ćw
Transgender - The Inability To Distinguish Facts From Wishes
Matt Taibbi opines on the latest piece of transgender nonsense:
The Dumbest Cover Story Ever - Racket News, Mar 13 2024 New York Magazine's "Freedom of Sex" is the ultimate example of the lunatic nihilism that's consumed America's intellectual class
New York Magazine has a new cover story, by the trans writer Andrea Long Chu: “The moral case for letting trans kids change their bodies.” A jeremiad in support of the idea that children must have absolute political agency, it makes the Unabomber manifesto read like a Shakespeare sonnet. The money passage:
We must be prepared to defend the idea that, in principle, everyone should have access to sex-changing medical care, regardless of age, gender identity, social environment, or psychiatric history.
A lot of the piece is standard-issue woe-is-me fuck-everything cartoon nihilism you’d hear from any laptop-class liberal arts product, arguing for a generalized smashing of the patriarchy, among other things by attacking the biological conspiracy to produce those units of material labor value known as babies. Complete abolition of norms would be an “impossible task,” Chu notes sadly, but that doesn’t preclude their “collective reimagining” by an alliance of intersectional victims working toward a Marxian paradise free of “oppressive systems,” which of course include the nuclear family.
The nihilism Taibbi points to is also the major theme the French anthropologist Emmanuel Todd takes on in his book "The Defeat of the West".
From its New York Times review:
This Prophetic Academic Now Foresees the West’s Defeat (archived) - New York Times, Mar 9 2024
American leadership is failing: That is the argument of an eccentric new book that since January has stood near the top of France’s best-seller lists. It is called “La Défaite de l’Occident” (“The Defeat of the West”). Its author, Emmanuel Todd, is a celebrated historian and anthropologist who in 1976, in a book called “The Final Fall,” used infant-mortality statistics to predict that the Soviet Union was headed for collapse.
...
Mr. Todd is not a moralizer. But he insists that traditional cultures have a lot to fear from the West’s various progressive leanings and may resist allying themselves on foreign policy with those who espouse them. In a similar way, during the Cold War, the Soviet Union’s official atheism was a deal-breaker for many people who might otherwise have been well disposed toward Communism.
...
Mr. Todd does believe that certain of our values are “deeply negative.” He presents evidence that the West does not value the lives of its young. Infant mortality, the telltale metric that led him to predict the Soviet collapse half a century ago, is higher in Mr. Biden’s America (5.4 per thousand) than in Mr. Putin’s Russia — and three times higher than in the Japan of Prime Minister Fumio Kishida.
While Mr. Todd is, again, not judgmental on sexual matters, he is judgmental on intellectual ones. The inability to distinguish facts from wishes astounds him at every turn of the Ukraine war. The American hope early in the war that China might cooperate in a sanctions regime against Russia, thereby helping the United States refine a weapon that would one day be aimed at China itself, is, for Mr. Todd, a “delirium.”
Back in January Todd expanded on the inability of distinguishing facts from fiction, which is also the basis of trans-genderism, during an interview with Le Figaro. From its English translation:
Q: Over time, haven't you become a bit of a reactionary?
I was brought up by a grandmother who told me that, sexually speaking, all tastes are part of nature, and I'm faithful to my ancestors. So, LGB, welcome. For T, the trans issue is something else. The individuals concerned must of course be protected. But the fixation of the Western middle classes on this ultra-minority issue raises a sociological and historical question. To establish as a social horizon the idea that a man can really become a woman and a woman a man is to assert something that is biologically impossible, it is to deny the reality of the world, it is to assert the false.
Trans ideology is therefore, in my opinion, one of the flags of this nihilism that now defines the West, this drive to destroy not just things and people but reality. But, once again, I am in no way overwhelmed here by indignation or emotion. This ideology exists and I have to integrate it into a historical model. In the age of the metaverse, I can't say whether my attachment to reality makes me a reactionary.
The intentional denial of reality, as it is currently practiced in the West, is not a new phenomenon. It is the basis of neo-conservatism from where it has crept over to the progressive side.
As Ron Susskind wrote in his portrait of the first years of the Bush junior presidency:
Faith, Certainty And The Presidency Of George W. Bush (archived) - Ron Susskind / New York Times, Oct 17 2004
The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore." He continued "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors … and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
Karl Rove, the Bush advisor Susskind had quoted, displayed the same lunatic nihilism that is represented by those who argue that children, teenagers or people generally should can freely chose their gender. It is an attempt of "creating other new realities". It represents a total denial of actual reality and of the common values derived from it. The Bush administration failed in its endeavor to create new realities in Iraq. The current regime in the West will fail likewise with regime change in Russia. So will others who deny realities.
The author of the Todd book review, Christopher Caldwell, adds:
Fighting a war based on values requires good values. At a bare minimum it requires an agreement on the values being spread, and the United States is further from such agreement than it has ever been in its history — further, even, than it was on the eve of the Civil War. At times it seems there are no national principles, only partisan ones, with each side convinced that the other is trying not just to run the government but also to capture the state.
I see a very similar denial of reality, followed by nihilism and a lack of values, at the top of the current European leadership. The loss of the common view of things is splitting societies on both sides of the Atlantic.
However, with regards to transgenderism, some sense of reality is still trying to survive:
National Health Service England stops prescribing puberty blockers, citing 'not enough evidence' - USA Today. Mar 13 2024
"We have concluded that there is not enough evidence to support the safety or clinical effectiveness of (puberty suppressing hormones) to make the treatment routinely available at this time," the publication by NHS England stated.
Puberty is a natural process which often includes a temporary confusion about ones identity. Blocking a kids puberty to further some ephemeral confusion some may have during those time is in my view criminal.
I even agree with Rishi Sunack on this:
U.K. prime minister on gender: ‘A man is a man and a woman is a woman’ - Washington Post, Oct 5 2023
British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak asserted his stance on gender identity in a speech Wednesday, stating it was “common sense” that “a man is a man and a woman is a woman” — a remark that sparked criticism from transgender rights activists and elicited fervent applause from attendees of the Conservative Party Conference.
I see myself, just like Matt Taibbi seems to see himself, as a progressive striving for a society based on some form of socialism and justice.
To then find myself on the same side of an issue as some staunch conservatives, and getting attacked for it, is mildly disturbing.
Is it really impossible to be reality based and on the left side of things?
To establish as a social horizon the idea that a man can really become a woman and a woman a man is to assert something that is biologically impossible, it is to deny the reality of the world, it is to assert the false.
I'm immensely sick of transphobes framing this discussion as one that has to do with biology rather than linguistics.
I always dust off this incredibly basic example. Imagine a conversation that goes like this:
Transphobe: "Trans women are not women because they do not have XX chromosomes!"
Trans Ally: "I disagree with that viewpoint."
Let me ask you this: when the trans ally affirms his disagreement, do you think he is saying that he actually believes that trans women have a genetic tendency to have XX chromosomes or that he just merely thinks using XX chromosomes as a metric to define womanhood is nonsensical?
Very clearly, it's the latter.
This is so simple to understand that it seems insanely disingenuous when conservatives use the whole "denying biology" as a talking point, like they simply want to give a half-assed attempt at justifying their hate and appeal to the masses by framing their viewpoint as a "It'S Just COmMOn SENSe, DuH!" kind of position, and those who only know middle school biology will eat it up.
I'm immensely sick of transphobes framing this discussion as one that has to do with biology rather than linguistics.
It's because transphobes can't get out of the mindset that men and women are basically different species. They're not just transphobes, they're usually also misogynists who believe women first and foremost are responsible for a certain biological role. Transphobes can't ever conceptualize what a transwoman is because they haven't even figured out what women are. They only perceive things in very strict, antiquated gender roles as dictated by genetics. It's a refusal to admit gender roles could perhaps be dictated culturally, by shifting material conditions and social norms. It's also a refusal to admit women are fully human.
Transphobes of both the chud and TERF variety talk about womanhood like it's a disability.
Very well put, and I agree completely. I always think of this image when shit like this happens.
Show
They are worse than children, truly.
Patriarchy where men are God's chosen and women are to be subservient. That is what it uktimately comes down to. If there wasn't a separation and women can become men (ignorantky like a flick of a switch) then the patriarchy is threatened. So much insecurity projection from "instiutions".
That's why I, as one of God's chosen men, instead of doing things that are actually productive for society, spam misogynistic hate speech online all day instead of actually having women be subservient towards me.
(This might have to do with the fact that I don't shower or go outside.)
It's because transphobes can't get out of the mindset that men and women are basically different species.
This would also explain why they think pulling the "transspecies" analogy makes any sense.
"If a man can identify as a woman, then why can't I just identify as a dog!?"
It’s especially funny because the people who actually do unironically identify as a dog (therians) tend to be perfectly sane and wear a tail or something at most
As someone who has studied biology and intends to do so a good bit more in the future, I would like to point out that the whole biology argument is even more bullshit than you've laid out here.
See, a trans friend of mine once linked me to a Nature article about how cells express sex characteristics, and it was pretty mind-blowing for me, being at the time still kinda transphobic. Cells, it turns out, can be relatively easily convinced to switch sexes by way of chemical signals, and in fact cell sex is not a constant state but more of an equilibrium whose balance can be shifted at any time. Chromosomes, it turns out, are basically irrelevant (which makes sense when you think about it, XY and XX both have copies of the necessary X-linked genes, and there isn't much of anything necessary encoded on the Y chromosome at all--it's mostly for male sexual development, aka growing the male sexual parts in utero).
So the next time a transphobe tries to lean on biology, you can let them know that the field very much does not stand with them and their babybrained view of how this stuff works.
I see myself, just like Matt Taibbi seems to see himself, as a progressive striving for a society based on some form of socialism and justice.
To then find myself on the same side of an issue as some staunch conservatives, and getting attacked for it, is mildly disturbing.
The social fascist brainworm is truly something.
Maybe read a book or talk to some trans people before prejudicing a minority out of your ass and calling it insightful? All the bullshit arguments against transgenders are boringly recycled from the anti gay fights. This supposed scholar dares refrences fucking Karl Rove in the whole thing. Do these people not recongize this?
The Bush administration failed in its endeavor to create new realities in Iraq.
People do this thing where they just like, have a thing that they like thinking about and then they just put trans people in there with what they already know, without ever considering the possibility that there may be something they don't just inherently understand. For a lot of people, their "thing" is either sex or sports so they think of us exclusively in those contexts. But it's always funny to see the same thing unfold in less usual ways. It makes me imagine all sorts of weird bits for different types of guy.
Guy who's really into buildings: "Trans people are just like when a building gets remodeled, and sometimes [paragraphs of architectural jargon] so that's why I believe only short people should be allowed to transition, because otherwise the structural integrity could be compromised."
Guy who's really into geology: "Sometimes rocks turn into other types of rocks, but it takes a really long time. That's why I only support trans people once they've transitioned for 10 years or so."
Guy who's really into snakes: "Transitioning is exactly like when a snake sheds its skin, therefore [I don't even know]"
Honestly at least those examples all include a thing changing. The comparisons people try to make in reality are even more tenuous to the point of being beyond parody. When somebody compares trans people to the Iraq War, or when the Pope compared us to nuclear weapons, or when Putin said, "The West is trying to cancel Russia just like they cancelled JK Rowling," what parody of that could you possibly make? Even when I reach for the most absurd examples I can think of, they're still more reasonable than what people actually say.
I wrote this and then skimmed the comments (do not do this) and found:
The trans ideology functions like a form of settler colonialist ideology just like Zionism.
It's literally exactly like the bits I wrote but dumber and less coherent. Do people not realize that they can just, like, shut the fuck up about trans people and talk about the thing they actually want to talk about?
The trans ideology functions like a form of settler colonialist ideology just like Zionism.
I hate it when the trans air force drops white phosphorus on cis neighbourhoods
Do people not realize that they can just, like, shut the fuck up about trans people and talk about the thing they actually want to talk about?
No! You MUST have a take on everything in our current take-haver economy. It doesnt matter that you don't know jack about shit, and besides trans people give them gross vibes because we've been modeled as gross jokes in all the movies and shows that they watched, so they probably know more about trans people than actual trans people do, bucko!
fucking tiresome shit
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Do people not realize that they can just, like, shut the fuck up about trans people and talk about the thing they actually want to talk about?
This is where I'm at currently. I'm fully on the trans-misogyny theory these days. I see almost all transphobes arriving at their position through hatred of women first and foremost. They believe men and women are very distinct, immutable categories. Women are supposed to fulfill a role of birthing babies and being domestic servants. Trans women demand to be viewed as valid humans, so that trips off a transphobe's misogyny. It's also why transphobes hardly ever talk about transmen, because they don't take afab people seriously nor do they listen to them.
it was funny to listen to the chapo "ladyballers" review. they were like "hey trans people if you're curious you're 100% safe seeing this movie. there's almost no mention of transgender people even at all. what then is the butt of all the jokes in the film? misogyny! it's just all bitchy remarks about ciswomen. these guys hate women"
Guy who's really into snakes: "Transitioning is exactly like when a snake sheds its skin, therefore [I don't even know]"
"Therefore, trans people should have a little rattle so they can shake it to ward off predators."
Do people not realize that they can just, like, shut the fuck up about trans people and talk about the thing they actually want to talk about?
I appreciate this question. A lot of the hardline, very deliberately abrasive stances I adopt on this stuff are specifically in retaliation to the American right's moral panics and fetish for playing culture cop. They could stop at literally any time (But they won't, thus I won't).
Is it really impossible to be reality based
Sorry dude you're reality cringe. Face the wall now
Alright fuck it. Time to post.
Every single one of you should post too. There's like what, 400 comments in 2 days in this thread? Like holy shit you all realise how much we could out post them right?
Motherfuckers. Can NOBODY just shut the fuck up about trainsgender identity when they've got no skin in the game?
God fucking damn it.
Do these pieces of shit think a person just wakes up one morning, and says to themselves: "Damn, I would LOVE to be permanently ostracized! Being othered and bullied RULES!"
For T, the trans issue is something else. The individuals concerned must of course be protected. But the fixation of the Western middle classes on this ultra-minority issue raises a sociological and historical question.
Yes I agree, chuds should find a different hobby than hyperfocusing on and harassing trans people.
To establish as a social horizon the idea that a man can really become a woman and a woman a man is to assert something that is biologically impossible, it is to deny the reality of the world, it is to assert the false.
The leap from the previous sentence to this one is really something. So the fixation on trans people is the fault of trans people in other words? And this fixation, that is the fault of this minority, is going to cause the downfall of western civilazation? Well done, trans people, i guess. Unfortunate that you have to go through all that bullshit but it sounds like you all have the power of god in your hands.
Yes I agree, chuds should find a different hobby than hyperfocusing on and harassing trans people.
It's wild that all it took for chuds to be
over trans issues was a concerted effort by their billionaire backed media to make trans people a target. It doesn't help that the other MSM is wholly incapable of countering it, partly because they're backed by the same people, and because liberals are the most feckless cowards in existence. I fucking hate it 
And this fixation, that is the fault of this minority, is going to cause the downfall of western civilazation?
Is there something wrong with that?
To be fair, western civilization falling sounds merciful given the track record
Remember when Matt Taibbi's paper, the Buffalo Beast, went on an unhinged transphobic screed defending their use of slurs in response to being politely asked to not do that?
I go on about the "vaguely left" American counter culture having been dominated by chauvinist libertine treat lads until most of those crystalized into full blown fascists around Gamergate, and Matt Taibbi really is like the poster boy for chauvinist libertine treat lads affecting leftist aesthetics because they want a bigger share of the empire's spoils and more personal freedom to do whatever they want. Really fits that his buddy, the editor in chief of the Buffalo Beast, went on to become a weirdo gamergator fascist.
Why would I concede on trans issues and just let them walk over me like that? This shit does affect me personally.
As for "each side convinced that the other is trying not just to run the government but also to capture the state", not for nothing - We know for sure that multiple parties within the right are trying to pull some shit. Look at the New Apostolic Reformation crowd and the whole "seven mountains mandate" thing they have going on.
The intentional denial of reality, as it is currently practiced in the West, is not a new phenomenon. It is the basis of neo-conservatism from where it has crept over to the progressive side.
Step 1: Set up some dominos.
To then find myself on the same side of an issue as some staunch conservatives, and getting attacked for it, is mildly disturbing.
Step 2: You go to push the first domino but you yourself fall over instead.
Also read this for a Marxist reformulation of gender. I promise it's good.
The definition of "queer" offered by this thing is fuckin rad, love it.
Not gay as in happy, but queer as in fuck you.
Once you see behind the veil of oppression you can't unsee it. So many of us try to just blame it on religion or conservatism but it takes real courage to admit the whole dang world is broken.
As Ron Susskind wrote in his portrait of the first years of the Bush junior presidency:
Faith, Certainty And The Presidency Of George W. Bush (archived) - Ron Susskind / New York Times, Oct 17 2004
The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore." He continued "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors … and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
Karl Rove, the Bush advisor Susskind had quoted, displayed the same lunatic nihilism that is represented by those who argue that children, teenagers or people generally should can freely chose their gender. It is an attempt of "creating other new realities".
Marxism is famously a philosophy interested only in interpreting the world and not changing it. /s
A place like MoA where they're able to see through quite a few imperial brainworms, generally with a well founded material analysis, yet not for this one, they're freeballing it not knowing shit claiming things that were long debunked in the previous century as fact. Anyway, not too surprised, they critfailed the analysis on Rittenhouse too iirc, bigotry in general must be the last security blanket holding down the pillow fort of their social reality.
Hangout of anti-imperialist boomers that generally has some good analysis on current events but reactionary takes on others. Has some recognisable commenters from time to time (Michael Hudson) and Chomsky has said he reads it in the past. Comments are very loosely moderated (almost none) and include nazis as such.
Failing the Schniff test.
