You know what really grinds my gears: When some dickweasel counselor wraps child abuse in a First Amendment flag while the Attorney General plays dodge-the-fucking-question like it's her goddamn Olympic sport.

Let me paint you a picture so visceral you can taste the institutional rot on your tongue like spoiled milk left festering in summer heat. Picture yourself sitting in a sterile office where the walls seem to sweat judgment, where some self-righteous fuckstick with a counseling degree decides your kid's brain chemistry is actually a spiritual crisis that needs Jesus-themed electroshock treatment. That's conversion therapy, and some dipshit counselor just dragged this nightmare back from the grave and straight into the Supreme Court's lap.

As Bertrand Russell once observed, "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." Well, we've got ourselves a fanatic here who's certain her right to fuck up vulnerable kids supersedes, you know, basic human decency and every scrap of legitimate psychological research conducted since we stopped drilling holes in people's skulls to let the demons out.

This isn't some abstract constitutional circle-jerk. This is about a counselor—a supposed professional—who marched her ass to her regulatory board and declared that bans on conversion therapy violate her precious First Amendment rights. She can't "integrate religion into her therapy" the way she believes she should. Translation: She wants the legal right to tell queer kids they're broken, sinful fuckups who need divine intervention to stop being such disappointments to Supply-Side Jesus.

Every legitimate psychological and psychiatric association has filed briefs opposing this shitshow, because—and I cannot stress this enough—conversion therapy is demonstrably harmful garbage that increases suicide rates, depression, and anxiety in LGBTQ+ youth. The science is settled. The data is clear. The only people still pushing this medieval bullshit are religious zealots and the legal foundations bankrolling them, throwing their weight behind "religious liberty" like it's some magical incantation that turns child abuse into constitutional freedom.

John Stuart Mill wrote, "Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign." But apparently, if you're a queer kid sitting in this counselor's office, your sovereignty means jack shit compared to her religious convictions. Your brain, your identity, your fundamental sense of self—all negotiable in the face of her theological certainties.

Let's talk about the actual science, since these cockwombles sure as hell won't. Most brains start as female in utero. As testes develop, testosterone floods the fetal brain, making subtle but significant changes. But if there's a blood-brain barrier—if that testosterone doesn't make the journey—you can end up with a phenotypically male body housing what's structurally a female brain. Similarly, XX fetuses exposed to testosterone or androgens can develop masculinized brain structures. This isn't ideology. This is endocrinology. This is developmental biology. This is the messy, complicated, beautiful reality of human neurodevelopment that doesn't give a flying fuck about your religious dogma.

And that's just the biological substrate. We haven't even touched the vast, complex landscape of gender identity and expression shaped by culture, society, personal experience, and the intricate dance between nature and nurture that makes each human being a unique configuration of consciousness and embodiment. Gender isn't a light switch. It's a goddamn kaleidoscope, and trying to "correct" someone's gender identity is like trying to "correct" their eye color—except exponentially more harmful because you're attacking their fundamental sense of self.

Simone de Beauvoir nailed it: "One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman." Gender is constructed, performed, lived—not some fixed decree handed down from on high that counselors get to police with their Bibles and their bullshit.

The anticipation here isn't whether conversion therapy works—it fucking doesn't. The anticipation is whether our Supreme Court, stacked with conservative justices who treat the Constitution like a Choose Your Own Adventure book where religious freedom always wins, will legalize this form of state-sanctioned child abuse. Will they decide that a therapist's freedom of speech includes the right to psychologically torture vulnerable kids? Will they enshrine the principle that religious conviction trumps medical consensus and the lived reality of countless destroyed lives?

Now let's slither over to the other steaming pile of governmental dysfunction: Attorney General Pam Bondi's recent appearance before Congress, where she demonstrated the accountability of a greased pig and the transparency of a black hole.

Picture Adam Schiff, that persistent motherfucker, standing there reciting a litany of questions Bondi refused to answer like he's reading the world's most depressing grocery list. Did she consult career ethics lawyers about Donny ShitChomper receiving a $400 million gift from Qatar? No answer. Who flagged The Dumping Donald's name in Epstein documents? Crickets. Did Homan keep his $50,000 bribe money? Silence. Did he pay taxes on said bribe money? More silence. Did career prosecutors find insufficient evidence to charge James Comey? Nope, not answering that either.

Jean-Paul Sartre wrote, "We are our choices." And Bondi's choice—consistently, aggressively, almost admirably in its shamelessness—is to choose not to answer. She's weaponized evasion, turned deflection into performance art, and somehow convinced herself that attacking the questioners is an adequate substitute for addressing the fucking questions.

This wasn't oversight. This was theater—bad theater, the kind where the lead actress forgot her lines and decided to just insult the audience instead. Every dodge, every deflection, every personal attack was another brick in the wall of unaccountability that this administration is building around itself like a fortress made of arrogance and horse shit.

When Schiff pressed her on whether government officials have to abide by court orders—a question so foundational it shouldn't need asking—Bondi couldn't even muster a straight answer. Think about that. The nation's top law enforcement official, asked whether government officials must follow judicial orders, responded with... nothing of substance. Just deflection and attack, attack and deflection, like a broken record player at a douchebag convention.

Albert Camus observed, "Integrity has no need of rules." But Bondi's operating on a different principle entirely: Power has no need of answers. She doesn't have to explain the Qatari gift, the Homan bribery investigation that mysteriously evaporated, the firing of prosecutors who worked January 6 cases, or any of the other corrupt, authoritarian, democracy-corroding actions her department has taken or enabled. She just has to survive the hearing, and survival means attack, deflect, run out the clock.

The parallels between these two scenarios—conversion therapy and Bondi's non-answers—aren't immediately obvious, but they're viscerally connected. Both represent the triumph of ideology over evidence, authority over accountability, and power over truth. The conversion therapy counselor wraps child abuse in religious freedom. Bondi wraps corruption in executive privilege and personal attacks. Both demand we accept their framing, their authority, their right to harm without consequence.

Isaiah Berlin wrote about two concepts of liberty—negative liberty (freedom from interference) and positive liberty (freedom to act). The conversion therapy defender claims negative liberty: freedom from government interference in her "therapeutic" relationship. But she's wielding that freedom to destroy the positive liberty of her clients—their freedom to exist authentically, to develop without psychological torture masquerading as treatment. Bondi claims executive privilege and confidentiality, but she's using those claims to undermine the positive liberty of citizens to hold their government accountable, to know whether their Attorney General is enabling corruption and targeting political enemies.

Here's where the anticipation becomes almost unbearable, where your gut clenches like you're about to witness a slow-motion car crash and you're powerless to stop it. What happens when the Supreme Court rules? What happens when Bondi continues stonewalling? What happens when the machinery of government—the institutions supposedly designed to protect us—becomes the instrument of our harm?

The Supreme Court could legalize conversion therapy under the banner of free speech, opening the floodgates for every religious fuckwit with a counseling license to torment queer kids with legal impunity. They could declare that professional standards, medical consensus, and the actual welfare of vulnerable populations all take a backseat to religious conviction. Imagine the precedent: if conversion therapy is protected speech, what other demonstrably harmful practices get constitutional protection? Faith healing instead of medical treatment? Religious counselors telling abuse victims to submit to their abusers? The slope isn't just slippery—it's goddamn vertical.

Martha Nussbaum argues that "The best citizens are those who have the capacity for critical thinking." But critical thinking is exactly what both these scenarios attack. The conversion therapy counselor doesn't want critical thinking—she wants compliance with religious doctrine. Bondi doesn't want congressional oversight applying critical analysis to executive actions—she wants deference to power.

The anticipation builds because we can see the pattern. We've watched Trump the Turd stack the courts with ideologues. We've watched Bondi refuse accountability while the enabling fucksticks in Congress either cheer her on or offer token resistance without real consequences. We're watching the dismantling of democratic norms, the erosion of professional ethics, and the elevation of religious authoritarianism—all happening in real time, all proceeding according to plan.

Peter Singer wrote, "If possessing a higher degree of intelligence does not entitle one human to use another for his or her own ends, how can it entitle humans to exploit non-humans for the same purpose?" Extend that logic: If religious conviction doesn't entitle you to harm others, how does it entitle you to torture children? If political power doesn't entitle you to ignore the law, how does it entitle you to dodge congressional oversight?

The answer in both cases is the same: It doesn't. But they're doing it anyway, and the anticipation comes from wondering whether anyone with actual power will stop them or whether we're just going to watch the train wreck in slow motion, documenting every terrible moment while the victims pile up and the perpetrators face zero fucking consequences.

Consider the compounding horror: conversion therapy survivors carrying lifelong trauma while their tormentors claim constitutional protection, and career prosecutors fired for investigating Trumpty MouthAnus while his Attorney General refuses to explain why. Each represents a different flavor of authoritarian decay—religious and political—but they share the same putrid essence: the powerful harming the vulnerable and facing no accountability.

John Rawls proposed the "veil of ignorance"—imagine designing a society without knowing what position you'd occupy in it. Would you design a society where therapists can legally torture you for being queer? Where the Attorney General can ignore congressional oversight and face no consequences? Where religious conviction and political power both function as get-out-of-jail-free cards for harm and corruption? Of course you fucking wouldn't. But that's the society these assholes are building, and they're counting on enough people being distracted, defeated, or complicit to let them finish the job.

The visceral reality hits you in waves. Your stomach turns thinking about queer kids in conversion therapy, their sense of self systematically attacked by someone they're supposed to trust. Your blood pressure spikes watching Bondi's smug deflections, knowing she'll face no real consequences for treating congressional oversight like a joke. And underneath it all, the creeping dread that this is the new normal—that accountability is dead, that expertise and evidence don't matter anymore, that power plus shamelessness equals invincibility.

Jürgen Habermas argued that legitimate authority requires rational discourse and mutual understanding—what he called "communicative action." But there's no communicative action happening here. The conversion therapy counselor isn't seeking understanding; she's demanding submission. Bondi isn't engaging in rational discourse; she's blocking it. Both scenarios represent the breakdown of the deliberative processes that make democracy and ethical professional practice possible.

The anticipation algorithm works like this: We see the pattern, we extrapolate the trajectory, and we realize with sickening certainty where this leads. More queer kids traumatized. More corruption normalized. More erosion of democratic accountability. More triumph of authority over evidence, power over truth, ideology over humanity. And we wait, anticipating the next shoe to drop, the next norm to crumble, the next victim to fall, while the architects of this clusterfuck face no consequences and sometimes even get rewarded.

This is the visceral, gut-churning reality of American governance in 2025: watching harm happen in real time, understanding exactly what's being destroyed and why, and feeling increasingly powerless to stop it. The anticipation isn't whether things will get worse—we know they will. The anticipation is whether we'll find the collective will to stop the slide before we've completely normalized barbarism, before conversion therapy is constitutionally protected and Attorneys General are functionally above oversight, before we've surrendered so much ground that recovery becomes impossible.

Citations: