need me. I need myself” (236). To bolster such selfishness, enter the deus ex machina of her favorite lesbian teacher’s self-centered “wisdom”: “what’s also true, Doris, is that you don’t need a reason. You can have an abortion because you want one” (240; italics in original).

No, Doris is dead set on abortion, abortion, and abortion yet again. It is as though she is the 1960 mouthpiece for the abortion business Planned Parenthood of 2026.

Granted, the brief passages where Coretta Scott King’s support of abortion is highlighted are interesting and could be shocking, especially to those readers who never learned this bit of civil rights history (that, while Martin Luther King, Jr. may have been prolife, Coretta was not). Coretta recommends an abortionist to Doris thus: “I know someone. A midwife. A good friend. She can help you [to abort because] I believe in reproductive freedom for the Negro” (228).

Doris’ remarks as she undergoes her abortion concern her pain and her comfort, not that of the unborn child: “It didn’t really hurt but it was uncomfortable” (243). Doris ends the episode (and the abortion chapter 18) with “And the thing was done” (244).

The final page introduces the new idea that the killing of the unborn child is a “gift” and:

“that, yes, I’d had an abortion, and that there were women who helped me, and that those women had given me a gift. That every good thing in my life—every song I’d written, every trip I’d taken, every love I’d chosen—was possible because of that gift” (255).

Renaming the killing of the unborn child as a “gift” is a final travesty which may be evidence more of her cognitive dissonance or PAS (post-abortion syndrome). Doris is merely another woman who cannot acknowledge that her successes were obtained on the body of a dead unborn child.

Image credit: The Babylon Bee

The Babylon Bee Guide to Gender is the perfect Hanukkah and Christmas gift for LGBTQ zealots who would rather murder you instead of argue for their distortion of heterosexual normativity.

Ordinary people (you know, the only two genders on the planet called “men” and “women”) will laugh, often hysterically, at the Bee’s reduction of the idiocies of gender zealots to quick one-liners or strings of memorable verbal phrases. It is simultaneously most unfortunate that those who have been infected with gender ideology by leftist, anti-American, anti-Semitic, and woke weakling professors who want to make a name for themselves by talking about gender, gender, and more gender will believe the sorry shit the Bee is mocking.

(Sorry for the string of adjectives before “professors”; I know they’re repetitive concepts, being terms denoting people who want to kill fellow human beings.)

However, disregarding the pains of those who suffer from gender ideology for the moment, the humor in the book is substantial. Consider the following quotes:

Gender is “whatever we want it to be, and it’s never what we don’t not not want it to be” (4). Wha-what? That’s the point, though; since gender ideology is not based on rational science, trying to state its tenets yields as irrational language as any verbal tongue-twister.

“A key concept we’ll be discussing throughout this book is the core difference between the fluid, imagination-driven concept of gender identity and things that try to make us question our gender identity—bigoted, hateful things such as ‘reality,’ ‘facts,’ and most importantly biology” (7).

“If they can’t tell at a glance that you are a non-cisconforming fairy-bodied triosoul, they obviously hate you, and the only thing you can do both for their benefit and for the forwarding of culture is to proverbially smash them into the ground with charges of hate speech, microaggression, macroaggression, misogyny, misandry, homophobia, transphobia, sexism, and possibly even racism. Did I say ‘possibly racism’? I meant ‘definitely racism.’ Always racism” (10).

“’Maleness’ only exists as a spiritual force of political oppression that can manifest itself in all kinds of bodies, no matter what the genetics say” (17).

“Men are a dark force of unbalanced power that must be neutralized at all costs. They are the main cause of all the bad things, such as global warming, racism, climate change, and global warming. The evil force of manhood can take the form of a man, woman, or Brian Stelter” (30). The repetition of “global warming”, I suspect, is deliberate to illustrate that gender zealots merely repeat themselves needlessly because they are not critical thinkers of a valid philosophy.

Margaret Sanger is correctly described as “the feminist and women’s rights activist who was indirectly responsible for one of humanity’s greatest achievements: baby murder. Sanger notably also inspired the charismatic world leader Adolf H. Don’t worry about his last name. It’s not important” (50).

Regarding pronouns: “And if you’re not on our side, we will punch you in your ignorant, bigoted, and probably white face. We will win this war. Join us or die, infidel!” (67).

“Pride is loving who you are despite what others may think, and also attempting to force others to think in the exact same way as you; otherwise, they are fascist aggressors who literally want you to die, and they should die themselves unless they change their beliefs” (129).

Political activism is defined as “the act of intimidating and terrorizing elected officials into passing laws to officially recognize gender ideology as the law of the land. If we don’t do this, politicians will turn this country into The Handmaid’s Tale and hunt down trans people for sport” (190).

Universities “cost $200k a year and turn kids into obedient gender activists with highly effective slogan-repeating skills and second-to-none demonic screams” (199).

Other items in the work provide more of the Bee’s inimitable comedic commentary: a chart on inventing a gender (58), Pride flags (61-2), replacing family traditions like “sitting around the campfire” with “sitting around the burning police station” (99), how a woman can attract a man (“Show up at his front door barefoot, wearing a housewife dress, holding a load of fresh bread, and offer to bear his children. Subtle!”) (107), a “Gender-Sensitive Pickup Line Generator” table (115), commentary on “The Church of Gender” (119ff), an analysis of woke corporations (146ff), “The Twenty-Five Step Process to Changing Your Gender” (162-7), and the gender glossary (210ff), wherein “biology” is defined as “hate speech” (211).

Finally, since Amazon collaborates with cancel culture and woke zealots and bans conservative and pro-life books, buy this book directly from the publisher:

The Babylon Bee Guide to Gender