Gender Identity Ideology and Anti-Male Feminism at Juilliard

A four-year bachelor's degree at Juilliard costs upwards of US$250,000, including tuition and living expenses. For that substantial sum of money, students should receive professional training in the performing arts, not political indoctrination.

Unfortunately, Juilliard seems to have become politicized with Cultural Marxist ideology.

For example, Juilliard's official website lists a series of seminars that apparently teach students unscientific gender identity ideology and anti-male feminism.

See for yourself: Just look at the seminar descriptions and the table of invented gender pronouns. These are the hallmarks of gender identity ideology and radical feminism. The danger is that these seminars could lead Juilliard's students away from their natural, biological sexuality, and cause them a lifetime of unhappiness.

Pernicious as these seminars may seem, enrolling in them can earn Juilliard students some academic credit toward their degree. By offering academic credit for these apparently neo-Marxist seminars, Juilliard is, in effect, approving them and encouraging students to enrol.

Womankind Deconstructing Masculinity

Let's consider one of these seminars, entitled Masculinity in the Media. It's scheduled for March 20, 2020. And here's the description:

"[A] Representative from Womankind will deconstruct masculinity in the media as part of Women's History Month."

So, what does "deconstructing masculinity" mean? Typically, it involves berating men in general for their purported "toxic masculinity", "rape culture", and “patriarchy”. In other words, young men on college campuses across the Western world are being told that their masculinity is obnoxious and evil. This pervasive, hostile, feminist propaganda is especially demoralizing for young men in their late teens and twenties, at a time when they are struggling to gain confidence and find their place in the world.

Ironically, no such abuse is directed at young women, who in their late teens and twenties are at the peak of their fertility, physical attractiveness, and sexual bargaining power. No college courses ever attack "toxic femininity" or "seduction culture", though they certainly do exist.

No, only men are the targets of such relentless disparagement, especially if they are white and heterosexual. So it's no wonder that an increasing number of young men now want to become women. "Gender dysphoria" is the psychiatric term for their state of mental confusion.

Men with gender dysphoria apparently believe that they can become women simply by imagining that they are women. This they call their "gender identity". Some even claim that their gender identity can be fluid, changing from one moment to the next, according to their mood.

In normal times, these confused sexual feelings would be considered a private matter, but not these days. Such personal inclinations are now professed publicly, because radical Cultural Marxist activists have promoted gender dysphoria to make it seem fashionable. For example, they encourage young people to adopt exotic gender identities, and flaunt them publicly. While this might enhance a student's social status, it won't heal their gender dysphoria.

Some people with gender dysphoria even insist on being referred to with invented gender pronouns, such as Xe, Xem, and Xyrs, instead of he, him, and his. This may seem silly, but laws have actually been passed in some jurisdictions, forcing people to use these dishonest pronouns against their will. For example, in California, refusing to address people by their invented gender pronouns can now result in prison sentences.

Note that forcing people to speak words they disagree with is known as "compelled speech". It is a tool of oppressive totalitarianism.

Gender Dysphoria Can Lead to Sex Change Operations

Gender identity ideology is based on the absurd idea that objective reality doesn't matter. Even biology doesn't matter. So everyone is free to invent their own gender, regardless of their biological sex. But this freedom is an illusion, because in fact, biology does matter. This is particularly obvious whenever we suffer from burns, cuts, broken bones and diseases. The pain we experience is real, because biology is real. So gender identity ideology is dishonest. It confuses vulnerable young people, poisoning their minds with false beliefs that will never help them, and will only cause them harm.

For some people, adopting gender identity ideology is an intermediate step toward expensive hormone injections and sex-change surgery.

Of course, men cannot actually transform themselves into women, because as men, they have male genes in every cell of their bodies. Their male genes cannot be converted to female genes simply by injecting female hormones and amputating their genitalia. Nonetheless, these medical procedures are encouraged, because they can be highly profitable for biomedical companies and wealthy investors. In fact, "Exceedingly rich, white men (and women) who invest in biomedical companies are funding myriad transgender organizations whose agenda will make them gobs of money", according to a meticulously documented article on TheFederalist.com.

In any case, young people who genuinely suffer from the confusion of gender dysphoria need counseling, not ideological indoctrination. Unfortunately, it is indoctrination that they are apparently receiving at Juilliard.

The Biological Necessity

Before going further, let's remember that the main biological purpose of sex is to merge two individual's genes. Merging genes allows plants and animals to achieve genetic diversity in their offspring. This genetic diversity increases the odds that at least one offspring will survive. It also allows each species to adapt more rapidly to changing natural environments. Thus, genetic diversity is a survival advantage, and it results from heterosexual reproduction. This is why sex evolved over one billion years ago. And it is why we should not casually meddle with the sexuality of young people.

Besides reproduction, the human sex act in particular also helps couples stay bonded for decades, to cooperate in the long and challenging task of raising children. Reproducing and raising children is our ultimate biological purpose. Indeed, without heterosexual reproduction, none of us would exist. Hence, heterosexuality and child-rearing deserve Juilliard's open respect.

In contrast, homosexuality has no reproductive function, which is why many people disagree with it. On the other hand, it is relatively benign, as it does not by itself undermine heterosexuality. Moreover, it has coexisted with heterosexuality for generations. Hence, homosexuality per se is not the contentious issue at this point.

What really is the problem is the widespread promotion of gender identity ideology. It is being promoted by greedy investors who want to profit from it, and by bitter Cultural Marxists who hate heterosexuality and Western culture. Their intensive campaigning seems intended to pervert the heterosexuality that is innate in most young people. At stake is the natural inclination of most young people to form new families and raise children. These vulnerable young people are being misled into believing that they can choose freely from an unlimited number of genders, that their gender can fluctuate with their mood, and that they can become a member of the opposite sex simply by imagining it.

For openly adopting gender identity ideology and for using invented gender pronouns, young people are being rewarded with enhanced social status. In other words, they are being manipulated by Cultural Marxist activists. This is dishonest and subversive.

In fact, every student at Juilliard comes from parents who created their child by heterosexual intercourse. After conception, pregnancy, and childbirth, parents must work tirelessly for almost two decades to raise their child. They do this because they care about their child deeply. And when parents send their child to Juilliard, they do so trusting that Juilliard's leaders and teachers will act responsibly and in their child's best interest. For Juilliard to betray these parents would be unconscionable.

Clearly, it is irresponsible and unethical to teach anti-male feminism or unscientific gender identity ideology to students. If Juilliard is doing any of this, it should stop.

Toxic Parents

Now, let's consider a scenario where a young male student decides to get female hormone injections and genital surgery, in the futile hope of becoming a woman. If his parents try to change his mind, they might be derided as "toxic parents" by Cultural Marxist activists. Indeed, "toxic family members" is the subject of a Juilliard seminar, scheduled for April 8, 2 020. It is entitled "Breaking Up with Toxic Family Members". Here is the description:

"Sometimes family members are so toxic that you need to cut ties with them. This session will focus on the difficult decision to move forward without family members in your life and strategies for coping."

So, what exactly are "toxic" family members? Well, they are any family members with whom students don't get along, including their parents. Getting along with parents must surely be harder for students who have been indoctrinated at college with irrational gender identity ideology. Very conveniently, any parents who challenge this ideology can be dismissed as "toxic".

But why is it necessary for students to take the drastic step of cutting ties with their parents? It is necessary because their parents might refute the Cultural Marxists' dishonest ideology. If the parents persuade their child to abandon gender identity ideology, the activists will lose their grip on the student. To avoid that, the activists seek to censor the parents by cutting off communication with their child. Breaking up families in this manner is apparently acceptable for Cultural Marxists, if it enables them to achieve their political goals. "By any means necessary" is one of their slogans, and it reflects their absolute determination to gain absolute power.

So, is this what's happening at Juilliard? Perhaps. The evidence on the Juilliard website is disturbing, but inconclusive.

Anyway, if this really is happening at Juilliard, then it is tragic, especially given how unnecessary it is. Decades ago, Juilliard students got along just fine, regardless of their race, sex, and sexual orientation. There was never any need for "gender identity" ideology.

Cultural Marxist Totalitarianism

Gender identity ideology is a tool of Cultural Marxism. The purpose of Cultural Marxism is to unravel the fabric of our society. This is to allow Cultural Marxists to seize control, and create a totalitarian communist state. Besides gender identity ideology, other elements of Cultural Marxism include anti-white racism and anti-male sexism, acrimonious identity politics, the enforcement political correctness, antifa violence, and claims that the heteronormative patriarchy is oppressing everyone else.

Unfortunately, over the decades, Cultural Marxism has advanced inexorably in its "long march through the institutions". Cultural Marxism started in 1923 with the founding of the Frankfurt School in Germany. From there, this neo-Marxist ideology spread to America, where it has gradually taken control of our universities, our schools, our corporations, our news media, our entertainment industry, and much of our government. This has enabled Cultural Marxists to brainwash countless millions of children and adults, year after year.

However, Cultural Marxism conflicts with human nature, so to succeed, it will inevitably need to be enforced. It will require ongoing brainwashing, suppression of opposing viewpoints, and severe government regulation. In other words, it will require Stalinist totalitarianism. Key obstacles to that include the nuclear family and Christianity, because they stabilize our society with traditional values – so they must be destroyed.

This is why Cultural Marxists frequently mock Christianity. It is also why they claim that our nuclear family structure makes women and children the slaves of men. This blatant lie sows distrust among children for their parents, and provokes resentment among wives toward their husbands. No doubt, this pernicious propaganda has poisoned many marriages, and harmed many children.

The Real Meaning of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion

Similarly pernicious is the phrase "Equity, Diversity and Inclusion". This slogan expresses values that, at first glance, seem admirable. Indeed, this phrase, "Equity, Diversity and Inclusion", has become so fashionable that merely speaking the words evokes an aura of moral superiority. That's why this phrase is so popular among people who enjoy signaling their virtue.

Unfortunately, and the slogan, "Equity, Diversity and Inclusion", is not as fair as you might expect. To see it in practice, let's visit Juilliard's student affairs web page:

Looking at the list of Registered Student Organizations, we can see a number of student clubs. Four of these clubs are organized around immutable traits, such as the students' race, ethnicity, or sex. These clubs include:

The Alliance for Latin American & Spanish Students
Chinese Student & Scholars Association
Juilliard Black Student Union
Women's Empowerment Group

The first three clubs exclude white people, and the fourth club excludes men. To exclude people based on their race, ethnicity, or sex, is racist or sexist. If you doubt that these clubs are racist or sexist, try substituting alternate words, such as "white", "American", or "men" into the club names, and imagine the hysterical uproar that would ensue. For example:

Alliance for White Anglophone Students
White American Student & Scholars Association
Juilliard White Student Union
Men's Empowerment Group

Obviously, such white-only or men-only clubs would never be tolerated. So then, why does Juilliard tolerate clubs that discriminate in reverse, and exclude whites and men? Perhaps because such racism is actually encouraged by Cultural Marxists, with the flimsy excuse that only whites have power – as if that somehow justifies anti-white racism. They conveniently ignore the reality that Barack Obama was the US President for eight years – and of course, he is black. Obviously, blacks do have power. In contrast, ordinary white Juilliard students have no significant power, so racism against them cannot be justified, even by the flawed logic of Cultural Marxism. In any case, excluding whites and men from certain Juilliard clubs is racist, sexist, and inexcusable.

Yet the Juilliard Black Student Union has the audacity to claim that it serves "not to create division amongst the Juilliard community, but rather to acknowledge and address the needs and concerns of black Juilliard students, as well as other students of color".

But blacks and "students of color" includes everyone except Caucasians. So despite their sanctimonious words, this club actually does divide the Juilliard community – by excluding whites!

Evidently, the Juilliard Black Student Union club members have forgotten the inspiring words of renowned black civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., who famously said, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

Abandoning this worthy goal, the Juilliard Black Student Union members have actually chosen to segregate themselves from white students. But why? Do they feel they need to lobby for special advantages, believing that they lack the talent to compete with whites? Do they still harbor resentment for slavery, five generations after it ended? Are they aware that slavery was practiced by various races and civilizations throughout history, including Asians, Arabs, indigenous Americans, and Africans? Have they forgotten the countless thousands of white soldiers who sacrificed their lives to abolish slavery in the American Civil War? Do they feel no gratitude for Abraham Lincoln, the Republican President after whom Lincoln Center is named, for leading the fight to end slavery?

The self-segregation of Juilliard's Black Student Union members is unfortunate, given the fantastic opportunity they have – to succeed with their Juilliard education and make friends of all races.

As for the other Juilliard clubs, it's fair to ask whether the Chinese Student & Scholars Association has links to the totalitarian Chinese government, which reportedly monitors, coerces, and controls Chinese college students worldwide.

As well, why do Latin American & Spanish Students need an "alliance"? Against whom are they allied? Do they believe they are oppressed, having been persuaded of that by Cultural Marxist activists?

Likewise, why do Juilliard women need an "empowerment group"? They already dominate university enrolment and graduation. Moreover, according to the BMO Wealth Institute, "Women currently control 51 percent ... of personal wealth in the U.S. ... [And they] now hold ... 52 percent ... of management, professional, and related positions in the U.S."

In all, these Juilliard clubs have no legitimate reason for their existence. Moreover, by excluding whites and men, they will surely create mutual resentment. Of course, that's exactly what Cultural Marxists want.

Indeed, they encourage feelings of victimhood, which they reward with high social status. Victimhood leads to resentment and animosity, which Cultural Marxists utilize to gain power.

In fact, Juilliard was free from racism and sexism decades ago. But since then, Cultural Marxist activists have promoted identity politics through relentless propaganda and outright lies. Even their slogan, "Equity, Diversity and Inclusion" does not really mean what it sounds like; instead, it is doublespeak.

Particularly misleading is the word "inclusion". What "inclusion" really means for Cultural Marxists is to coddle anyone who is deemed a victim, while excluding heterosexual white men. For example, they exclude heterosexual white men by implementing diversity quotas that promote less talented people solely because of their race or sex. From that perspective, the term "inclusion" actually means "exclusion". Inevitably, this causes resentment.

Ironically, it is the truly privileged elite whites who seem to utter this "Equity, Diversity and Inclusion" slogan the most. They use it to signal their virtue, while sanctimoniously casting shame on ordinary whites – by discriminating against them. This is unfair, because ordinary whites mostly lack any "white privilege" whatsoever. Yet it is ordinary heterosexual white men who are more likely to be displaced by diversity quotas. Meanwhile, the elite whites constantly compete to gain even more money, power, and privilege for themselves.

For example, white Senator Kirsten Gillibrand famously denounced white privilege while seeking even more power and privilege for herself in the Democratic Party leadership nomination race.

In sum, the Cultural Marxist slogan, "Equity, Diversity and Inclusion" is racist, sexist, and divisive. Yet Juilliard's new President, Damian Woetzel, recently employed a variant of this phrase in an email to Juilliard Alumni. Here's an abbreviated quote:

"This is a moment to ... reinforce our commitment to further work in the area of Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging (EDIB), an institutional priority that requires our collective efforts... Last summer, we assembled a taskforce of staff and faculty to help design next steps in this area expressly for our community".

What Damian Woetzel and Bruce Kovner Must Do

No doubt, Damian Woetzel is a good person who has the best of intentions. However, if he sincerely wants to achieve true Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging, then he should ban racial segregation, anti-male feminism, and gender identity indoctrination at Juilliard. Instead, he should focus on improving the arts education that Juilliard's students pay so much for.

Furthermore, Damian Woetzel should encourage individual achievement on a level competitive playing field. He should reject "diversity quotas", and condescending claims that blacks, hispanics, and women need special advantages. For one thing, it is cruel to admit students who lack the skill and talent to excel in Juilliard's highly competitive environment. Such students only end up feeling failure, alienation, and resentment.

In addition, Mr. Woetzel should ask why Juilliard's reputation has declined over the years, despite its enduring advantage as part of the prestigious Lincoln Center. For example, why don't Juilliard students win the top international piano and violin competitions very often?

Above all, Mr. Woetzel should stop the politicization of Juilliard. Juilliard is a college for the performing arts, where Cultural Marxist brainwashing and identity politics have no legitimate place. To be fair to its students, Juilliard should teach them how to think clearly, rather than filling their minds with useless, dishonest ideology.

Likewise, billionaire philanthropist Bruce Kovner shares this responsibility. As Chairman of the Juilliard Board of Trustees, he must insist that Juilliard refocus on its core mission, which is to train young people in the performing arts. After all, it is under Mr. Kovner's watch as Chairman of the Juilliard Board of Trustees since 2001 that Juilliard has become so politicized. Indeed, it would be very unfortunate if Mr. Kovner's generous donations were used to corrupt young students and separate them from their parents.

Looking forward, Juilliard's current students will inevitably join the ranks of tomorrow's music teachers, college professors, actors, directors, and writers. In those roles, they will influence young people around the world, for years to come. Thus, any corrupt ideologies taught at Juilliard today could poison the minds of many future generations.

To avoid this, Damian Woetzel and Bruce Kovner must take action. They must ensure that Juilliard promotes non-discriminatory, mutually respectful relations between all students, regardless of their race and sex. No excuses are acceptable for excluding or discriminating against whites and men.

In addition, Mr. Woetzel and Mr. Kovner must put a dead stop to the teaching of divisive, dishonest ideologies in Juilliard, including gender identity ideology, and anti-male feminism.

Instead, Juilliard should teach its students practical life skills and clear thinking, to prepare them for the many challenges of a performing arts career. It should also teach them to value what has made our civilization great, including our freedom of speech, democracy, meritocracy, science, free enterprise, and individual responsibility. This is the kind of high quality education that Juilliard's students and their parents have a right to expect.

Ensuring that Juilliard delivers this high quality education is the responsibility of Damian Woetzel and Bruce Kovner. To succeed, they will need to demonstrate courageous leadership worthy of our heritage, and uphold

the time-tested values of our great Western civilization.

Only if they do this will history judge them approvingly.

*****************