* Class Cams

YT

Climate religion, gender religion -- how widespread is the abuse?  Woke "teachers" indoctrinating children into a religion obnoxious to the parents?  Are any statistics available?  I won't even say I should think the number would be small.  I don't know.  Universities are toxic.  So why not elementary schools, up to high schools?  

It's been many years since I've been in a classroom.  Things were still under control in those days.  But in those days "gay marriage" wasn't even a topic for late night comedians.  

We've seen it before, we humans.  How teaching as a profession becomes revolutionary.  Soviet Union and Red China teachers were just an arm of the party.  And the point that I've been building to is this: teachers were the profession most represented in Nazi Party membership.  

There must be something about having huge influence on young minds that swells weak characters into monstrous and conscienceless egotists.  The former-principle and now-quaint notion of in loco parentis cannot compete in the marketplace of ideas, when the marketplace is a socialist or wokalist cooperative.  

We don't want your kind around here, parent! Your child?  Ha!  My child, in my classroom, under my values.  Now where did I leave those puberty blockers...

So an obvious necessity now is for classrooms to be equipped with cameras, with sound.  There have been objections about this, regarding privacy.  But whose privacy?  Not from parents -- we give our kids baths.  Not for teachers -- they are hirelings, like babysitters.  And in a public school there should be no secret curriculum, hidden agenda.

Student-teachers are not infrequently observed by mentors or administrators.  Department heads audit classrooms.  Teachers are observed for evaluation.  Parents sometimes sit in classrooms.  So...?  I find no substantive valid objection.  

Cameras then, accessible to parents.  Only parents, or appropriate administrators.  Etc.  Common sense.  

Bodycams for police are widely used now.  There was a lot of pushback originally, but my not very well informed impression is that a significant majority of officers support bodycams now.  My own opinion is that it is a superb idea, protecting officers and citizens alike.  Even criminals should benefit -- fewer lies is good for the soul.  

Hardly anyone nowadays is camera shy. Think of it as you staring in your instagram or tictoc or whatever page or account or channel or whatever. It's the future already, and everyone is a star.

J    

3 23

*Solutions and Their Problems

YT

I'm not obsessing about it.  But I do wonder, comparatively speaking -- which is what being socialized is all about, other people.  It's not so much diligence as curiosity.  How does it work.  

So I looked a bit into the actual details of the neovaginoplastic surgery. And I have been correct. There may be other techniques, but what seems most common is that the penis be inverted. The corpus cavernosum, the erectile tubes are removed, and all that remains is penis skin, like an empty glove, or a deflated animal balloon (Biden 2024!) like the weener dog a birthday-party clown might make.

This skin sac is pushed in, between the urethra and the rectum, and sutured in place so it doesn't prolapse — pulled back outside the body, inside-out like a sock.  Of course it's not really inside-out.  It was outside-out as a normal penis, then it was outside-in as a neovagina, and if prolapsed it would be outside-out again.  It's sort of a möbius-strip thing -- there's only one side.

How successful is this surgery?  To my skeptical mind, it sounds like not-very.  Prolapse is called "rare".  Huh, should be plausible, coming from disinterested medical professionals.  But let's look at, say, this study from 10 years ago -- an 8-year followup of 43 "reassignment" cases.  (Indeed, that is accurate -- healthy genitals are reassigned to transgenitals.)  

Only 37 of these neovagina men identified as "regularly sexually active".  These are our persons of interest.  The other 6 were not sexually active.  Why not? -- information not available to us.  Their neovaginas would be symbolic rather than intercourse-functional.  Socially speaking, they are functionally asexual, and presumably not at-risk for prolapse, given the vigorous to and fro, the tugging and pushing and friction of penile sexual activity.

Of the 37 sexually active transexuals, no "significant prolapse of the neovagina was noted, 11 patients had a grade I cystocele, rectocele or apical descent that was asymptomatic." [sic]  Okay, so three medical problems, but what does all that mean?  It means thirty percent had prolapses (eleven out of 37).  The significant word is "significant". 

In grade 1 cystocele, the traditional-vaginal wall and bladder drops "only a short way" into the vaginal canal.  In such cases, intercourse would hit, displace, or a best vigorously palpitate the bladder with each, well, thrust.  Grade 2 is when the bladder drops into "the opening of the vagina" -- so, visible --  and grade 3 is when "the bladder bulges out of that opening."  Both are debilitating, in terms of physical blockage of sexual access, and of normal bladder function.  All this would apply to neovaginas as well.

In rectocele prolapse, "the front wall of the rectum sags and bulges into the vagina, and in severe cases, protrudes out of the vaginal opening."  The authors would not have any of this categorized as "significant". Need I say, a rectum intruding into a vagina seems significant to me.

Apical descent is the lowering of the top of the canal -- sagging, slumping or collapsing 2 cm down into itself.  In neovaginas this seems to manifest as a shortening or crimping of the opening, more horizontal, less vertical.  I'd just have to say, not very vagina-like. 

The authors' usage of "asymptomatic" is typically poor academic writing style.  Is it all three problems that are asymptomatic, or just the final item.  Let's just suppose it's all three.  (Sloppy, that we have to suppose.)  

When they say the eleven neovaginas are "asymptomatic", they must be excluding the phenomena themselves as symptoms.  A rectum or bladder intruding into a neovagina is in itself a symptom, of a prolapse.  A looser yet smaller, saggier or baggier neovaginal canal is a symptom.  Having pronounced and constant urinary or rectal sensations during intercourse must be a symptom.  Likewise, to me, all this seems "significant".  

But I have different standards.  My purpose is not to trivialize or minimize or normalize this mental disorder, oops, I mean spiritual disorder.  A female spirit misincarnated into a male body.  God or karma messed up.  Yet, it is a mental disorder as well, and a real one.  But it is forbidden to say so.  

Because terms have definitions, it is NOT body integrity dysphoria (more properly body integrity identity disorder), suffered by able-bodied people who desire an actual disability, whether physical or sensory -- eg, an amputated arm, or blindness.  

By definition, BID specifically excludes genital issues.  Such issues would be diagnosed as gender dysphoria ... formerly gender identity disorder, but that's hateful and racist, calling it a disorder.  

The foolishness and brazenness of the double standard is foolish and brazen.  Indefensible, the way all hypocrisy is.  My thing is good, but even though your thing is just like mine, it's bad.  If a man can identify as a woman ... no, sorry: if a male can identify as a female ... but that's not it either.  If a male can identify as a woman, then why can't an able-bodied person identify as transabled (yes, that is a real word -- as real as transgender).  

Why?  Well, they can and they do.  But it's a disorder, sick.  It's sick, the way we're not allowed to understand transgenderism is sick, because transablism is not sexual.  Sex is why young men get a job and buy a car and play guitar.  Not every individual is wired that way, but that's the reason there's a Gen Z to be messed up by a Gen X.  There are generations because genitals generate.  Gender has nothing to do with it.  post

There are fetishists who obsessively masturbate to amputation porn, or pay beaucoup dollars to git wit someone with, please pardon me, a stump -- acrotomophilia.  The way you and I feel about that is, first, irrelevant, and second, it's how we used to feel about gay marriage and sodomy.  We disapproved.  The Supreme Court has educated us out of our tradition-bound ignorance, but so far we're still allowed to be acrotomophiliophobic.  Maybe it's acrotomophiliopugnic.  In any case, it's still a right.

So, acrotomophilia is about sex, but transablism is not about sex.  So transablism is a disorder.  By this reasoning, acrotomophilia should only be a dysphoria.  It's who they are.  I agree, it's confusing.  

Maybe medical technicians do some electrolysis on the inverted penis we've been talking about.  That wouldn't be a surgeon's job.  Electrolysis, because post-puberty penises have been known to have hair some distance along the length.  I am certain that no woman would want hair growing inside her vagina. No transexual either, in his neovagina.  Really ingrown hairs -- that would be a fourth medical problem.  Probably only grade 1 though.  Wouldn't be grade 3 until a gigantic matted hair plug was pushing out 4 or 5 centimeters past the neolabia.

There is a point to all of this.  The life-long medical and pharmaceutical dependency that transsexuals have to endure seems debilitating to me.  The soul-crushing defensiveness, constantly to be battling biological reality and simple common sense -- the effort must be herculean.  It is not brave in a moral sense, but it's brave in a social sense, facing down scorn and repugnance or even simple disapproval or incomprehension -- not to say physical violence. 

Some heroes do this, stepping up no matter the cost, and they are right.  But not everyone with emotional pain is a hero.  Self-loathing is not admirable.  Whatever fortitude it takes to be castrated and reconfigured, this is not the sort of self-sacrifice that is ennobling. It is as self-asserting an act as can be imagined, and the opposite of generosity. 

Me first.  God got it wrong.   

J

*Identity as Rape

YT

Even the Greeks would be shocked.  Sodomy, to them, was just a matter of doubled opportunity (or tripled, given that females also have anuses).  Rosy-cheeked boys, like rosy-fingered dawn, meant simply that a man would be rising. Heh. You know, for boy-sodomy.  Giddit? That's just who they were, but not as an identity -- so I should say it's what they were.  Sodomites.  Not that there's anything wrong with it.  

Every culture falls, after all -- name one that hasn't -- an old one, I mean, and I mean degenerates rather than falls.  I guess it started with Sodom -- the first culture to fall, if being stoned from the heavens counts as falling.  

It's summed up nicely, what I'm saying -- perfectly, in fact, by Aristophanes, in Thesmophoriazusae.  He had the coldest eye ever for observation.  And sure enough, here comes Agathon, dressed as a woman. 

Mnesilochus sees him coming and is bewildered.  "Are you a woman? Then where are your breasts?"

Agathon is never at a loss for words.  "Old man, old man, I hear the shafts of jealousy whistling by my ears, but they do not hit me. My dress is in harmony with my thoughts." A prim smirk, and a saucy flick of his skirts.  "What we don't possess by nature, we must acquire by imitation."  And he tosses his head.

Mnesilochus is an Athenian, so it's only the transvestitism he objects to.  Otherwise, quite inclusive: "When you are staging Satyrs, call me; I will do my best to help you from behind, if I can get my tool up."

Heh.  Giddit?  Well-dressed fools and well-dressed follies.  It's not that pigs wear lipstick -- at least never self-applied.  It's that women wear nose rings -- formerly, in our culture, reserved for pigs, and cattle.  Heraclitus was referring only to physicalities when he said everything is change.  Human nature never changes.  Hence the recurring need for degeneration.  That there might be the change of reformation.  

Pascal starts by dividing minds into mathematical and intuitive -- he rephrases this later by observing that the most powerful cause of error is the conflict between reason and the senses.  Nietzsche thought he'd come upon a clever idea by dividing cultures etc into Apollonian and Dionysian.  Hegel was glutinous with self-approbation when he synthesized thesis with antithesis.  Whether religion or philosophy or psychology, it's always some version of This, not That.  Even if This has to become These ... or HE has to become tHEy.

So it's not that they don't have a religion, the atheists, the Left, the wokesters.  It's that the god of their religion doesn't have intelligence.  The zero-sum game of random pantheism just barely manages to be a mushy dualism -- but certainly not Manichaean because that's patriarchal or intolerant or whatever.  It's a mere mechanical blending of something, whatever, into the virtual foam of an always theoretical but necessary brahmanistic sea of nothingness.  

That's the religion they think they follow, utterly relativistic, while ignoring how much they hate the other side.  

Relative, quantum, brahmanic, manichaean.  Whatever.

This is too religious a way of saying it, but their short-term eschatological prophecies keep on failing -- overpopulation and nuclear infernos and catastrophic climate meltdowns.  One of my problems with their religion is that they should pick one and only one apocalyptic horseperson, and keep the faith.  They switch horses like a circus acrobat.  Nobody respects an apostate.  

So the Greeks didn't have our particular (now increasingly peculiar and fading) outlook on a number of things.  But they would die free rather than be slaves -- the point of the Persian Wars.  Individuals mattered.  That's their contribution to the world.  Their science and art and philosophy follows from it.  

The opposite is marxism in its myriad protean forms.  Socialism has nothing at all to do with the Polis.  Athens and Rome each had tribes -- it's where the word Tribune comes from.  But their tribes were mere organizations, as a justification for clubhouses.  I simplify.  The fanatical and fantastical segregationism of marxism leapfrogs further back than Classical or Ancient history, far past Civilization itself -- practically to ape troops.  

So sodomy is individualistic.  Me and just you, consenting and there's nothing wrong with that.  Transvestitism is about me -- well, not me, but me and everyone else.  You all have to affirm me.  Not all sodomy is rape, but all wokism is rape.  You will be forced to obey my sexual will.  Identity fascism. 

I said I would not title this "Identity as Rape".  But I have to.

Like our Soviet Nazi Totalitarian past, and our islamist and wokist present, our future is a boot stomping on a human face, forever.  Nose-rings and tattoos notwithstanding -- these are just Party Cards with a low number.  Badges expire.  The Old Comrades were purged, because loyalty has nothing to do with it.  Nothing divides faster than the cells of a revolution.

They came for the Jews, then the Christians, then the deplorable ultra maga republican supremacists, then the wokesters.  Just because they could.  

But maybe I'm wrong.  I don't like it when people tell me what my motives are.  I will tell you.  My motive is to see things as they are.  Objectivity.  I can't really say why they do and will do what they do.  I have only history, experience, observation and common sense to guide me.  

My dog identifies as a cat.  My cat identifies as human.  Humans identify as whatever the eff they feel like.

Giddit?

J

*No "People of Color" or Perverts Welcome

I thought of it, and just couldn't resist. Because of that whole DIE thing, where it's ONLY perverts and "people of color" welcome.  It's just the very natural reaction, neurological function, amygdala and the like, to the neo-McCarthyism, the ultra-Orwellian meta-Maoist supra-Stalinist, um, hyper-Hitlerite, uh, maximo-Marxism of Hollywood, media, platforms, no- "white-" "cis-" "male" DIE censor kultur.  

Because everything is about only words and feelings (and "my truth" is my error only because I did not capitalize it), therefore I am whatever I say I am -- at this moment a bigot, the next a perv, after that I am a genuine 100% pure-beef woman of the non-vaginal sans-uterine variety.  Have I talked about anuses yet? ...no, I see ... but I will.  Promise.

Sam Something, of whom I had never previously heard, is an avatar and a herox.  I particularly admire the urine-drinking. 

[image available but withheld]

Boss.  Butt, too much jiggling-ass as a ratio to crotch-bulges -- more actual dicks, please -- these tiny little units all swaddled up in obscuring cloth ... extremely frusterbating.  I realize I have become inconsistent, going all perv on you, butt, this is My Truth, as a Person of Non-Transparency Who Happens to Produce Sperms with Their Testis butt Who Celebrates Their Anus, and Also, or Is It also, Their Rectum, and Sigmoid Colon, Maybe!  [Have I gone too far?  Confucius spoke of the Rectification of Names -- calling things by what they are.  That's all the apology you'll get.]  Promise kept.

Anatomy, like pronouns, serves whatever purpose Wee choice.  Intolerance is a Federal offense.

Now I am a tranzman with pronouns in a Star Wars language, and you are allowed to address me only through my protocol droid.

The barbie movie is profoundly offensive, to me as an authentic person of blondness.  The appropriation of my culture, nonbleaching, by the haters of their own natural coloring

is intolerant and unacceptable. 

Just thought I'd point that out.  I pointed it out in these pages some number of years ago -- the term dumb-blonde -- it's always dumb bleach-blondes; in other words, dumb poseurs, or poseuses 

since you Also insist on pedantic perfectionism.   

Authenticity.  So, a question.  What happens to their identity, if they don't have access to makeup, hair-coloring, outfits?  Who are you, if you cannot see yourself, or if others are not looking at you, with an opinion?  Speaking now as a gay woman of color, I am uniquely positioned to know -- although we prefer the term lesbian, or do I mean asian.  We used to be orientals, but the negroes schooled us about that, so we knew we were being offended.  

Without a mirror, 

we hardly exist at all.

The amygdala is the part of the brain that causes infants to "prefer" faces of their own "race".  Obviously it is an exposure thing, to early caregivers -- overwhelmingly parents -- no longer mammies.  Amygdala informs the organism of danger, because it reacts to differences -- same thing, in this universe of entropy and predation.  

So it's an inevitable synaptic reaction, this othering, this marginalizing, the institutional bigotry beamed, sprayed, like skunk stink, like tomcat squirt, at what is still a majority of the umehriqun poopulation -- "white" "males" (we are complying with the directive that we are not "men").  

Be miffed against the machine, mushine, pussine, passive voice, no eye-contact.

Anybody want to help me do a podcast?  As a counter to the untalented bitches and their pussy drones who have taken over? -- like toxic mold (avoiding "black" as insensitive and a dogwhistle), like untreated syphilis, like the Nazi Party.  I'm too special to be wasted talking to myself alone with writing.  It'll be great.  So popular.  I'm quite striking.  

And I'm totally over this anonymity thing.  This is the last time I'll be signing off as "J".  Hereafter, it's my true and full name etc.  Promise.

H

*What Is Truth

The confusion comes from not using the plural.  That is, this particular confusion.  Ironically there's a precise counterpart of the confusion, where plurals are used, when it should be singular.  He and She, not Them.  But that first confusion? -- what is a woman?  When we make it plural, it's clear and easy. 

What are women?  Women are the people out of whose uteruses every human being has emerged.  

But this of course brings up another confusion, in its incompleteness.  Not every human being emerges from a uterus.  Or perhaps I mean not every human emerges alive.  Partial birth abortion is a murky area.  Murky yet clear.  It's certainly an abortion -- given that the word abort simply means to stop the process of something -- and all of life is a process.  All death is an abortion.  

It must be the "partial birth" part that's confusing.  How much of the baby has emerged, has been born, as an uncompleted process, before this particular medical procedure is performed (bravo!).  Is it dismembered piecemeal, as it emerges, like slicing bread?  A question for another time.  

(Why is a baby called "it", rather than "they"?  Is it something like the "of" or "-ed" that makes the difference between people/person of color, and colored people/person?)

To be fair we at least have to ask, if it's dead -- this partially-born aborted fetus -- is it human.  Dinosaur bones are not dinosaurs.  Mummified cats in Egyptian tombs are not cats.  Living things must exhibit some sort of behavior.  Mere existence-as-matter doesn't rise to the level of Being.  

I Am That I Am.  God being.  Human being.  Baby being.  Fetus being.  

Not all women produce humans.  Not all women can produce humans.  But everyone who has produced a human is a woman.  Everyone who has been produced was produced by a woman.

I've been thinking a fair bit in the past few years about maturity.  As in, stubbornness comes from immaturity.  Stubbornness and determination are similar, but determination is more than the assertion of will -- it arises from rationality and character.  Maturity might start with empathy, but that's only a start, not maturity itself.  It's an understanding of the world as it is, with its social dangers: you will be judged by the impression you make.  Maturity calculates and understands that this matters. 

I have been too interested in what I supposed was integrity -- being authentic -- and disregarded the fact that the normal civilities exist not as mere rote, but as one of the very highest necessity of all human cultures.  Conformity to expected norms is a good thing.  It's the foundation of stability.  Once we are secure, we can grow.  

You may have misunderstood my usage of conformity.  It's a matter of unthoughtful, or enlightened.  I'm coming to accept this latest generational fad, of tattoos.  It will always be the stupidest fad, so far.  Permanent.  Mullets and bellbottoms and raccoon coats were stupid. But young people are immature, and it's their job to explore, and then settle into the conformity of non-destructive habit.  Tattoos are not destructive.  Just defacing.

So what is a woman?  The fact that there are shades of gray -- hermaphrodites, intersex -- has no bearing on the fact that there is black and white.  Meaningful terms can be objectively defined.  

Black is an achromatic color resulting from the absence or absorption of visible light.  The fact, that there might be some smaller number of photons that are present, is a quibble.  Even the absolute of black can be a phenomenological relativity.   But, like obscenity, we know it when we see it.

Likewise, white light is what the human eye sees when all wavelengths of the visible spectrum combine.  The fact that there are human eyes that might see things differently, due to mental illness, brain injury, eye-damage, etc -- this would be analogous to hermaphroditism, a rare anomaly of mutation or dysfunction.  As with abortion, we do not decide general practice based on rare exceptions. 

That there is variety has no bearing on the existence of absolute truth.  That people do not agree does not mean that truth does not exist. 

Simple.  Maturity starts by defining its terms.  It starts with clarity.  It starts when sperm joins with egg.  It is an abortable process, moving more and more into what it actually is -- like black, even with many photons -- like white, with a spectrum that is not perfectly and equally distributed.  We should know it, maturity, like black and white, when we see it.  

I tipped it in the title.  Pilate's well-worn question to Jesus.  What is truth.  It can mean so many things.  That is, the question can be taken in different ways.  If it's not meaningfully defined, it is merely evocative, the ground for poetry, not information.  

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil.  This is not a new idea.  Woe unto them that put darkness for light, and light for darkness.

Now it's not men taking the woman's penetrative role -- this antedates Sodom, probably to the, say, third generation after Adam.  Now it's men claiming they are women, and women, likewise.  Now it's an asserted cultural norm that whatever truth is, "non-binary" is true.  We are enjoying the blindness, then, the absence of light, that the citizens of the city of Sodom enjoyed after pounding on Lot's door.  

That should have been the title of this.  "America, Pounding on Lot's Door".  Let us in, that we may know them.  When there is no truth, we can know nothing at all.

J

Chastity

What I said, stands.  About Chaz Bono -- I'm pretty brutal, in the namecheck.  Same with Caitlyn Jenner, and for that matter, Elliot Page.  Lia Thomas deserves it, not because he looks like Lurch, and not only because he is an ax murderer.

It was Elliot that got me started again, in a desultory way, after my wilderness years of silence.  It's just that reality matters.  It's a losing battle, or seems that way -- we find out at the end who wins.  And everyone loves a good come-back story.  Rocky, uh, II I think, and The Bad News Bears, and the Book of Revelation.  

So many degenerations, and so few Great Awakenings.  Look at what the Methodists became, or the Carnegie Institute.  Even the Mormons didn't hold fast to the old-time doctrine -- polygamy, racism, Quakers living on the moon, etc.  Marxism is or would be a great idea, except for reality.  Evolutionism isn't as comforting and inspirational and ennobling a religion as the Victorians might have wished.  

All these theories that we invent in our imaginations and act as if they're true ... that's what being young is all about.  Follow the teen fashions, and then outgrow them.  Mullets and DAs and crewcuts, and bellbottoms and leatherstring vests (I'm sure they had a name) and whatever it's been in this, the characterless 21st Century.  Tattoos.  Just fashions.  

Then we settle into who/what we think we really are, settling not so much into quicksand, wearing not so much cement overshoes.  We settle into institutional conformity.  Not cliques and subcultures anymore, for most people.  Starting a family is a wonderful concentrater of the mind.  

But even that seems like it's outmoded, temporarily.  Not reproducing has to be temporary, because it's not sustainable.  You stop sustaining because you run out of babies, or, you get the motor running again, etc.  As Lincoln reminded us over and over, half-slave and half-free cannot long stand.  

A dessert that's half ice cream and half dog poop is not for me, thank you very much.  Not even if it's a gallon mixed with only one teaspoon. Nope.  We'd rather starve -- or the dog-poop lovers would kill us.

The obvious point is that genital amputations are the sort of teen fad that metastasizes into the future.  Chaz and Caitlyn and Elliot are well past following a fad.  They are trendsetters, influencers, examples to teens.  Collectively they averaged about age 50 when they elected for their surgeries.  Biologically mature adults. 

("Adult" meaning reproductively viable may be excluded -- something like whether or not a fetus is "viable".  None of the tranzes in question are able to reproduce now.  (Is that rude, 'tranzes' -- objectifying them? -- othering them?  When POCs (people of color) stop othering me, calling me 'anglo', which I am not, then we can open a dialogue about it. (Was that rude? 'POCs'?  When I get that long-overdue apology from libtards for being called a right winger, which I am not, we can start having that discussion.  (Was that rude?  That thing about 'libtards'?)))  (And Caitlyn, if ever a woman, would have been past his fertile years anyway -- past his Lemon-fresh prime, heh heh, giddit!?!)  No, not adults.  Adult bodies have settled into their final functional shape ... and sorry guys, no more size coming your way.)

Sadly, from my worldview, Caitlyn & Company's example is toxic.  My perhaps ad hominem polemics against them are, I would hope, also toxic, like DDT to mosquitoes.  But it's against their examples, not them.  They are empowering teenage self-annihilation.  Tragic.  Maybe you agree that I'm deliberate, if not wise, in the words I use.  Tragic.  

This is the obvious point.

The actual point here is that I do recommend the "Chazztitty" post, now.  Not in its 2011 portion, but in the 2023 preface I added.  Some cute meta stuff there, but in itself that's not the reason.  What followed naturally in my mind was about Bruce Jenner.  Slightly convoluted:

If or since tranz people have always been that other thing, what they were not born as, then Bruce Jenner won the '76 Decathlon as a woman.  So 1] his record must be expunged, because women could not compete in men's events, or 2] a woman held those men's records for lo those many years, or 3] all women's records have to be adjusted lower, supplanted by Bruce's.  Either it was Caitlyn who won them, or Bruce.  (What ever shall the Olympic Committee decide?  It is a dilemma and a puzzlement worthy of Solomon.)  

This is why I said "meta".  It's time travel. 

Or it's like finding out you've been betrayed, and you have to go back and reexamine all those conversations, those intimacies you had with her, watch them take on new meanings, alien or opposite to what you had thought they were.  Every time she said I love you -- it meant something else.  Every caress, every plan about your future together -- they become something else.  And it breaks your heart. 

Or, it's not so much like your husband saying he's gay, as it is him saying he's a woman.  What does that make you, ma'am, if you were married to a woman?

And so on.  The whole world has to adjust itself, if gender is fluid.  It's certainly not just about presumptively male or female clothing styles.  It's not even about gender-neutral restroom stalls.  It is about young teenage girls sharing shower space with naked teenage boys who today, fluidly, call themselves girls.  It's the girls who must adapt and accommodate.  

But, maybe, the wokists are right?  So ... Get over yourself, girls.  It's not like you've never seen a penis before.  Apparently, everyone has one.  

Speaking of which, that Elliot Page.  

Cute.  If I were gay I'd really go for him.  Git all up in that, no joke.

J 

*Vicious, Cruel and Clueless

YT

Breaking News

HOLLYWOOD, Calif, Apr 25 (FP)

Caitlyn Jenner, formerly Kate-Lynn Jenner, announced this morning that she had "erred in believing" she was a trans woman.  "I made a terrible mistake," she stated at a press conference held at the Hollywood Wax Museum.  

"I'm a man, obviously," the reality show star and Olympic Decathlon Gold Medalist claimed.  "What was I thinking.  I don't identify as gay, but I am homosexual.  I'm sexually attracted to men, and I'm a man."  

The press corps erupted into loud and prolonged booing and jeers. 

 

Water bottles, notepads, hats, shoes, chairs and a computer were hurled at her, but the 73-year-old decathlete dodged them deftly.  

Security intervened, restraining representatives of both Slate and Salon.  The correspondent for the Daily Beast was wrestled to the ground and escorted off the premises.  Six security personnel were treated for bites and scratches, several quite severe.  

When order was restored, Jenner continued: "It was all a big misunderstanding.  I was confused, and I got confused about what I was confused about.  I wasn't a woman -- all that surgery was just delusional.  I don't regret the plastic surgery, I look fabulous, but the castration wasn't necessary.  It didn't address the issue, and I really miss my penis.  

"I had bad councilors, who told me what they wanted to hear. Yesterday I filed a 260 million dollar lawsuit against them.  A man from my era, born in the 1940s, gay just couldn't ... I just couldn't see it.  But that's what it was, and all this could have been avoided except for their agenda.  

"I could have just married a man, without losing my dick.

"I was very confused, not about being attracted to men -- I knew all about that.  I was confused about how I'm trans.  I'm not a trans woman.  I'm a trans young man.  I identify as a 26 year old man, who happens to be homosexual, and I identify the year as 1976.

"I'm not old, I'm young, a young man, in his prime, beautiful, powerful, unstoppable, immortal.  Like at the Olympics, when it all came true."

Jenner went on to explain that she came of age at the peak of "youth culture", and herself had chanted the slogan, Don't trust anyone over 30.  

But by this time the audience had lost interest, and melted away.  

The final question came from a reporter for MSNBC, who quipped, "You fucking loser traitor.  C'mon people, we should stone her to death.  Racist cunt."

Said security officer Oscar Sanchez, "We see this sort of thing a lot.  They go for your groin a lot, like Dobermans."

=====

This one is problematic.  Caitlyn does not deserve it.  Per his own recent statements, Jenner is not attracted to men.  Without actual genitals, now, any attraction to women would be ancillary, and psychologically quite convoluted.  He wanted somehow to be a lesbian?  That one isn't in the LGBTPLUS sexual alphabet ... yet.  I've looked, and he seems to be saying he's asexual.  Whatever dude.  I guess he's like me -- just will not be pinned down.  Peekaboo.  

He's like the boy in Equus.  Really really effed up.

But he doesn't need to be mocked.  He is not a criminal, or a moral-degenerate, publicly, given that transvestite behaviors are no longer so deemed.  He has mental illness, and he joined a cult.  So I'm thinking I'm wrong, to use him like this.  

I may remove this post.  I've written nearly 2000, and there are some number saved in drafts, removed or never posted.  In looking a while back for the link to something on Chaz Bono, I found one on her that I'd never posted.  It is extraordinary.  I have no clue as to where or how I found those online pictures. 

I have my own compulsions, in conflict with each other.  Courtesy and tact, as I see it, but also courage of a sort, and honesty.  If you can get a tattoo, I can use the word cunt, or, in its context, nigger, as commentary, as dialogue, in character.  

In the back of my mind now I'm thinking I may write something about this, possibly called the three vulgarities.  Cuz there are three vulgarities.  It would/will be interesting to see how and where I wander from there, or how I get there from where I started.  It's an adventure for me, to discover where I'm led.  

If the sight of those words offends/triggers you, you wouldn't want to be seeing my Chaz-thing draft.  Lots of dicks, or tranzdicks.  I cannot fathom how I found them, in 2011.  

I'll look at it again, and think about posting.  It's like this one in that it picks on her, singles her out, because of her mental illness.  Of course there is grave societal harm in what she, and he, Chaz and Caitlyn, are doing.  But "society" could stop it, per the right of self-preservation, and will not.  So they're like willful children demanding to play dress-up, incorrigible because that's what american toleration encourages.  

The draft-post is entitled Chazztitty -- don't know why I used two zees; no doubt I had a reason, being the way I am.  I wouldn't call it that, now.  A cheap pun.  The name and the post itself are in extraordinarily poor taste.  Like a film by John Waters.  So we can call it art, with a trigger warning.  Oh, yeah, here's the trigger warning for this one:

Trigger Warning: 

this post contains words and ideas that may cause emotional distress, and is likely to exacerbate pre-existing mental and/or spiritual illness.

=====

So I read it, Chazztitty.  There's nothing new.  It's as much an exposure of my own psychology, as an examination of Chaz or the tranz issue.  (Is that where I got the extra z?)  Some number of closeup and graphic pictures of neopenises, either clitoral or entirely fabricated.  Some of them are quite plausible, given my overall inexperience with penises in general.  Small, but aren't we over size by now?

So here's the deal: I'm posting it, on its original date,     HERE.   The only people who will ever see it are those who read this, right to the end.  I do not recommend it.  It's on you.

J

Rated Z

If Benjamin Franklin had a time machine and saw what the United States has become, he'd go back to 1776 and ax murder George Washington.  

I haven't made a study of it, or even given it meaningful thought.  But if virtually any movie from the past few decades were to fall back in time to the '60s, it would be rated X, or prior to MPAA ratings, unreleasable.  

The Motion Picture Association of America dropped the "of America" a few years back. I'd say because there was no more america, but it was just business, like cancelling is just business, the tithe paid to the Church of the Great aWokening.  Goddess bless america, tranzgoddess.

It's not emirica, not amerikkka,  It's just nothing at all.  Canada-south, Mexico-north, not hot or cold, and not even tepid.  Ameriblah, AmeriBLaMe.  Blah blm blame.  

The Crime of Masculinity is, no, not rape, or violence -- same thing.  Being a man, that's the crime, an existential crime, like original sin.  Unforgivable save through repudiation, inexpugnable save through surgery.  Born again, through genital bleeding, into the right body.

Maleness, so penetrative, male, man, masculine.  Not equivalents, as we certainly must know by now.  That's why they prefer to tell us how much they hate white males, rather than white men.  Men are human.  Males are animals.  

As for masculine, that's never a good thing, alone.  It needs to be balanced.   

It's only yesterday maybe that I heard about "deadnaming", via twitter's cancelling of its cancelling policy, for using deadnames -- which would be a tranny's biological sex-name.  Bruce for Caitlyn, or Chastity for Chaz.  We all have the right to change our names.  (That's the spelling he chose, for Caitlyn.  Seems overly elaborate.  But young girls dot their "i"s with hearts, so ... something about his own private puberty.)  My father changed his name some number of times, or multiple names at the same time.  It's complicated.  It would be a matter of freedom, then, the civil liberty of free speech, for someone to be rude enough to use the old, deadname.  

Rudeness is a right.  So is blacklisting, or as it's now called, cancelling.  Boycotting, witch hunting ... as long as our purity is not puritanical, or our rightness is not righteousness -- it's only hypocritical if you don't do it too.  

Orwell would have called it unpersoning, if his imagination had been depraved enough to conceive a need for such a term in a constitutional system.  It was Winston's job in 1984 to revise the news, rewrite or excise the past.  Orwell based the book on the Soviet propaganda machine, erasing disfavored apparatchiks from photos etc.  

This is only the normal amount of hatred we would expect.  It's likely the Romans did not salt the fields of Carthage, but it is believable, true or not.  Cato ended all his Senate perorations with Carthago delenda est, Carthage must be destroyed.  Hating the enemy is normal.  That's right, I said it.  

We all have our priorities.  Ours, as a culture, as a generation, is to destroy the past.  Like the Soviets.  We hate reality.  We know reality by remembering what happens. 

Sadly for me, I do not forget.  It's not a trait that contributes to happiness.  But there it is, whatever it is, hanging like a corpse on a gibbet, stinking and rotting and causing oppression and fear.  The past is always with us, festering, suppurating, until it is faced.  We cannot be facing backwards, angel, but sometimes we must.  Courage to face psychic annihilation, disintegration, or to survive, to thrive, courage to forgive, accept, embrace, be touched.  

I'm not bothering to develop these ideas, here, now.  Each sentence could be an essay.  I expect the diligent reader to contribute to this very one-sided conversation.  You contribute nothing. Silence has its virtues, but passive silence doesn't.  You have the duty of faithfulness.  By now you should have recognized my worth.  Your obligation is to understand that hardly anything I inscribe is actually farce.  So flesh it out.  Case in point: do you suppose this was a digression?  Flesh is out.

Hey.  Jack.  Jack H.  Jack Haych.  Chill dude.  Or are you doing it again, that thing you do, being meta about being meta.  It's sort of hard to take you seriously, with all the games you play.  You just undercut yourself all the time.  Or is it us you're cutting, cutting down, base, base court, down court, down king, come, go.  Oh see, I did it again, I mean you did it.  Or is it me.  Us, we?  Pronoun trouble, again.  That's all folks.  But not.   

The disintegration of his mind is accelerating.  Is there anything we can do, doctor?

But it's another, yet another of their miscalculations.  It's laziness from them of course, and disrespect to you, if it is disrespect.  If you do not deserve respect, you can't really be disrespected.  My distinction is debatable, but I'd say disrespect is an injustice, and if you deserve it, it's appropriate.  So you decide if their laziness is really a problem:

Deadnaming.  Suicide, manslaughter -- homicide, to be used only after the Latin root, "man" -- Homo sapiens; Greek, "same" -- homosexual.  The deadnamee killed the "man", indeed, the homo.  It's a dramatic term, we might say histrionic, deadnaming -- although certainly not hysterical, hystera, "uterus".  But it's more reflexive than illuminating.  

Tranzreformation is not an affirmation, but an execution.  That thing, that dead thing that was so hated, it's dead now, along with its hated name.  

Not a butterfly, metamorphosis, or even a mutant -- mutilation, like a teenager cutting herself with a razor -- is that more a boy or a girl thing.  Which ever, whatever, what ever it was that I was not, am not, and am now, or not.  

The thing that they were, that gender, that sex, that self -- they never were that, and it's dead now anyway, with a dead name, hated, hated enough to slash it to death, rated X for graphic violence and misgendering.  They deny invalidate repudiate kill the past.  As they suppose.  Trying to kill it, kill it dead.  Kill kill kill kill kill kill.  All they have to fear is a prolapse, like a zombie pushing out of its grave.  

It's the same relationship, inverted though, that necromancy would be to resurrection.  Religious ideas, both, the way condemnation has something to do with redemption.  The way degeneration has to do with abortion.  

Penis.  Rosebud.  

J

* William Thomas, formerly

YT

Another undoubted triumph for humanity, enlightenment, diversity, inclusion and equity.  Women's swimming champion Lia Catherine Thomas. She has dominated her sport like Babe Ruth; she's a virtual Jim Thorpe -- won the 500 freestyle by seven seconds.  That's how long the fall takes off a 68-story building.  You can just about make toast in seven seconds. 

In the picture below, the young woman behind her is crying for some reason.  Probably because she just came in at number two.  So close.  Well, seven seconds, maybe, but what should women expect?  Lia is a champion.

Here in this candid shot  

she's adjusting her penis.  That's a real issue for men, a little embarrassing, or at least self-conscious, at least for me, sometimes, and women have to do it too, obviously.  I won't spell it out, because it's not a part of satire, parody or farce.  Well, the 'women too' was parody, but I mean the, what, hygiene?  Grooming?  Comfort.

A tailor might ask a man how he "dresses", right or left.  (So I am spelling it out.)  That would be a boxer situation, rather than briefs.  Each has its advantages.  Briefs provide some support, but you can ride up on yourself, I suppose that's how it would be said, if it needs saying.  Not quite like trying to telescope-in a vacuum hose.  With boxers, you're a little more on display, draped all along one side.  I'm a briefs guy, but if I had to choose, say commando, I'd slightly favor left.  But I'm generally ambidextrous.

Despite whatever impression I might have accidentally made in these pages, I still maintain that the swimsuit area should be generally discrete.  Take Lia, again.

Exibit A

She is wearing black for a reason.  Women know that black is slimming, but that's not her, Lia's, problem.  Black is more modest.  I've noticed this myself.  It visually mutes the male genital bulge.  Sorry to be so blunt.  Lia knows this.  Her penis certainly makes for an entirely different silhouette than … hm, how shall I put it? -- than your mother would make.  Modesty behooves us all.

Lia may still have some vestigial behaviors left over from her bro days.  Does she still manspread, maybe on the swim-team bus? -- take up both seats?  

"Oh I'm so sorry, sister.  I forgot myself.  Tee hee."  

It's a guy thing.  Maybe, airing out the curtains?  Is this appropriate, in her?  Let's find out.  Using my very minimal graphic skills, I've brightened Exibit A so you can see with your very eyes that which the traditional biological female athletes might enjoy on display while sharing the women's locker room with her, Lia.  

La!

Exibit B

It might take a moment to orient yourself.  Hi, I'm Lia, champion female athlete, and this is my penis bulge, and my nuts too, but they're much smaller than they used to be.  Cuz I'm a woman.  

And here she is again, tall and proud.

Hey, presto chango! 

Well.  My.  My my.  

This isn't really my cuppa, but I'd lay odds that Lia is NOT circumcised.  I don't have an expert eye, and stats favor that she IS circumcised, or "cut" as the gays say.  But I suppose her parents were not very traditional, re this american folkway.

[So, um, Lia.  Lia.  Dude.  I get it.  You want to dress like a woman.  But their clothes have a different cut for a reason.  Women, smooth.  Men, bulge.  Your onesie needs a little tailoring, for a little extra room.  You were probably more of a grower than shower, back when you had enough testosterone to get erections.  But you're like a face being smothered by a plastic bag.  It's like something out of science fiction, 'Alien' maybe, with that thing bursting out of that guy's belly.  Just saying.  We can see your dick.]

What I find unfair is that Lia, here, appears not to have bosoms. That is a distinct and unfair advantage, re swimming hydrodynamics.  She might be just naturally flat-chested, or, and I hope not, she suffered the trauma of mastectomy (men, or rather, here, male bodies can have mastectomies).  The Amazons of Herodotus removed the right breast as an advantage in archery.  But Lia is certainly more streamline, slicing through the water more efficiently.  That would explain how she wins — and she's six foot one.

It's probably for convenience that he kept her two last relics of masculinity -- his patronym, "Thomas", and her penis.  Changing either is a hassle.  

*ahem*

Be fair.  He's an okay-looking guy.

Woman, meh.

Is it rude, that I put this guy on display, literally reveal a physical part of himself that he must loath?  Call it rude justice.  He puts himself on display -- fully, as is reported, in the women's locker room.

This is a big dude. The fact that Riley Gaines, a paleowoman -- but no, I retract that. She deserves respect, and will not be a part of my farce. The fact that Riley Gaines tied this man in competition says everything about her.  What it says about him is that he is an above-average male athlete.  He's nothing at all, as a man.  But he knows that.  

It's not that he has mental or spiritual illness.  It's that he thinks it's right to compete against women. 

Why pick on Lia?  Aside from the obvious?  Because, there are merely personal injustices like, obviously, a man competing against women, in certain sports.  Then there is murder.  It's his murders that are the point.  Six of them. 

Yes, yep, that's right.  Corporate responsibility.  What reparations this Tranz owes, to Nashville Christian Children and Adults, I won't say.  But the case is clear.  The logic is irrefutable.  Simply by being her identity, tranz, Lia is guilty.  And by being a prominent public figure, he is an appropriate target.  He asked for it.  I dominate women's swimming!  I rule!  King of the world, queen of the seas.  So he should learn that with great attention comes great culpability.  

Also, as a woman, he is guilty of the Lizzy Borden ax murders.  Logic.  Woke, woke logic.

J

Simplifying

Alright, I have to admit that it wasn't very workable, my insistence on people centering their entire lives and speech patterns around me -- my demand that every-body use my pronouns.  This is still important, but I went too far.  I've matured since then, and I under-stand now that while I wanted my pronouns capitalized, if that's what I wanted -- I forget -- I shouldn't try to change every-one else's pronouns too.  Same thing goes for verbs.  

Just me, what I want for my-self.  That's what america is all about.  And by just me, I mean just you too, from your point of view.  We're all here for just our-selves.  That's clear to me now.  Maturity.  You'd be wrong about that, since it's me who's important, not you.  But I can't make you be right.  And I'm okay with that.  You're not even stupid.  Just human.  

I can only say what I want, and trust that you have the human decency to honor that.  It wouldn't cost you any-thing, to use my pronouns for me.  I'm not making any-thing up, no new words to memorize and learn how to pronounce.  There's no-thing about you calling your-self or other people other things.  What could be more reasonable that that?  Live and let live.  It's all about uniting! -- not dividing.

So here are my pronouns, simplified:

In-stead of he/him/his, please use thhey/to thhis/ours. (Proper usage of the objective case: in-stead of "We want him to come", it is We want to thhis to come; in-stead of "This pronoun applies to him", it is This pronoun applies to to thhis.)

Also, when I am referring to my-self, I/me/my/mine will hence-forth be Usns/you/hher/ours.

And when Usns am included in plural pronouns, please replace we/us/our/ours with wewe/thhe dudes/weuns/i.  (No need for caps.)

Oh, and for my own purposes of personal fulfillment, I will be replacing thhey/thhem/thheir/thheirs, along with it/it/its/its and for simplicity all equivalents, eg, thhat/thhose and thhis/thhese, with fish/fish/fish's/fish's.  Obviously I would not require you to adopt this practice.  It would be unreasonable for me to expect the world to reshape it-self around me and my self-actualization.  

Usns'll have pamphlets printed up to hand out -- you can help -- clarifying this.  And laminated cards, for wallets and to hang from your neck on a lanyard.  The new Harriet Tubman $20 bill will be out in 2030, in Kamala's first term, and Usns'll be lobbying fish hher pronouns be printed on the back.  Discretely of course, because not every-thing is about you.  [Okay.  So "that" etc will not be "fish" unless acting as a sort of pronoun.]

For clarity, Usns won't be lobbying discretely -- Usns'll be very persistent and forceful about fish!  Hher friends at Antifa 

and BLM 

are on-board, and wewe will be loud and proud.  Usns don't have close ties to NARAL, 

and NAMBLA 

will not be welcome.

Usns'll be wanting hher pronouns to be printed discretely.  Not printed discretely, like by the printing press of a small company that does no advertising.  Usns mean that on the bills, the letters that spell out the words will be discrete, like with a small font-size.  Fish will all be in good taste.

You can see that Usns do not tolerate that typically bad academic writing style Usns mentioned not long ago.  Clarity!  Precision!  Fish is why you return to fish pages ... no, these pages -- you can rely on hher.  Oh, hee hee, I mean you can rely on, uh hher? you? ...  no, Usns mean me no you can rely on you -- or do I mean hher, I mean Usns mean Usns mean...  Well Usns'm confused.  But you know what Usns mean. 

My no dang hher usage here is copy-right but not trade-marked.  Feel free to adopt fish for your-self, and share fish.  Social Media could spread fish like wild-fire!  Wouldn't fish be great!?!

You can see Usns've adopted a pleasing humility.  When would Usns ever have admitted Usns was confused, before.  Fish is the hard-won lessons of maturity.  If there are any other small points of confusion remaining in your mind, please feel free to inquire about fish.  Usns'm only here to help, and you can help too.  Fish is the least wewe can do.

J

A Brilliant Plan

Why am I going on so much about this?  I'll just say it.  The Trans Nashville Christian Children Killer.  That's it.  Previous to her spree, if it qualifies as a spree, I had touched it as it arose.  Heh.  Touched on this particular peculiar tranz detail of a generally degenerating culture -- all of a piece with pronouns, riots and cancelled careers.  Just stuff, because life is not supposed to be a smooth road.  But none of that was murder.  

Mass murder takes it to another level.  

The queer apologists, and I think I'm using the term correctly -- formerly it was a slur, but now it's reclaimed, like swampland with condos on it.  Repurposed, like aborted fetus tissue harvested for stemcells, or human skin used for lampshades.  Pragmatic, utilitarian.  Prudent.  

The queer apologists remind us that it's seven, not six but seven victims of this unfortunate occurrence.  Of course it was foreseeable, they remind us, because the real and metatragic victim, of amerikkka's white supremasist patriarchy maga-cis republican ultra toxicity, was driven to her or his ultimate expression of self-assertion by me, Jack H, for obvious reasons of hatred, intolerance, envy, evil, hatefulness, Jesus, penises, and evil.  

The Red Chinese demand an apology for US molesting their perfectly innocent balloon (Go Biden 2024!).  They inform us that we're racists for claiming covid came NOT from Florida but China.  Mao blamed "rightists"; Hitler knew that jews were to blame; Stalin identified the "wreckers"; for Pol Pot it was city-dwellers and anyone who wore glasses.  And from exactly this same playbook, manifesto, the queer lobby identifies the victims as the perps.

Society is to blame. The Establishment, the Man, the magaman, the ultraheteroman, the white male man. Make gay love not proxy war with Russia, but, yes, do. Don't trust anyboomer over thirty. Defund the police. Comrade Napoleon is always right.

It's a brilliant plan.  They deserve to win.  They smart, we dumb. The Killer was a victim.  Seven is our lucky number.  Who are the monsters?  In this our new america, it's anyone who has no difficulty identifying what a woman is.  In Neoamerica, Wokeamerica, to be rational is to be hateful. 

A woman is a human adult who has a paleovagina.  We might say biological vagina, or traditional, or natural, or real, or nontranz.  Very rare genetic anomalies can complicate matters, but untidiness is always the case, everywhere.  If we couldn't count on universal generalities, neither logic nor experience could have validity.  That is satanic: what is perfectly adversarial must end in universal chaos.

Seems like all of a sudden, to speak of pronouns we need to talk about the existential qualities of genitals.  If it's all about vaginas and penises, then it should be either academic or pornographic.  Grammar is the last place we'd expect to find gender.  

English is the only European language that is NOT gendered.  We use figurative language -- Father Time, Mother Nature.  But time and nature are its.  The only gendered nouns are those that identify which of two types of genitals are at issue.  Man/woman, actor/actress, bull/cow.  "Earth" is not masc, the "moon" is not fem.  These things do not have genitals, or gender.  In other languages, nouns do not have genitals, but they have gender: der Mond is NOT male, but it is masc; la terre is NOT female, but it is fem.  

A "tranzman" is NOT a man or male, or feminine, and she is fem.  A "tranzwoman" is NOT a woman or female, or masculine, and he is masc.  Because in English, paleopenises or paleovaginas determine our very few gendered pronouns, exclusively. Those individuals who have had transsexual surgery no longer have genitals, strictly speaking, but they still have a grammatical gender -- they were born with it.

What are genitals then, strictly speaking?  A prosthetic limb is not an actual arm or leg, but it is good to have.  A transplanted arm is an arm, as a transplanted liver is a liver -- good to have.  So, I'm honing in on something that is biological in character.  

Reshaped vaginal tissue, supplemented with additional skin and tendon and cartilage, is not a penis.  A transplanted penis is a penis.  In transexual cases, such a transplant-recipient would be a woman who now has an actual penis, thanks to a donor.  

This would be something like a mouse having a human ear growing from its back.  

Science progressing as it is, a penis might be grown de novo.  I'd expect that transplanted testicles will someday be an option -- rather than the cosmetic, prosthetic ovoids currently provided.  

Again, because this seems to be difficult, a woman with a transplanted penis is a woman.  The way a horse with a transplanted horn is a horse with a horn.  Not a unicorn. It's not that unicorns have horns -- it's that they are magical.  If there were magic, a magical horse might be a unicorn.  But there is no magic.  Science does not transform the nature of a thing.  Unnatural results may accrue, but they are unnatural because they are not authentic.

If gene therapy were to became so sophisticated that all XX chromosomes were changed to authentic XY, and ovaries became or were somehow replaced by testes, and the Skeen glands became and took up the functionality of a prostate, and the feminized brain became testosteronic in its compartmentalization ... etc, well, that would be a male body.  

Male authenticity would become merely philosophical speculation, or a question of theology: is spirit "binary".  Thank you, critical gender theorists, for that term in this context. It is apt.

But for reality as it is, genitals are those organs genetically designed for procreation. They are biologically generative.

For men, soldiers, who have been catastrophically wounded, it is altogether fitting and proper that every surgical means be used, to restore them.  They will never be lessened, by their tragedy.  Such losses, in the performance of duty, can never be repaid.  All we can do is honor what is noble.  

That is the opposite of what I'm talking about. 

I'm talking about what is ignoble.  Their brilliant plan.  The tranz takeover of pronouns is so bizarre that it has normalized gay marriage. Brilliant.  Being white is racist, having a penis is violence, outside-in penises are vaginas. Woke politics is so much more an attack on common sense, let alone on civilization itself, that former extremes wither in comparison.  Genius.

It works because conservatives think there are rules, but we want to be polite, so we are silent.  That's what "acquiesce" means -- "to become quiet".   We were silent until we were unable to speak. 

And we are grateful for what we get.  The sop that the Most Supreme Court has tossed our way re abortionism might have made some of us do backflips of glee, but all that August Body really did was allow some hydrogen peroxide for an open wound.  Ouch, but thanks -- master.

Logic.  Logic logic logic.  Penis penis penis.  Wherever there is a NEO, there must be a PALEO.  Thus, there are no more vaginas, only paleovaginas and neovaginas.  No more "women" -- only prefix-woman, either traditional or tranz.  Tradwomen or tranzwomen.

I must have said it already, years ago by now.  I said we will have no more marriages!  Tranzmarriage hath made me mad.

I'm not done yet.  It's not the words weener or peachie, tee hee, that bring me back like a dog to its vomit.  It's the murders.  

Their plan is brilliant.  The murders were a bit much.  But we are, most of us, too polite to bring them up.  And anyway, the new news is that Trump was indicted.  He's the real criminal.  

J

*Xface

YT

You know, like blackface.  Tranz.  Could be Zface.  But X.  X it out.  How is it different.  Let's say it's a white guy, in blackface.  He's NOT black, but he's attempting to represent, if not simulate, the appearance.  How is it different?  You're not black, not a woman, not a black woman.

Well, there's a surgery, if there is, so not as temporary as blackface.  Although the previously completely obscure hiphop beebop doowop boop boop bedoop, um, artist? performer? personality? bandwagoneer has partway tattooed himself toward his aspirational race.  

Vaudevillians like Al Jolson used burnt cork, easy to remove.  Bert Williams was a black performer who wore blackface.  He wasn't black enough, otherwise.  That's a problem nowadays too, not being sufficiently authentically black, not all BLM and Reparational and Democrat.  There are chemical ways to darken, but that would fade, slough off the skin, or the pill or shot would wear off.  Melanin wouldn't be permanently ramped up in cells.  Like the guy who turned himself blue by supersaturating himself with colloidal silver; he's dead now.  

Whereas amputated organs do not grow back.  We're not lizards, most of us, to regrow tails.  Cal Gov Gavin Newsom, 

The Nightmare of California (now streaming on Peacock), might, as he reportedly said, "creep out of my skin for you like the snake that I am.  That's right, sssstupid, I'm coming for you.  Sssscum."  But non-Silurians (or does he identify as Sleestak?) can't regrow penises.  Penis penis penis.  I enjoy my penis, but I depend on my balls -- like the girl you'd party with, or the woman you'd marry.  

So it's not quite the same.  But that is the nature of all analogies.  If there weren't differences, they'd be the same thing.  Blackface, and tranz surgery.

But they're pretending. They've x'ed out their birth genitals, excised, ex-size, and they're passing as something else -- as the other.  I won't bother to inform you about passing.  The difference is that race-passing was for social advantage in a repressive state, and sex-passing is about dysphoria, a dysfunctional emotional state.  

We should have compassion for those who are sick.  It's a christian and jewish virtue.  But to believe the deluded is to follow them into destruction.  We know what male and female is because we have eyes and hands.  It's not belief, it's fact.  A fact is something that can be demonstrated.  Otherwise it's theory, or opinion, or deception, or delusion, or etc.  As they say, someone with an experience is never at the mercy of someone with a theory. 

So, xface.  Latinx, hispanix, whatever.  Larynx, phalanx, manx, minx, lynx, jinx, latinx.  Latino, ex out the o, O-face.

Xface, a sexual blackface, a pretending to hate the male or female that you are, or actually hating what you are and pretending you're the other thing, or you're something that you just made up, or that you feel, or that you overheard and believed.  We'll hammer out the specifics later maybe, over a sun-dappled brunch of brie and Chardonnay, from Gavin's vineyard.

The Genderfix Bible - all "binary" gender errors corrected! Sample (copyright): "For Gox so loved the world that xe gave xers only begotten donx..."

We haven't been asked to participate in a mass hysteria before ... well, the Salem witch trials ... and the Civil War ... and Covidism.  Stalinist Russia, aside from Stalinism, had Lysenkoism.  The Dutch had tulip-mania.  St Vitus' Dance.  Examples are easy.  Ours now is particularly toxic, because wokism is sexual in nature, down past the genetic level, to spirit itself.  Wrong chromosome, wrong sex, wrong race, wrong god. 

J

I'm Sorry (thing, trigram, opugnia, xher)

I don't know why I did it.  It was wrong.  That thing about my "thing".  It wasn't a typo, like I said — I lied about that.  I did it on purpose.  I'm sorry.  It was thoughtless.  It might even have been cruel.  Toying with you that way.  Low, it was low.  I'm ashamed.  It's bothering my conscience.  But I was weak.  I knew what it would feel like, your hope, all that hope, dashed.  And I did it on purpose, that's what's really so bad.  We all make mistakes.  But this was an "on purpose".  I did it with full awareness.  You must know by now how I am, how I examine things.  You know I will have done that here.  I calculated how you'd be tricked, anticipated your disappointment, and I went ahead and did it anyway.  Inexcusable.

That's how temptation works.  Desire is conceived in the heart.  It should be aborted.  Does the Supreme Court still allow us to get our abortions?  Cuz man oh man do I need one, I mean I needed one.  Too late now.  The monster was born, my thing the monster.  Heh heh.  Gittit?  Cuz my thing is so big.  Huge.  Yeah.  I mean really huge.  Frankly, freakish.  Disgusting and non-functional.  Ugly.  Some sort of genetic mutation like that canadian Gutfeld guy with the gigantic bosoms, is that how you spell bosoms? it's an under-used word.  Boobies, titties, you'd think I'd learn how to censor myself, cuz this is just getting ridiculous, I mean beyond that, pathetic.  Not even close to funny.  What's the matter with me.  Really sick.  Just such bad judgment, and I clearly have some objective gifts, but this is how I use them?  What a waste.  And I'm not even really sorry, what I said before.  Not at all.  I was being insincere.  Yanking your chain, again.  So I deserve what I get, cuz I am incorrigible, unteachable.  Just lying, that's what I was doing.  Like Biden or AOC.

What's with that, "AOC".  Is she important? — this shrill mouth-flapping handwaver?  Another example of Republican incompetence.  "AOC."  Hey, stupid.  Do not use their language.  They do not choose the terms.  We do.  We're the deciders, we control our own language.  Marriage is marriage.  Woman is woman.  Pride is pride.  Choice is choice.  Even gay is happy, although it's too late for that one, if not for all those others.  

Now we need to include adjectives for simple clarity.  Traditional marriage, biological woman, pride of achievement, happy gay, choice to kill a baby...

So, those three-initials of significance, MLK, JFK, BO, BLM, HIV, KKK, etc.  Really, "aoc"?   Her?  It elevates her beyond flattery, given her minimal accomplishments and talents.  Well, Congress is an accomplishment, albeit of party machines and toxic egoism.  And shamelessness is a talent, give her that.  Sometimes it's a skill, perfected by dint of diligent practice.  There may have been a time when she had shame.  Long ago, or really not so long, given her callow age.  

She would not be receptive now to the fact that shame is a virtue.  Shame is the emotion that registers what is socially repulsive, revulsive.  Repugnant, like pugilist or impugn — Latin: repugnare "fight back, oppose; disagree"; from pugnare, "to fight".

So there's a suffix which I may just now be inventing that is more apposite than "ophobia."  Homophobia, islamophobia, etc.  There's a need for the suffix that means to feel not fear, but repugnance.  Something like -opugnia, "to fight, to be willing to oppose".  So, not islamophobia, not a fear of that terrorist cult of Islam.  A repugnance for it — islamopugnia.  

And (yes, I'm going there) not homophobia — homopugnia.  If they're going to label those straights in squaresville, at least be accurate.  Name-calling is sleazy enough.  Lying about it is bidenesque.  And it's not about being homosexual — it's not even a human-normal visceral rejection of the lack of hygiene re sodomy.  Homopugnia is about the public, and successful, attacks on foundational institutions of Judeo-Christian civilization. 

So, not everything they like that we dislike is a phobia. 

And (by the way), not every scandal is a "hyphen-gate", after Watergate. Most would be -aquiddicks, commemorating the cowardice and moral turpitude of young Senator EMK's youthful homocidal Chappaquiddick antics.  Balloonaquiddick, Trans-Nashville-Christian-Children-Killerquiddick, etc.

Aside from partaking more of the virtue of accuracy, this neosuffix also comes equipped with a handy-dandy conjoining vowel, Chapp a quiddick.  Not all suffixes require a conjoining vowel.  So while it's "islam o pugnia", it's not "trans o phobia" or "-Killer a quiddick".  I'd imagine that's because transogender is such an innovated concept.  (If a prefix can become a noun, a noun can be a suffix.  Politics, baby, it's all words.)  

Transophobia just sounds like Bozophobia (more properly coulrophobia, fear of clowns, although more properly, a fear of stilt-walkers).  But with the shared requirement for makeup, bozophobia cuts too close to the ... pubic bone.  Heh.

*ahem*

For those of you whose business it is to observe politics and to comment, from now on "aoc" will be "AO Cortez", like PT Barnum or DB Cooper — hucksters and thieves.  You are Republican, but you don't have to be stupid.  FDR, LBJ — these abbreviations are not mere conveniences.  Franklin or Lyndon would be clear enough as unique identifiers.  The triple monogram ... the trigram is a spotlight, for a virtuoso performer.  Virtuosx.  But it's for a star with real ability, not for the degraded celebrity of social media.  

I point out these issues because it's so basic: the Rectification of Names.  Defining, and defending, the terms. Meaning is real, but it's also rhetorical, with only the reality we give it.  The Constitution for example is either a leaving I mean living breathing document, or it changes not by the corruption of mutation and degeneration, but by the formal process of Amendment.

The Blob is a movie monster of, just, whatever.  That's no way to go through life — as a fat, drunk and stupid language, or government.  Because both, inherently, have vast power.  

The word definition, then.  It means finite.  Finished.  It has a limit, beyond which it is no longer the thing it was.  Language, unlike the Constitution, IS a living breathing thing.  But even new words have their new meanings.  Can you grok it?  Give the oldest syllables the newest kind of meanings.  New vocalizations, either as homophones, or as, um, neophonemes.  Neophoneme is apparently a word that has never been used before.  It is everything it is, a hologram, a YHWH (tetragram[maton]).

It would be easier, but neither does the Trans Nashville Christian Children Killer get her own abbreviation, a ... pentagram.  Unless it's branded into her forehead, in hell.  They won't be speaking much of her anymore, this murdering Tennessee girl and young woman.  It's in poor taste to remind us — opening the wound, or grave, or graves.  We should ignore the fact that she killed and killed and killed and killed and killed and killed, bloodier than Coriolanus.  Coriolpenis, Coriolpeeneo.  

But, point of order.  I just said "this murdering Tennessee girl and young woman..."  Would "this" be correct, politically correct usage?  Genderically received usage?  Or should it be 'these girl and young woman...'  Was she a plural? — they/them, these/those?  No, I remember — she was He/Him.  Pretty conventional.  

Obviously I'm not solid on the newly revealed nuances of biology, or is it sex, or rather gender.  What's the diff between gay and queer, and fag for that matter.  They used to all mean the the same thing.  Gay was the polite word, like Negro used to be.  

It's these invented "pronouns" — first time in recorded history that a pronoun has been invented.  While we're at it, let's invent oxygen and bandersnatches.  Things that are either elementally immutable, or impossibly fantastical.  In this universe, you might have one or the other, but not both, given that universes have laws.  

Is it xe/xher, currently?  Like Pinyin chinese?  I'm more of a Wade-Giles guy, myself.  Mao Tse-tung, not Mao Zedong.  If it's good enough for The Little Red Book, it's good enough for me.  Gimme that old time religion...  Chiang Kai-shek, not Jiǎng Jièshí; Teng Hsiao-p'ing, not Deng Xiaoping ... well, I might be wrong about that one.  But I still haven't given up about the Peking-Beijing controversy.

 

You can't just go changing the rules.  That's cheating.  Debate and vote.  But that's like wanting that old time religion.  Hidebound.  Don't you know?  You can change your spots, your g-spot, reposition it so it's part of a penis, I guess.  I'm a little vague about g-spots.  I don't even have a relationship with my prostate. The gays tell me it's quite the target. It's just getting there that puts me off.

Have I gone too far?  People have to let me know.  But I sure have used a lot of italics.  Must be a record for me.  Like my gigantic thing.  And, bandersnatch.  Another word for sacgina?  Andro-snatch.  

So, as I was saying before, you deserve what you get. You deserve to be tricked and betrayed, because you let it happen. You didn't bother to think it through. You know how I am, but you know that I have limits, as we were just discussing. I will occasionally resort to vulgar language, but it has been considered, used as a part of a persona I have donned for the moment. A guise of my disguise.  You have every reason to know that I would not be showing you my thing ((talk about it, sure, all the time.  It's hideous).  Email me privately.)

I apologize for any misunderstandings.  Mistakes were made.  I hope we can all learn and *move on from this unfortunate matter.  I will be taking some time off to spend with my family.  Thank you, and God bless America. 

J

*For more information, or to offer help, contact JackH@MoveOn.Org