The proposition that a boy can become a girl and girl can become a boy is preposterous. And no I don’t need to use “biological” or “assigned at birth”. It is not compassionate to foster someone’s delusion. Using bastardized language to appear compassionate is helping the delusion manifest. We need to put a full stop on changing our language. There is no such thing as trans in regard to human sexuality/ gender.
Thanks for highlighting this. Most people have no idea this is happening. We are all being manipulated in so many ways. Great point that this enables troubled kid to think changing their sex is the answer to their angst. Its so dishonest and dangerous.
I think the distinction that matters is when transness is part of the news story itself: no glammy selfies or airbrushed images for men invading women’s spaces.
In other circumstances it is well known that 9/9 book jacket photos look better than the author in person and there is no rolling back that human tendency.
This is a slippery slope. What if everybody had to be makeup/ filter free in official pictures and profile shots?
The effects of neotony are well known, and they are a huge factor in the cultural, economic and legal inequalities between men and women. An obvious example being the huge disparity in arrest rates, prosecution and the sentencing gap. Women's naturally more child-like faces creates this sexual inequality/ discrimination and makeup massively amplifies this effect.
Also, men often have no idea who or what they are actually dating thanks to modern makeup and filters. These 'masks' can deceive everyone in society (including women themselves) about your true age/ fertility and state of health.
This grand deception negatively impacts everyone (including women) by creating the delusion that it's possible to be young and fertile well into your 30's and 40's and that the wall does not exist. This delusion wrecks lives and causes unimaginable levels of despair in middle aged women who left everything too late because they thought they could live as 22 year olds for 10 - 15 years straight.
If we banned makeup ('young face') most women would make much more sensible life choices in their youth, because they would not be able to disguise their true biological age and level of fertility. Obviously that's a bit extreme, but having a social convention (as we once did) where heavy/ deceptive makeup is not considered acceptable in the workplace and daily life would work just as well.
A 40 year old wearing heavy makeup, with dyed hair/ hair extensions, padded bra, sculpting underwear and a face full of botox/ plastic surgery is kind of 'trans' if she is passing herself off as a much younger and more fertile woman. This level of extreme deception became normalised and celebrated starting around 30 years ago, and as a consequence we opened the floodgates for a whole society of people wearing all manner of masks, costumes and avatars.
What the whole celebrity / influencer trans thing has done is to hold a mirror up to the shallowness and grotesqueness of the 'modern empowered woman' caricature - as created by feminism, Hollywood and the cosmetics industry. Society lets women get away with such displays of materialism, entitlement, shallowness and vacuity because vagina. And in that sense society is actually treating transwomen who exhibit the same levels of entitlement, vanity and narcissism more humanely by actually criticising or condemning them, rather than affirming them just for being able to consume fashion and beauty products and wear them in public on a daily basis, as if that was some sort of 'achievement' or 'contribution to society'.
"Women’s child like faces explains why men’s crime rates are higher? "
The issue in question is that FOR THE SAME CRIMES women are less likely to be arrested, charged or convicted than men. And if convicted will receive a shorter sentence than men.
Crime rates is a totally separate issue, but seeing as you brought it up... I don't think we can really compare male/ female crime rates until we even the playing field. That would mean ending taxation (which is disproportionately spent on women, even though men pay the bulk of taxes). Welfare and other government programs is just pointing a gun at other people and demanding they hand over a proportion of their wages, but it is not considered a 'crime' because the government allows it. So in a poor neighbourhood the women might have lots of kids with random men which she keeps out of the house so she can claim maximum welfare, while the men of equivalent status are more likely to resort to drug dealing or mugging because that's the only option available to them.
Studies also show that in poor/ high crime neighbourhoods women place a higher value on men who have served jail time and are criminals, deliberately selecting them as partners, in much the same way people in high crime areas often get pitbulls or other 'attack dogs'.
Given that men's role is to provide for and protect women, it is likely that low status men committing crimes (drug dealing, robbery etc) are doing it to support a female partner, with her full knowledge and consent and probably encouragement (she wants more stuff!).
But she usually won't be considered a partner in crime, and only he will go to jail if caught and so only he will show up on crime statistics. The woman may attach herself to another man and have him commit more crimes for her...
This is another example of neoteny, and female privilege in general, and it's why women generally have more options than men in terms of welfare and government programs (shelters etc). And so women do not need to turn to crime like men do.
The proposition that a boy can become a girl and girl can become a boy is preposterous. And no I don’t need to use “biological” or “assigned at birth”. It is not compassionate to foster someone’s delusion. Using bastardized language to appear compassionate is helping the delusion manifest. We need to put a full stop on changing our language. There is no such thing as trans in regard to human sexuality/ gender.
Thanks for highlighting this. Most people have no idea this is happening. We are all being manipulated in so many ways. Great point that this enables troubled kid to think changing their sex is the answer to their angst. Its so dishonest and dangerous.
I think the distinction that matters is when transness is part of the news story itself: no glammy selfies or airbrushed images for men invading women’s spaces.
In other circumstances it is well known that 9/9 book jacket photos look better than the author in person and there is no rolling back that human tendency.
Thanks for this very interesting discussion about an angle on the madness I had not fully considered before.
Have cross posted
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/we-women-will-not-make-it-easy-for
Dusty
This is a slippery slope. What if everybody had to be makeup/ filter free in official pictures and profile shots?
The effects of neotony are well known, and they are a huge factor in the cultural, economic and legal inequalities between men and women. An obvious example being the huge disparity in arrest rates, prosecution and the sentencing gap. Women's naturally more child-like faces creates this sexual inequality/ discrimination and makeup massively amplifies this effect.
Also, men often have no idea who or what they are actually dating thanks to modern makeup and filters. These 'masks' can deceive everyone in society (including women themselves) about your true age/ fertility and state of health.
This grand deception negatively impacts everyone (including women) by creating the delusion that it's possible to be young and fertile well into your 30's and 40's and that the wall does not exist. This delusion wrecks lives and causes unimaginable levels of despair in middle aged women who left everything too late because they thought they could live as 22 year olds for 10 - 15 years straight.
If we banned makeup ('young face') most women would make much more sensible life choices in their youth, because they would not be able to disguise their true biological age and level of fertility. Obviously that's a bit extreme, but having a social convention (as we once did) where heavy/ deceptive makeup is not considered acceptable in the workplace and daily life would work just as well.
A 40 year old wearing heavy makeup, with dyed hair/ hair extensions, padded bra, sculpting underwear and a face full of botox/ plastic surgery is kind of 'trans' if she is passing herself off as a much younger and more fertile woman. This level of extreme deception became normalised and celebrated starting around 30 years ago, and as a consequence we opened the floodgates for a whole society of people wearing all manner of masks, costumes and avatars.
What the whole celebrity / influencer trans thing has done is to hold a mirror up to the shallowness and grotesqueness of the 'modern empowered woman' caricature - as created by feminism, Hollywood and the cosmetics industry. Society lets women get away with such displays of materialism, entitlement, shallowness and vacuity because vagina. And in that sense society is actually treating transwomen who exhibit the same levels of entitlement, vanity and narcissism more humanely by actually criticising or condemning them, rather than affirming them just for being able to consume fashion and beauty products and wear them in public on a daily basis, as if that was some sort of 'achievement' or 'contribution to society'.
Just saying :)
Women’s child like faces explains why men’s crime rates are higher? You may want to come up for air.
"Women’s child like faces explains why men’s crime rates are higher? "
The issue in question is that FOR THE SAME CRIMES women are less likely to be arrested, charged or convicted than men. And if convicted will receive a shorter sentence than men.
Crime rates is a totally separate issue, but seeing as you brought it up... I don't think we can really compare male/ female crime rates until we even the playing field. That would mean ending taxation (which is disproportionately spent on women, even though men pay the bulk of taxes). Welfare and other government programs is just pointing a gun at other people and demanding they hand over a proportion of their wages, but it is not considered a 'crime' because the government allows it. So in a poor neighbourhood the women might have lots of kids with random men which she keeps out of the house so she can claim maximum welfare, while the men of equivalent status are more likely to resort to drug dealing or mugging because that's the only option available to them.
Studies also show that in poor/ high crime neighbourhoods women place a higher value on men who have served jail time and are criminals, deliberately selecting them as partners, in much the same way people in high crime areas often get pitbulls or other 'attack dogs'.
Given that men's role is to provide for and protect women, it is likely that low status men committing crimes (drug dealing, robbery etc) are doing it to support a female partner, with her full knowledge and consent and probably encouragement (she wants more stuff!).
But she usually won't be considered a partner in crime, and only he will go to jail if caught and so only he will show up on crime statistics. The woman may attach herself to another man and have him commit more crimes for her...
This is another example of neoteny, and female privilege in general, and it's why women generally have more options than men in terms of welfare and government programs (shelters etc). And so women do not need to turn to crime like men do.
So your argument is actually backs up mine :)
There was an argument in there somewhere? Golly.