@FtttG's banner p

FtttG

Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.

7 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 13 13:37:36 UTC

https://firsttoilthenthegrave.substack.com/


				

User ID: 1175

FtttG

Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.

7 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 13 13:37:36 UTC

					
				

				

				

				

				

					

User ID: 1175

And this is true of laws in general. There are probably people who can drive safely with a blood alcohol level of [two percentage points over whatever the legal limit is in your jurisdiction], and people who can't drive safely after imbibing so much as a thimbleful of sherry. But in order to enforce laws effectively we need to set cutoff points somewhere.

Weight is still at 171, no progress on the weight loss front.

Do you need to lose any weight? How tall are you, if you don't mind my asking?

Do you campaign against euphemisms in general or is it this one specific pair of euphemisms that you consider the great political issue of our time?

I really hate this specific breed of whataboutism that so many trans activists practise, when literally any criticism of any component of the trans activist agenda is met with derisive accusations that their interlocutor thinks this issue is the most important issue facing the entire planet!!!!1!

Where, exactly, did I say that the demand that the words "male" and "female" be substituted with "AMAB" and "AFAB" is "the great political issue of our time"? Why do you insist on repeatedly putting words in my mouth and attributing things to me I never said, beliefs I never endorsed?

We have people here claiming she is a man.

"People here" including Khelif themself.

Would you not agree that, in her case, "assigned" rather than "observed" is the correct term to use?

Yes, "assigned" is the appropriate phrasing to use in the specific case of people with disorders of sexual development. Trans activists, however, want to use the "assigned at birth" phrasing for everyone, including the 99% of people who were born without DSDs. I was not "assigned" the male sex at birth: the doctor who delivered me correctly identified my sex as male.

What a fascinating twist on that one scene from A Beautiful Mind.

Well this is basically my stance. If trans is just a weird progressive sect (a modern skoptsy), whose sacraments are puberty blockers and HRT and whose initiation rituals are top and bottom surgery, that would be one thing.

But that means dropping the pretense that these things are anything other than sacraments and initiation rituals. When a surgeon conducts a circumcision on a man suffering from phimosis, that is a necessary medical intervention. But when a rabbi or imam circumcises a male infant, no one claims that this procedure is being conducted out of medical necessity, and so should it be here. That means:

  • no more taking children into care if their parents don't want them to receive these interventions (because they don't share their children's faith);
  • no more once-respectable medical bodies making affirmative claims as to these interventions' efficacy in treating mental distress;
  • no more emotionally manipulative browbeating from ideologically captured physicians ("would you rather have a live daughter or a dead son?");
  • no more having these interventions covered by health insurance as medically necessary interventions (if they're covered as elective interventions, I suppose that's okay);
  • no more presenting these interventions as medical treatment in public education (separation of church and state).

It also means that, just as the children of Jehovah's Witnesses can be taken into care if their life is in jeopardy as a consequence of their parents' religious beliefs (at least in some jurisdictions; apparently not Idaho), the state can take trans children into care if their welfare is in serious jeopardy as a consequence of their parents' beliefs.

I genuinely believe a huge proportion of children in the Anglosphere who have received these interventions over the past twenty years would not have done so if their status as sacraments and initiation rituals had been more clearly communicated to their parents. I think "HRT, elective mastectomies, vaginoplasties etc. are still available for true believers who really want them – but no medical organisation is claiming they are medically necessary interventions, and caveat emptor if you decide to pay for them out of pocket" is a compromise that would suit most people. I imagine a lot of medical bodies might eventually hit on this solution via convergent evolution if the pace of detransitioner lawsuits keeps up. A recurrent complaint in said lawsuits is that patients and their parents felt their physicians had knowingly misled them about the efficacy or medical necessity of these interventions. It'll be much harder to win a malpractice suit if the defendant can prove that they offered the patient these interventions, but made perfectly clear to them that these are elective procedures and made absolutely no affirmative claims as to their efficacy in ameliorating mental distress.

I agree with much of your comment, although I question your dismissal of slippery slope arguments as intrinsically fallacious.

As for the sequel's main character -- look, I grew up on early chan imageboards and the unfiltered early 2000s internet so I have a pretty high tolerance and probably a quite warped sense of what's within the bounds of good taste -- but even in my opinion, that's a 7 year old's face on a young woman's body.

Echoing what @RenOS said below – between the ages of 26-27 I was in a relationship with a Chinese woman who was a year younger than me. Whenever she went to buy beer in a shop, she was asked to show her ID, literally every single time. (The fact that she was five feet tall certainly didn't help.) The median East Asian woman legitimately looks significantly more childlike than the median white, Hispanic or black woman.

New Year's resolution check-in:

  • Went to the gym three times last week and again yesterday evening. Can deadlift 1.84x my bodyweight for 3 reps, squat 1.28x for 6 reps and bench press .87x for 6 reps.
  • Have not consumed any pornography since waking up on January 1st.

How goes it @self_made_human, @thejdizzler, @birb_cromble, @ThomasdelVasto and @falling-star?

I second this. The "mama bear" phenomenon is absolutely real, but I'm not sure if the average woman is quite as willing to put herself in harm's way for the benefit of a complete stranger as the average man is. And that's as it should be: men are stronger and faster than women, eggs are expensive and sperm is cheap.

Ahem:

“You can’t compare this to, like, poor people who complain about being poor. Food and stuff are basic biological human needs! Sex isn’t essential for life! It’s an extra, like having a yacht, or a pet tiger!”

I know that feminists are not always the biggest fans of evolutionary psychology. But I feel like it takes a special level of unfamiliarity with the discipline to ask “Sure, evolution gave us an innate desire for material goods, but why would it give us an deep innate desire for pair-bonding and reproduction??!”

Yeah, I also bristle a little when I see parents getting their very young daughters' ears pierced, but you have to pick your battles.

Claims of rape are still baseless.

You obviously aren't familiar with "Karen" White. What do you mean by "baseless"? Do you mean that no trans-identified inmate in a women's prison has ever raped one of their fellow inmates?

According to the Guardian, there were 97 sexual assaults in the female estate between 2016-19, of which 7 were committed by transgender inmates. At the time there were 3,795 people housed in the female estate, of whom 34 were transgender. In other words, a transgender inmate is ~10 times more likely to sexually assault a fellow inmate than a cisgender female inmate.

But sure, "baseless".

It's also to prevent flashers from doing their thing. Indecent exposure is a crime. There are lots of men who get off on exposing their genitalia to women who don't want to see it, and yes, a non-negligible proportion of those are trans-identified males.

In most human societies, it is not as easy to identify the sex of another person.

Ah yes, one of those incredibly difficult tasks that babies learn to do before they can walk or talk.

they're banning trans people completely

I don't propose banning trans people (whatever that means). I don't propose rounding trans people and herding them into camps. I propose making people use the public facilities and compete in the sporting events that concord with their sex. I'm not saying "trans people can't compete in sporting events ever"; I'm saying "if they wish to compete in sporting events, trans people must compete in the sporting events corresponding to their sex, just like everyone else".

Photos from the Olympics clearly show Khelif being carried on their coach's shoulders and their coach's hands touching Khelif's bare skin. In theocratic MENA countries it's a big no-no for a man to touch the bare skin of a woman who isn't his wife (many women won't even shake hands with a man when meeting him). The coach definitely knew.

Even if she does have XY chromosomes (not confirmed),

Strange, given Khelif has admitted it.

Cutting off an arm is clearly a much worse (and more irreversible) level of harm than surgery on your genitals.

While the former would have a much greater impact on your day-to-day activities, never being able to have children seems like a really big imposition. It would be interesting to do a poll asking people if they'd rather lose an arm or all functioning in their genitalia.

Has anyone ever gone to jail because of pronouns?

At least one British man was convicted for misgendering, although his conviction was overturned on appeal. Something similar happened to a British woman, who was convicted for calling a trans-identified male a man, a conviction that was likewise overturned.

To the best of my knowledge no one has actually been sent to prison for misgendering, but at least two people have been arrested and held in jail cells for misgendering.

you'll notice that all they've done is change the terms to "AMAB" and "AFAB", respectively.

Which amounts to destruction. No one's sex is "assigned" at birth, like you just arbitrarily bestowed a sex on them but another one would have done just as well. Sexes are observed at birth. The claim that a doctor simply "assigns" them on a whim does, in fact, amount to a fundamental demolition of what the word "sex" means. Which would be bad enough if that was all trans activists were doing, which it isn't. See the absurd attempts to portray sex as a "spectrum", the inability of medical doctors to give a straight answer to simple questions like "can men get pregnant?", the replacement of commonly used anatomical terms with ghastly, dehumanising substitutes like "front hole", "chestfeeding", "birthing person" and "menstruators"...

It would be bad enough if "all" trans activists had done/wanted to do was replace the words "male" and "female" with "AMAB" and "AFAB" respectively. But it's abundantly obvious that that is not all they have done or want to do. Frankly, it strains credibility that you are so ignorant of the specifics of this group you're so routinely going to bat for.

Well, at least you're acknowledging that a new religious movement is what trans is.

"Genocide" is obviously the wrong word because genocide means targeting an ethnic group for extermination, and trans people aren't an ethnic group. Over time, a religious order can become a distinct ethnic group provided they only marry each other (you'd be amazed how often I have to explain to people that the Holocaust was not an example of religious persecution, as the Nazis targeted anyone of the Jewish ethnicity, regardless of whether they were practising or were even aware of their heritage), but I don't get the impression that this description is likely to apply to trans people any time soon. Sure, members of the Blue Tribe tend to endorse gender ideology and tend to intermarry, but most people who endorse gender ideology are not themselves trans. And as a result of the medical interventions they've undergone, trans people are disproportionately likely to be unable to have children anyway.

If (as you more or less concede) taking HRT and puberty blockers is more akin to a holy sacrament than anything we think of as medical care in the ordinary sense of the term, and if top/bottom surgery are more similar to elective surgical procedures done as part of induction into a tribe (analogous to circumcision or FGM), then in my eyes this strengthens rather than weakens the case for banning these interventions for children. If communion wafers wreaked the changes on children's bodies that HRT does, I'd be in favour of banning them too. Many jurisdictions already ban FGM for teenage girls. I'm aware that this practice is closely affiliated with certain strands of the Islamic faith and hence trying to prevent it could be thought of as "religious persecution": I just don't care. Religion or no, you shouldn't cut off bits of teenage girls' genitals when not medically indicated, and a pluralistic society has to drawn the line somewhere. I haven't been circumcised, but if circumcision were to be banned outright in all Western countries I'd be delighted. I'm sure there would be much waiting and gnashing of teeth from these countries' Muslim and Jewish communities, but this is one case where even an outspoken philosemite such as myself would say "tough".

Agreed. It's a transparent effort to make any criticism of trans activism (or disagreement with any component of its agenda) completely off-limits. See also "Islamophobia".

but I've seen the images they've seen, the collages, the screenshots, the threads, that gave them that opinion on SRS.

What "opinion"? @Shakes gave an entirely accurate description of what a vaginoplasty entails. Are you claiming the description is inaccurate? If so, how?

Doctors would not describe a neovagina as an "open wound".

And a used-car salesman wouldn't describe a lemon as a lemon. Of course the person selling something will try to present it in as flattering a light as possible.

Usually they admit when it wears off somewhat that they're actually miserable and their life sucks.

Citation requested. Many heroin addicts (and alcoholics, gambling addicts etc.) never admit that they have a problem or that their lifestyle is unhealthy.

They're not acting rationally when they shoot up.

Who are you to decree who is and isn't acting rationally? According to you, it doesn't matter if medically transitioning sterilises the recipient and opens them up to a host of health problems they wouldn't have otherwise – the only thing that matters is that they subjectively report feeling happier afterwards. By your own logic, a heroin addict who consistently maintains that heroin makes him happier is acting rationally, and the fact that heroin objectively destroys his mind and body and imposes negative externalities on the broader society is immaterial.

Trans people don't go back and forth like that.

Then why does /r/detrans have a five-figure number of subscribers? Why do most trans children desist before adulthood?

talk about that instead of accusing all trans people of being perverts, rapists, misogynists, etc.

When did I do that?

Welp, the incel hysterics can go to sleep satiated.

The "please let the shooter be white cis" crowd must be breathing a sigh of relief.

If you agree about the possibility of social contagion, you should try to minimize the attention trans people receive, yet anti-trans activists have been the main publicists of transness for about a decade now – trans people really entered the mainstream with the North Carolina "bathroom bill".

Not according to Google Trends. The bathroom bill passed in March 2016. In the US, searches for "Transsexual" peaked in January 2006, searches for "Transgender" peaked in February and September 2025, and searches for "transgender" peaked in July 2015 and May 2016. Searches for "Caitlyn Jenner" and "Laverne Cox" both peaked in June 2015 (Jenner publicly came out in April 2015). Searches for "I am Jazz" and "Jazz Jennings" peaked in July 2015. The idea that people only started talking about transgender issues because of anti-trans activism is baseless.

I also feel compelled to quote from the most popular thing I've ever written:

In his second article from last week, Freddie complains that gender-critical people have vastly overstated the significance of the trans issue, elevating it to the status of “the most important social divide of our time, apparently beating out crime and education and the collapse of the family etc” when trans/NB people make up at most 2-3% of the American population. I agree that, in the scheme of things, trans issues receive a vastly disproportionate share of column inches relative to their import. Where I differ from Freddie is placing the blame for this state of affairs solely at the feet of gender-critical people.

As noted by Wesley Yang, there are 40 separate days in the American political calendar specifically dedicated to celebrating trans people (and an additional 77 days dedicated to celebrating trans people as a subset of LGBTQ+) - in contrast to Black History Month, which famously falls on the shortest month in the Gregorian calendar, despite black Americans making up 13-14% of the US population. President Joe Biden gave a statement on Transgender Day of Remembrance, while Democratic candidate Elizabeth Warren made the frankly bizarre campaign promise that her pick for education secretary would have to be personally vetted by a transgender child. There has hardly been a single political issue in the last ten years that hasn’t been framed as “how might this affect trans people?” or “what does this mean for the struggle for trans rights?” in the popular media, no matter how tangential the connection - everything from Black Lives Matter to the war in the Ukraine to gun violence in schools to the cost-of-living crisis to Covid to AI to the Israel-Palestine conflict to Brexit and even climate change (“[exposure to secondhand smoke] can exacerbate the respiratory stress that LGBTQI+ populations may experience from air pollution and chest binding, which is a common practice among transgender men to achieve a flat chest”).

It’s a bit rich to demand that Americans spend more than one-tenth of the calendar year celebrating trans people, “centring their voices” and putting their trials and tribulations at the forefront of their consciousness - only to then turn around and say "umm why do you even care about this, it’s such a tiny issue lol" when some of them offer even the mildest pushback. You brought it up.

And you'll notice that hypothetical mass killings of trans people are very much not actual killings of trans people.