This year marks the centenary of the birth of a man who is largely unknown to the general public, but whose intellectual legacy has a profound influence on our daily life: John Money (1921-2006), the New Zealand-born American psychologist who invented the idea of so-called gender identity.
On July 5, 2017, I gave an interview, published in a Catholic online magazine kath.net for German-speakers on a controversial topic at that time: same-sex marriage and the right of these couples to adopt children. I summarized the harsh consequences I had to face as a result of my public statements, with reference to Money’s bitter legacy.
In the German text, “Ehe für alle? Diese widersinnige Entscheidung überrascht mich nicht” (Marriage for all? This nonsensical decision does not surprise me), I referred to my then-popular book Das Gender-Paradoxon (The Gender-Paradox), wherein I had dedicated many pages to Money and his ideas, including his failed 1965 gender-reassignment (baby-castration) experiment. He used David and Brian Reimer as experimental subjects. These twin brothers, born in 1965, later committed suicide.
Moreover, with reference to John Moneys concept of “affectionate paedophilia” that he explicitly endorsed, i.e., non-violent erotic interactions between boys and adult homosexuals, I discussed possible problems when men that are exclusively attracted to male bodies adopt an under-aged boy, to whom they are not genetically related (step-father relationship, Cinderella-effect, emotional child abuse, mother absence, and so on).
The interview sparked an outcry among German students linked to the LGTB and transgender movements. As a result, a coordinated action against my integrity as a scientist quickly followed, with negative articles in the media and a storm on the internet.
Finally, in December 2017, a public court case was opened against me by the Staatsanwaltschaft Kassel, where I was living. It was based on the absurd charge that I had invented (or “doctored”) biomedical facts and data with the criminal aim of discrediting homosexual couples, which are, according to the popular narrative, equal or superior to, a biological mother and her husband.
After several rounds of public Court hearings in 2019, 2020 and 2021, I was, with the vigorous support of an excellent attorney, acquitted of all charges on March 2 this year. You can imagine how relieved I was.
The Judge of the Landgericht Kassel explained in detail that my statements are protected by my right to free speech, independent of whether or not they are factually true.
Because the German tabloid press (Bild-Zeitung, Die Welt, Hessenschau.de etc.) continued to claim that I allegedly “distributed false biological facts”, I responded with a 588-page book which was published in October – Strafsache Sexualbiologie. Darwinische Wahrheiten zu Ehe und Kindeswohl vor Gericht (Criminal Case on the Biology of Sexuality: Darwinian Truths on Marriage and Child Wellbeing in Court).
I first summarize the life and achievements of the hero and the villain of this story: Charles Darwin (1809–1882) and John Money, respectively. I also profile the Russian biologist Konstantin Mereschkowski (1855–1921), who may have had paedophile tendencies, but nevertheless was a world-class scientist and the spiritual father of the theory of symbiogenesis.
I then describe the biological basis of bi-parental sexual reproduction, the Darwinian paradox of homosexuality, and the two uses of the word paedophilia. The first is Money’s “affectionate paedophilia” and the second is the mental disorder of erotic paedophilia, as defined in 1901 by the Austrian Psychiatrist Richard von Krafft-Ebing (1840–1902). I document that Krafft-Ebing’s “disorder in sexual preference”, which does great harm to the victim, whether boy or girl, and Money’s notion of non-violent “surplus of parental love”, are distinct biological phenomena, although some overlap may occur.
This so-called “love for girls or boys” (the original meaning of the word paedophilia) exists almost exclusively in men, although Money’s “eroticized surplus of parental love” may also occur in some lesbians. I have several references to the latter.
And then I describe the witch hunt I experienced in court. All of my arguments, which rested on solid scientific publications and monographs, were ignored by the State Prosecutors. I was in the ring against the quasi-religious gender ideology invented by John Money. I discovered that this pseudo-scientific system has become a dogma in mainstream German politics.
Allow me to summarise the basic tenets of John Money’s gender identity ideology. Its core belief is that humans are social constructs with malleable biological features. It may be hard to appreciate how radical this notion is. Ever since Darwin’s masterpiece, On the Origin of Species, appeared in 1859, evolution has been the dominant scientific framework for human behaviour.
Gender ideology places Darwin in the rubbish bin. One hundred and fifty years of science, the science to which I have dedicated my life, have been junked. People fret about backwoods rednecks who believe in “creation science”. This is far worse. Humans are deemed to be social beings without an evolutionary past; men and women are equal members of the same genetically identical clone. (See my earlier article in MercatorNet, “An evolutionary biologist dissects gender theory”.)
Astonishingly, transgender people are the norm and not the exception. Changing one’s biological sex from male to female (or vice-versa) is possible and good for a trans individual. X and Y chromosomes, sex hormones, and primary sex organs (testes, ovaries) are of sub-ordinate importance.
Moreover, homosexuality and heterosexuality are just different ways of making love. Children don’t need a mother and a father; two homosexuals, gay or lesbian, can do the same job of caring just as effectively. Adoption, IVF or surrogacy are all fine, even though the biological parents have no involvement whatsoever. Children will never ask about their ancestry; they do not need a natural family with sisters, brothers, aunts and uncles, and grandparents.
And significantly, child abuse, be it physical, emotional, or sexual, happens just as often in natural families as in gay and lesbian households. Finally, Money’s affectionate paedophilia, to which I referred in my controversial interview, may be beneficial and helpful for boys in the custody of certain homosexuals, who call themselves “boy-lovers”.
During the court hearings, I refuted all of these irrational claims (as I have documented in the Strafsache book). I also presented as evidence a MercatorNet article, “A toxic combination: pedophiles, baby farms and same-sex marriage”. Even though this related a documented horror story of paedophile abuse from Australia in gory detail, the state prosecutor was again unimpressed.
The prosecutor’s message to me was simple: forget human biology and all of your inconvenient facts. Gender identity ideology frames our post-modernist worldview. Old-fashioned Darwinists (like you) should be punished for distributing false “biologistic” claims about sex and gender — especially with respect to homosexual couples, who are regarded as ideal step-parents and role models for children.
Finally, I want to quote the British philosopher Kathleen Stock, who was forced to abandon her position at Sussex University as a result of aggressive attacks by transgender activists. “It was a medieval experience,” she wrote.
Dare I say that my German witch hunt was worse, much worse. Sussex University largely supported Stock’s right to free speech. When I was terrorized and attacked by LGBT and transgender activists, neither my former University nor any state agency came to my rescue.
The reason is clear: John Money’s postmodern gender identity ideology dominates public opinion in Germany.
Since the State Prosecutors (Staatsanwaltschaften) are under the thumb of German politicians, notably the Ministry of Justice, I expect that there will be further charges against me. I am confident that truth will prevail. As the victims of LGBT and trans persecution know, the process is the punishment. But I am not disheartened. I shall continue to fight for Darwin (who was the loving father of ten children), the evolutionary sciences, and human biology!
Kutschera, U. (2021) Strafsache Sexualbiologie. Darwinische Wahrheiten zu Ehe und Kindeswohl vor Gericht. Verlag Tredition, Hamburg. Download an excerpt at evolutionsbiologen.de/media/files/flyer-final.pdf