This footnote by Amia Srinivasan, taken from her book, the Right to Sex, poses the question in a useful way. It is a hard question that is part of the psychosexual pre-history of our times. I will feel I have satisfied my purpose as I writer when I have answered it.
What I like about the framing is the way at looks at two pieces by the same author and uses it as a lens to look at the way the world change. Here are two of my favorites: salon.com/2005/09/20/kun…
The story told in Srinivasan's sequence is in a way the same story told in mine. This is the story that hasn't quite been told, merely acted out by the culture industries.
The question is not hard in itself, it just becomes hard because of all the ways the culture has become involuted, but the work of writing is to master those involutions in such a manner as to make them straight them again
The rhetoric of the prior tweet is sure to be parsed as illustrative. And it is!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
First, the ACLU's lead trans rights litigator admitted before the Supreme Court that there is no evidence to support the claim that chemically castrating children reduces suicide.
Today, the incoming president of the medical lobby that creates standards of care for the gender industry is published stating that cutting off the breasts of teenage girls caught up in the delusion that they are boys isn't suicide prevention either.
And yet California is suing a hospital for complying with federal mandates to stop transing minors.
BREAKING: A detransitioned woman who received a "gender affirming" double mastectomy at the age of 16 just received a $2 million medical malpractice judgment from a jury in New York state.
We brainwashed hundreds of thousands of unstable young people to believe that chemically castrating and dismembering themselves is their only way to become their true selves and avoid suicide and that anyone preventing them from inflicting the ultimate sexual violence on themselves is a Nazi who wants to kill the children he’s protecting from the ultimate sexual violence. Of course they will threaten and commit violence.
Colorado just passed a law forcing every private insurer in the state to cover the cost of cheek implants, lip augmentation, nose jobs, and breast implants (among other elective cosmetic procedures) for one group of legally privileged people -- men who claim to be women and women who claim to be men
It's literally against the law in Colorado not to force every insurance customer to bear the cost of the elective castration or nose job of any man who claims to be a woman
No. A man gets breast implants covered by insurance because for him it is lifesaving and medically necessary care. A woman getting breast implants would be merely cosmetic.
All the hard won lessons of decades were thrown in the trash when the failed nostrums of the 1970's were rebranded by a new generation of activists, yielding the same results they did the first time around because deranged and dysfunctional ideas inexorably generate failure.
A new layer of dysfunction and delusion was, however, added to the old manias -- transgenderism.
On SNL, it's a joke. In reality, the sorority sisters failed in their federal lawsuit and the Washington Post wrote a weepy feature story about the man who joined the sorority and prevailed in federal court despite claims that he had a visible erection while staring at his sorority sisters portraying him as the world's most vulnerable victim