Jessica Yaniv and the Return of the Cooing Doves

Jenn Smith

It has been a while since I was last published in either the mainstream or the alternative press, but with the current furor over the Jessica Yaniv case I thought it would be important to interject a transgender perspective that is at once critical of the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal (BCHRT) and the fiasco currently unfolding there involving the transgender identified Yaniv, while at the same time cautioning the reader about getting distracted by prevailing narratives that take our focus off bigger issues.

Set right here in my home province of British Columbia (indeed centered only 20 minutes from where I live), the Jessica Yaniv story has become far too bizarre, expansive, and convoluted to hold my attention in all of its particulars.

The story has suddenly gone global because of the strangeness and apparent outrageousness of a transgender person that claims to be a woman despite having male genitalia and who is suing a large number of biological women because they refused to perform a Brazilian wax around Yaniv’s groin.

The media has been focusing on the fact that Yaniv is a pre-op transgender that still has male genitalia, as if this disqualifies him personally from being classified as a “woman.”

Yet this same media constantly refers to Yaniv using female pronouns, and also seem blissfully unaware of the fact that the vast majority of MTF transgenders still have male genitals – even the prettiest ones.

Coverage of Yaniv’s story has been massive recently, particularly in the conservative press. More and more keeps coming out about Yaniv’s sordid past and strange proclivities, such as the alleged luring of young girls into sexual conversations and a bizarre obsession with female sanitary napkins.

The more I read about Yaniv and the more interviews I saw with Yaniv, the more convinced I became that Yaniv may be suffering from mental health issues.

If my suspicions are true and Yaniv is somebody with mental health problems, that would mean the media is currently having a field day beating up a mentally ill person, which while understandable is perhaps not good form. Whether or not Yaniv indeed has mental health issues does not excuse Yaniv’s abysmal actions, but it should inform our actions in terms of what we focus on.

Despite the fact that I, as a transgender identified activist, am well-known for criticizing the most intrusive and destructive transgender laws and policies while defending women’s rights, I have reached a saturation point with the unending stream of lurid Yaniv stories and accusations – I am at a point where I now must say, “enough, can we get back to the macro issues here?” 

The micro or person-specific issues have to be ironed out by the proper authorities (police, mental health workers, etc.), the rest of us should be interested in the macro implications of what the Yaniv case is telling us.

The Yaniv case has a lot of similarities – in terms of how it has been treated by the public and the press — to the Karen White case in the UK – a case that saw a transgender-identified male (White) put into a women’s prison, where White allegedly immediately began raping women inmates.


Whatever Yaniv has been doing recently or over the past few years, we have to come back around to the fact that Yaniv is actually not the problem. The MSM want you to believe that Yaniv is the problem, just like they wanted people in the UK to believe Karen White was the problem there. Neither one of them were reflective of the real problem, they were merely symptoms — the real problem is a system that has been founded upon a denial of the importance of physical reality that caters to such things happening in the first place.

The Yaniv case (like the Karen White case) reflects the dangers of untethering your laws and policies from knowable, testable, shared physical reality.

We now have lawyers debating the meaning of “a Brazilian” or a “Brozillian” in the BC Human Rights Tribunal hearing for Yaniv, and saying that “Brazilian has a specific meaning”; but what should be debated in this case instead is the word “WOMAN” and the fact that “WOMAN” has a specific meaning — a very important meaning. 

We would not have to debate the meaning of “brozillian” etc. if we had stayed tethered to our previously sound KNOWLEDGE of what a woman is.

We have always known that a woman is an adult human female (with a nod to Posie Parker in the UK and the dictionary).  The word “woman” is informed by physical reality and a specific identifiable thing in nature that existed long before there was a word to identify it and which has been known to humanity since the dawn of time. 

That physical, biological thing gives us the word; it is not the word that gives us the thing.  The word “woman” does not inform reality; it is reality that informs the word “woman.” A woman is not an illusion. A woman is not an appearance.

As the East Indians all know, appearances are not reality, illusion is not reality: that is Maya. A woman is not an appearance or an illusion, a woman is a specific thing, and we all know it. And all these people that have surrendered the word “woman” and its long understood meaning are partially to blame for what is happening now. And now they are wheeling out the big propaganda guns again — the same magical propaganda guns that helped blast holes in reality and get us here in the first place.

We are now seeing a return of what I coined over two years ago as the transgender “cooing doves.”

video is now making the rounds featuring super sexy transgender sensation Blaire White (featured in the title art), who has arrived on the scene to save us all from that nasty ‘ol bad trans Jessica Yaniv. 

I once labeled White a “cooing dove” (I could have just as easily used the term “purring sex kitten”) in order to describe how such pretty transgender figures were being used as a propaganda tool to sooth and convince a reluctant public regarding changes in laws and policies. Like a transgender version of Elizabeth Montgomery, with a tinkling sound and twitch of the pretty nose, White appears on the screen sucking suggestively on a lollipop, jiggling silicone breasts in a low cut top, and tells us Yaniv is not a “real trans,” and that White will now vanquish the mean troll “fake trans” that “does not even try to look the part,” and save women from such terrible creatures in the future by speaking incantations of “common sense.”

Mesmerized by Blaire White’s witchy gender transitioning powers (and extensive cosmetic surgery), women en masse begin dropping their guards, while thinking “but she sure looks like a real woman, surely she needs our help?”

Meanwhile, male talk show hosts like Steven Crowder and other horny (albeit repressed) media people will eagerly rush to interview White again and drool dropped-jawed at how much White looks like a “real woman,” while at the same time thinking things like “if I was in jail …. Blaire would do just fine,” although most would never admit it.

I am sorry if this last comment offends anybody, but there are a legion of men out there that think just this way. White does not have a half-million followers because White is so smart; White has a half-million followers because of sexual illusion.

I suspect we will soon see Blaire White’s transgender friend Theryn Meyer doing a version of the same shtick in Canada and maybe Paris Lees in the UK, all cooing, batting their pretty transgender eyes, wiggling their noses and fake boobs, and talking about how they are “real trans” women that have come to save everybody from the mean old fake trans.

But don’t let them do it to you again. The problem exposed by the Yaniv case is, and always was, allowing the notion that a male can be a female (a.k.a., a man can be a woman).

It is not possible no matter how pretty a male is. It is an illusion. It is Maya. Maya is not reality. Such breaches of privacy, personal autonomy, and security for women that the Yaniv case has shown us cannot be prevented in the future without a recourse to absolute truth and physical reality, because you cannot write things like “men must be super feminine and sexy to be considered a woman” into laws and guidelines designed to protect women.

This is an argument I have been making in my controversial public talks for two years, and for which I have been thoroughly and deceptively demonized by mainstream media and LGBTQ organizations


It was the surrender of truth and physical reality that got us here in the first place and it is only a return to truth and reality that will guide us back to sanity. We have been the victims of a magician’s illusion. It is time to finally reveal the magician’s secret: the secret is that not only does the magician not saw the pretty woman in half on the stage, but that the woman is in fact a man and no body parts have been severed whatsoever.


As a transgender person myself I can tell you it is okay to be trans and to recognize your biological sex. It is okay to be a man. It is not a shame to be the sex you were born, even if you choose to dress and express in ways associated with the opposite sex. As for changerooms etc., it is not women that need to allow feminine males into their spaces, it is men. So can we please get back to focusing on the big issue, and not allow ourselves to be fooled again by the re-emergence of the “cooing doves.”
(Note: The aforementioned Posie Parker recently made an excellent short video discussing this subject from a woman’s viewpoint and it is well worth watching).

Jenn Smith is a 54 year-old transgender identified male (biologically male) with degrees in history and political science. Jenn is a writer, a public speaker, and a political activist, He lives in British Columbia, Canada, where he has been fighting on the political front-lines for over two years to protect vulnerable children from being confused and indoctrinated by transgender ideology in schools, and for the rights of parents to shield their children from this ideology. He has also battled to protect women’s rights and safe places, and warned of the dangers transgender ideology poses to freedom of speech. He can be contacted via his blog or his Facebook page.

can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

OffGuardian does not accept advertising or sponsored content. We have no large financial backers. We are not funded by any government or NGO. Donations from our readers is our only means of income. Even the smallest amount of support is hugely appreciated.

newest oldest most voted
Notify of

I just thought I’d add an another piece of fake transgender news just in – I lived for awhile at the end of the street where the alleged axe-wielding transwoman went crazy in a 7/11. One story said the crazy behaviour was due to hormonal treatment, while others came up with other BS explanation for it.

You can tell she’s a biological woman in the video.

Now they’re telling us she’s de-transitioning in jail. LOL.


Evie Amati is a transwoman – a biological male, who has now decided that they wish to transition to a man again.


You mean they told us she’s a transwoman and now she’s de-transitioning.

I said when I first learnt of this ludicrous hoaxery a year or so ago that Evie was a biological woman (it’s always reasonably obvious, isn’t it, unless the person is a Thai Kathoey or similar – though admittedly transition processes are becoming more sophisticated and it probably helps the younger you are) and I had to laugh when I now see they’re telling us she’s de-transitioning. It’s truly farcical just like the Jessica Yaniv farce.


Do you really think that “transitioning” means having any surgery? Only a tiny percentage of transgender people have any surgery, and in Australia there is no requirement to have surgery in order to change sex on your birth certificate.
I don’t see why you have such a problem believing this.
A transgender woman is a biological male.





Yes I know that a transwoman is a biological male. What I say is that Evie Amati is a biological woman. The story they spun about her being a transwoman is false (I said this about a year ago) and now the de-transitioning story they’re spinning is false too – because she has always been a woman – biologically and any other way.

You can tell she’s a biological woman from the video they showed before she went to jail (allegedly) and where she is now allegedly de-transitioning.

It’s pretty straightforward, andy, they spin loads and loads of false stories.


My sincere apologies, Andy. I posted on FB about Evie being a biological woman and someone told me they knew her pre-transition and she is, indeed, a transwoman. However, when I asked if the axe-wielding was real the person didn’t respond so I have no reason to doubt in that regard and that really is clear. OMG! They just snow is in fakery so much it’s hard not to get carried away with it.

Frank Speaker
Frank Speaker

Elsewhere on this increasingly bizarre planet, finally some common sense is being applied where biology trumps gender!


I now expect severe retaliation against the IAAF and the Swiss by the usual actors for being so “hateful”, “racist”, etc.


That is certainly good news Frank, a step in the right direction, although looking at it more closely reveals that it is less than perfect. In the case of Semenya of course the person cannot help what they were born as, but on the other hand the authorities have known about this for ten years. The other shocking point is that all three podium places at the 2016 Rio women’s 800m, were taken by athletes with XY chromosomes – Semenya, Wambui and Niyonsaba, all thletes who would have gone through a male puberty.
The IAAF has also not banned these athletes from all events, only ones between 400m and 1 mile.
I would like to see sports categories divided on the basis of chromosomes, as part of the biological passport which all elite athletes have to have.

the pair
the pair

i should have known the author was canadian; i never heard the laughable term “east indians” until i moved here. it’s especially ironic given the article’s focus on linguistic realities. you can just say “indians”. if a trans “woman” with a penis shouldn’t insist on being called “she” then the natives here shouldn’t be called “indian” because some eurotrash psychopath labeled them as such circa 1492.


Names identify and distinguish groups of people in colloquial usage; they are not assigned by psychopaths for evil intent or laughable purposes. Names evolve over time and sometimes become obsolete or evolve due to social changes; sometimes they don’t.
No, you can’t just say ‘indians’ if you wish to identify a disparate group of people for purposes of description.
‘Indian’ was the name used to identify North American native people, and was and in many cases, still is, used by them to describe themselves in both Canada and the States.
‘West Indian’ is the name used for Caribbean Black-mixed-with-everything-else people (and is used by them to describe themselves and even white people) who come from the West Indies (itself not a laughable name).
East Indian is the name used to distinguish people who come from their home country India from other Canadian people described as Indians.
Then of course, there’s the East Indies, but East Indians don’t come from there.
Moving to another country with different terminology and linguistic usage can be quite confusing; I do sympathize, but understanding the culture is much of the experience.


I would like to suggest that Flaxgirl is spamming this topic, because the articles which have been posted by Flaxgirl have nothing at all to do with the JY article.
Please remove them.


Apologies. I really only meant to post the one comment pointing out the similarities between JY and the Frankfurt story but I kept adding to the Frankfurt comment as I found more things out. If you click the down arrow at the bottom of my first comment it rolls all the other comments up. Just to let you know OffG are not super strict about staying on topic and obviously I didn’t just bring in Frankfurt out of nowhere.


Actually, andyoldlabour, it occurred to me that as you use the word “spamming”, you don’t understand my reasoning for including the Frankfurt incident in my original comment where I compare JY and Frankfurt. The original meaning of spam is unwanted advertising emails. Obviously Frankfurt is not that. So what do you perceive my reason to be for including Frankfurt in my comment and why do you object to it rather than see any value in it?


Andy, I believe you are simply making the assumption that a significant number of news sources telling the story is testimony to its veracity. The evidence shows otherwise. In fact, what the evidence generally shows is that each news outlet varies the story so that the anomalies multiply. I have to say your linked articles provide a fantastic way to illustrate this phenomenon.

Irish Times
“A 78-year-old woman was also shoved by the man, but she fell before reaching the edge of the platform.”

The Guardian
She added that the man had intended to push a third person on to the track, “but she was able to defend herself”.

… the attacker also tried to push another man onto the tracks as the Intercity Express train was approaching, but the would-be victim managed to avoid falling onto the track.

The 40-year-old suspect attempted to push a third person but failed.

The Mirror
Picture caption – Police say the man may have tried to push a third person onto the tracks
Text – The police spokeswoman said the man tried to push a third person onto the track but the woman managed to defend herself.

Have only seen anything like the following in the Mirror.
“Another witness said the station was “full of children” at the time, and the train conductor was screaming.”

If you think that there is any reason to believe the story other than the fact that it is published by so-called “respectable” media, please tell me what it is.

Frank Speaker
Frank Speaker

Andy, to help you, that kind of behaviour is called trolling. I agree, it’s annoying, and that’s the purpose of the troll.


Cheers Frank, yes I did use the wrong term. It could have been frustration of course.


So what’s the link between JY and unnamed mother and son pushed off train platform in Frankfurt by an Eritrean?

Both stories are improbable and the reporting contains anomalies … and we see an AGENDA, don’t we? A BIG AGENDA, A BIG BUTTON-PUSHING SITUATION.

Screenshots of text conversation with no datestamp
The inappropriate use of the word “retorted”
The shoddy reporting generally with details you’d expect missing



Why does it say “it was possible to arrest him while he was still in the station”? Why would this be pointed out – isn’t it normal to be able to arrest people in stations?

Why do they not know for sure where the suspect is from? Why is he still only a suspect?

Why were six platforms closed for several hours?

Why are absolutely no names and no details even of the station given?

Why does it say, “German police have said”? Why, in this digital, big brother age, is everything so unclear?

Why does it say:
“Witnesses told police a man had approached the woman from behind without speaking and pushed her on to the track.”? What about the boy?

“Passengers waiting for trains in Germany are being advised to scan the platform for distressed or troubled faces and to stand at least two metres away from the platform edge.”
Doncha love it?


And in the second case, at least, if not both cases, they’re playing on FEAR. Oooh, platforms are dangerous, somebody might push us onto the tracks and we might get killed by a high-speed train.


I missed the picture caption. It says Frankfurt’s main train station. Frankfurt’s main train station? Hello? You don’t say “Frankfurt’s main train station”, you give the name which happens to be Frankfurt (Main) station (the full name of Frankfurt is Frankfurt am Main) – but they haven’t capitalised Main and they’ve put the possessive with Frankfurt so it’s a generic reference rather than denoting Frankfurt (Main). So high speed trains go whizzing through Frankfurt’s main train station do they? Frankfurt’s not a city they always stop in or perhaps the high-speed train is going to stop at another station in Frankfurt, not Frankfurt (Main) but a lesser station?

OMG! This is unreal.


Just looked it up. It looks as if all ICE (InterCity Express) trains that go in Frankfurt’s direction, in fact, either terminate or start there – seems like a bit of an interchange. Perhaps the speed the train was going as it was pulling in or pulling out of the station was enough to kill the boy though certainly the way it is expressed is as if it was going at speed.

“The boy was hit by a high-speed ICE train and killed instantly.”


Frankfurt (Main) Hauptbahnhof(for short HBF) translates to:

Frankfurt (no translation needed)
(Main) (name of the river where the city is located at)
Haupt- (main)
bahn- (train)
hof (station)

Haupt-(main) has nothing to do with the Main river. You don’t even pronounce the name like the english word main.
The stations name is “Frankfurt (Main) HBF” because there is more than one city called Frankfurt for example: “Frankfurt an der Oder” whose train station is named “Bahnhof Frankfurt (Oder)”.


Looked up the story in SMH.

“… just before 10am at the country’s biggest train station, a man on the platform suddenly pushed a 40-year-old woman and her eight-year-old son into the path of an oncoming inter-city train from Dusseldorf”

If you look up Monday’s schedule from Dusseldorf to Frankfurt the only train that might fit involves a change at Cologne (in which case wouldn’t it really be the Cologne to Frankfurt train?) and it arrives at 10.13am not shortly before 10am.



Oh dear, I need to be careful. There are a number of things that show stories are fake but I need to be more careful and not just grab at anything. There was a train arriving at 9:48 so I guess that fits “shortly before 10am”, however, there are ample other things that indicate fake.


But really why not say the 9:48 from Dusseldorf in any case?


Hello, thanks for the article. At the end it says ” it is not women that need to allow feminine males into their spaces, it is men.” As a straight male I have never thought about this and in my ignorance did not realize this is an issue. But I guess it is? Is this part of why were are here now? Because men have made non-straight males feel they are not welcome in the bathroom/changeroom?

I don’t know but as a straight male I now take advantage and use “women’s” washrooms when needed. (single person ones, not actual women’s washrooms yet) If people trans or otherwise can pick their gender and washroom why can’t I? If someone says something I can say they are discriminating against me.


I made a point earlier that this “event” shows evidence of fakery, eg, the alleged screenshots of a text conversation shows no timestamps and I also said it seems as if it has a button-pushing agenda. George agreed on the seeming agenda but no one has responded to my question of whether text conversations ever don’t show timestamps.

There’s been lots of discussion about transgenderism though.

I rest my case.


Just to add: of course, it’s a good thing to discuss the issue if it needs discussing but it’s a great problem if the discussion is triggered by fakery. That is a very serious problem.

I simply do not believe all this stuff allegedly going on in Germany. I haven’t looked at it closely enough to judge but it seems so improbable and thus likely to be fake and it really frightens me as I think it harks back to Nazism and WWII. It is very, very frightening.

When I first started to realise news was being faked I immediately thought of Nazi Germany. It occurred to me that what’s happening is the exact opposite but the same in effect – I can just imagine many Germans saying, “Hey, they’re killing people in gas ovens” and being ignored, rubbished and VILIFIED. Now when I say to people, “Hey, they’re NOT killing the people they say are being killed,” I get ignored, rubbished and VILIFIED – “How dare you! People died! If you came round to my house and told me my son didn’t die I’d punch you in the face! How dare you!” The taboos around death are very dangerous. You need to disengage from that taboo if you wish to know the truth. Ultimately, it’s heading in the same direction. The novel, Maestro, I’ve just finished focuses on the character of an Austrian pianist married to a Jewish singer who realises too late the reality of what was going on and perfectly illustrates my fear.

Please, I beg you, scrutinise all instances of alleged killings which may have a push-button agenda or any news at all where an agenda might exist.

Just a quick scan of the various reporting of the mother and boy pushed off a train platform shows the words “alleged” and “German police have said”. Why so uncertain?


I don’t know any Marxist who is pro this nonsense so If love to know which (Trotskyist) professor would have made this popular amongst the rich herd

Gezzah Potts

Just read a most illuminating story on Sputnik News about Mz Jessica Yaniv who they report has allegedly made vile, racist comments about Sikhs and Muslims, and who comes across as just a vicious, attention seeking narcissist, as well as being a bully and control freak.
The sort of person most would avoid like the plague, irrelevant of what sex they are or how they define themselves.

Question This
Question This

Indeed there are numerous stories all over the net regarding this attention seeking pervert. the very fact he has had the audacity to make a human rights complaint really does do a disservice to people genuinely suffering transgender dysphoria. Which should be treated with sympathy as a psychological issue not a physical one.

Gezzah Potts

Just comes across as a really nasty person, and that he appears to have deliberately targeted immigrant workers to get his private parts shaved, knowing they would probably decline. Says all you need to know how much of a lowlife and manipulative person Yaniv is.
On a tangent Q.T, its good to be sceptical about things online, tho hope you find useful information on the Neoliberalism Softpanorama site. Whole subsections just on the role of the media alone.
Hope your day goes well.

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins

Chuckle, I’ve said it before & i’ll say it again Gezzah, surely you mean . . .

Neoliberalism SOFTPORNORAMA !

Lol, sleep well 🙂


The number of trannies in the UK was estimated at over 130,000 in 2018.
There was an estimate of 700,000 for the US, but that dated back to 2011.
But it probably all depends how you define it.


it probably all depends how you define it.


If a “transgendered person” is defined as “a man trapped in a woman’s body”, or “a woman trapped in a man’s body”, then the number of such people is zero, because these ideas are inherently self-contradictory and impossible.

On the other hand, if a “transgendered person” is defined as “a person who believes they are transgendered”, then the numbers are rising rapidly, as the fashion becomes increasingly popular. Who wouldn’t want to be the guaranteed winner of the Oppression Olympics?


I’m going to define myself as a zebra next week.
The week after that, I’m going to define myself as a lamp post.


Question This
Question This

Oh Jesus.

I have economic dysphoria i identify as a billionaire but have no money, please donate now to my cause.


Great article. I love reality and Jenn Smith!


‘To reduce the population by creating sterile human beings.’
So where’s the conspiracy?
When someone takes the hormones they need for “treatment”, they are prescribe expensive medication for life, one that requires lots of medical attention. These people are cash cows for the medical industry. Unfortunately, there are not a lot actual transgender people in the world today. So why not make more? I think that big pharma is shilling youth forums, and paying off doctors and therapists to convince people that they need these hormones.
The average trans person, when discussing their time before transition, fits a simple mold. An awkward nerdy teenager who doesn’t act like a stereotypical manly guy and doesn’t fit in with jocks and “tough guys”. However, that description probably describes a large portion of the population. That’s where the medical company’s take advantage. By convincing completely normal and healthy people that the need help during a low point in their lives. High school sucks, but once you leave it gets better. University and the real world isn’t high school. But pharmaceutical companies are convincing people that the problem isn’t that high school sucks, but instead they are suffering from a serious medical problem, and they need treatment now.
On the off chance circumstances actually warranted it, it would be a lot easier to help a boy who thinks he’s transgender by giving him testosterone than it would be to give him female hormones and hundreds of thousands of dollars of cosmetic surgery??
How much of this whole craze is caused by low testosterone due to soy and xenoestrogen consumption from plastics? Infecting our water?
Or, let’s go further, how much of this is caused, perhaps, by the general state of our nutrition and food supply? We have GMOs, vaccines, chemtrails, and virtually a whole rash of electromagnetic “wash” that is bound to affect human physiology, inclusive of sexuality. Not the mention the odd thing that “trans people” are given estrogen rather than testosterone?
I wouldn’t know if this is a pattern or not, but what’s disturbing is that there appears to be a pattern, and why not capitalize on and attempt to drive the phenomenon, and increase profits from what may be an “environmental problem” which Big Pig pharma and its chemical-industry allies in “agribusiness” might be causing in the first place? And, if one grants that high octane speculation, then one has to ask if indeed the pattern is correct: is there a trend to force feminization on such people through lifelong female hormone prescriptions, rather than masculinization through male hormone injection?

Dr Michelle Cretella hits the nail on the head:

>> “The issues of gender reassignment would seem to be ready made for an unstable parent, double bonus when that parent finds an equally unstable medical professional.
Child Abuse: Munchausen’s Syndrome By Proxy was identified by the FBI Behavioural Science Unit in the 1980’s. <<.

(..) What is apparent, from such first-hand accounts, is that transgender activists have created a narrative — a script — that is being promoted in the mental-health establishment, and the online transgender community then acts as Pied Pipers leading vulnerable youth toward “transition.”
Teenagers who immerse themselves in online communities are often socially isolated — treated as outcasts at school or otherwise alienated from the majority of their real-life peer group — and this isolation makes them especially vulnerable to those who seek to influence them. By identifying as transgender, these isolated teens may easily gain a sense of belonging that is lacking in their day-to-day interactions with peers.
Synthetic communities appeal to adolescents because group membership is a source of identity at an age when young people are struggling to define themselves as individuals. The greater a teenager’s feelings of alienation, the more outlandish their chosen identities are likely to be. Young people who are basically happy with their family and social lives, and optimistic about their futures, are as unlikely to announce they are “genderqueer” as they are to become radical Muslims. However, the ordinary emotional turbulence of adolescent life is such that even a popular and relatively well-adjusted teenager may at times be vulnerable to exploring synthetic communities. A growing body of research indicates that anxiety and depression are correlated with higher levels of social-media usage, and the association of rapid onset gender dysphoria with intense online involvement is almost certainly not coincidental:
Reports online indicate that a young person’s coming out as transgender is often preceded by increased social media use and/or having one or more peers also come out as transgender. These factors suggest that social contagion may be contributing to the significant rise in the number of young people seeking treatment for gender dysphoria. . . .
Young people can find plenty of in-group validation online. There is an incredibly positive climate around being trans in many places on the Internet. . . .
Young people on reddit and other social media sites explain that they started wondering whether they were trans because they enjoyed creating opposite-sex avatars in online games and liked the clothing or hairstyles of the opposite sex. (..)


“A video is now making the rounds featuring super sexy transgender sensation Blaire White (featured in the title art)…”

There’s something about her that reminds me of Telly Savalas. Maybe it’s the hair.

Seamus Padraig
Seamus Padraig

Sorry, but ‘gender’ is for French nouns; we human beings are grouped by sex instead, and there are two sexes only: male and female. If you’re unsure as to which you are, and you really just can’t bring yourself to look between your own legs, then there are labs that can check your chromosomes for you.

I have had it with the Cultural Marxists and Postmodernists who insist that homosexuality, for example, is biological, while one’s sex is merely a ‘social construct’. Their contrary-to-reality claptrap makes me think of O’Brien in 1984, telling Winston Smith that “two plus two equals five”. They are spreading malicious lies, and they are doing it to destabilize our civilization and distract us from the crimes of our masters.

Enough is enough!


Our psychotic omnicidal civilisation: built on genocide after genocide; war after war; that has murdered every indigenous person it ever met; raped and enslaved the rest of the globe and used its resources and peoples as nothing but a tax and rent farm; is racist, sexist, white supremacist, ethnocentrically exceptionalist and patriarchal to the core; that has all but destroyed the environment, and murdered by debt money countless species to maintain our entitlement; poisoned everything with its instrumentally rational values; and severely curtailed any real chance of prosperous survival for future generations so we can have unhindered bourgeois consumerism now …that murderous abomination of a civilisation?

Yep, them cultural Marxists and postmodernists (made up bullshit terms that assuredly point out a dearth of understanding of critical theory and post-structuralism; etc) …they sure fucked it up for the rest of us entitled Eurocentric Anglophone white folk by pointing this out. We were doing so well up to the sixties. That postmodernist (if we are playing hard and fast with categories) Frantz Fanon really upset the patriarchate order by pointing out Europe was built on the wealth of Africa and the enslavement of its people. Let’s put all the criticism under two convenient made-up labels and get back to traditional nuclear family orientated genocide and ecocide of the planet and its racially inferior peoples uncriticised.

That civilisation?

Question This
Question This

Bravo I salute you sir. (hope i got the noun right)

Seamus Padraig
Seamus Padraig

Bravo I salute you sir. (hope i got the noun right)

Thanks. And yes: you did get the noun right–at least based on the last time I looked between my own legs!


“Sorry, but ‘gender’ is for French nouns;…”

Yes, and sorry for it the French certainly should be. But

“we human beings are grouped by sex instead, and there are two sexes only: male and female.”

is about as close to scientific bullshit as one can defecate in public and not be charged with rampant circumstantial bestiality.


Never heard of intersex, Seamus?

There is the language definition of gender but there’s another one applying to people:

either of the two sexes (male and female), especially when considered with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones. The term is also used more broadly to denote a range of identities that do not correspond to established ideas of male and female.

My goodness! There are transgender people in probably every culture and always have been just as there have always been people attracted to those of their own sex. I have a friend who is more-or-less a lesbian but has had relationships with men and as far as “women” go tends to prefer transmen. I’ve read the singer, Beth Ditto, tends to prefer transmen too. There are many different preferences and inclinations – it’s a diverse world.

Question This
Question This

There are transgender people in probably every culture

Any examples of saan peoples of southern Africa having transgenders? I suspect not, when you have more important things to worry about you probably don’t question the laws of nature.


The laws of nature? There are many things in nature that aren’t the “norm”. Nature is unbelievably diverse.

Can’t find any of saan but below are links to examples of transgender among other African peoples, indigenous Colombian and native American.




Question This
Question This

I’m sorry what are you attempting to prove with the links?

Firstly these are written by western liberal journalist with a transgender agenda certainly the first one is literally nonsense.

Secondly i said complex societies well these are still complex human societies, its kind of embarrassing that these liberal progressives are being so blatantly racist as to imply that these tribes are some how ‘primitive’ (for want of a better word) examples of transgenderism in nature LOL. The only difference between them & you & me is our reliance on technology, they actually may have a more complex society LOL.

The Saan people are a remarkable ancient race of people (they have my deepest respect) that up until 100 years ago had probably maintained an uncorrupted hunter gatherer culture since the beginning of their arrival in southern Africa, tens of thousands of years ago, sadly their culture is all but gone because of the western corruption of Africa with their indigenous land rights taken away from them. I’m confident you wont find any example of Saan trandgenderism.


I think I can respectfully agree to disagree, Question This. I think there’s no point continuing discussion. Happy to leave it here.


If a female is lesbian, then they are attracted to other females (not transwomen), and if they are more or less lesbian and have relationships with men – human males – then they are bisexual. If however these lesbians have relationships with human females and transmen, then they are indeed lesbians, because transmen are in fact human females.
I have no problem with other people’s sexuality or how they identify, but I do have a problem with people who try to push their ideology, force others to accept it, rather like some religious fundamentalist.


Men who dress up as women because they envy and admire them has always been part of the human experience. Women who hate men but dress up and behave like them was always a little more puzzling.
I have known many of both sorts of individuals and never had a problem with it – it’s what some people do.
It was more fun when all this was underground, and people discovered their preferences (or often grew out of them in the process). Now that it’s mainstream, there are Pride Months where there used to be Pride Days, and kids are being recruited and indoctrinated beginning in primary school, it’s a fad that’s becoming tedious and undoubtedly quite confusing for … pre-hormonal kids.
There was actually a CBC Canada show on the other week called ‘Drag Kids’, which was promo’d on their kids’ site, as well as their regular programming site, presumably to educate adults how normal this should be.


It’s the Trans Lobby Agenda to “normalize” pedophelia and fetishes. It starts with grooming children with these Drag Queen Story Time and teaching “gender theory” to 5 year olds. It’s SICK.


Indeed Annie, it is a very dangerous progression. Have you heard of “Desmond is amazing” a young prepubescent American boy who performs for money at gay clubs, or maybe the “puppy walks” in London, where grown men dress up in fetish gear – puppy masks, leads etc. and walk around London parks in groups?



So what happens when the membership exceeds 101 Dalmatians?

And have their owners had them spayed?

Eric Blair

Good piece. This Yaniv character is either psychologically disturbed or a deliberate “shit disturber” as the Canadians say. Treating him/her as some sort of victim of prejudice and bigotry is just pathetic and a symptom of our politically correct times where adhering to the “correct” speech codes is more important than revealing facts and truth.

Mainstream media outfits like the CBC, which recently ran a one-sided piece championing Yaniv that mentioned nothing of this person’s history of bizarre and deliberately provocative/offensive behaviour because they have fashioned themselves as “pro-trans”, is not only disingenuous and shameful for a supposedly serious media organization, but it also tarnishes the collective reputation of trans people who conduct themselves like respectful citizens and just want to get on with their lives.

Focusing on glorifying freakish outlier “attention whores” like Yaniv only serves to give the public the impression that this kind of behaviour is representative of all trans people. This cowardly journalism thing no doubt fuels the prejudices of people who will use the CBC’s hack job to help advance an agenda that seeks to conflate incidents like this with the behaviour of regular trans people who are nothing like Yaniv. How very ironic for a “pro-trans” outfit!

The takeaway here is that self-censorship and cowardice in the face of Orwellian political correctness can, and does, backfire and harms the very people these misguided actions are supposed to protect.

Joan Hyde
Joan Hyde

Regardless of whether Yaniv is representative of trans people or not, This travesty is a direct consequence of both self id laws and the demonizing of anyone who suggest being gender critical while remaining based in reality.

S. Kaltner
S. Kaltner

Thank you, Jenn! You are awesome! You are brilliant! <3


Does anyone really give a toss about all this gay and trannie crap?

There was a guy at work who was into extremely fat women.
Anything under 25 stones and he just wasn’t interested.
That’s okay for him.
So long as everybody else doesn’t have to join in, pay for it, obsess about it, say how wonderful it is, join in taxpayer funded marches to promote it, employ activists to brainwash primary school children about it, and turn the whole world upside down to accommodate it, that’s fine.

If somebody says we should all pour custard in our shoes, we are not entitled to attack them, but we are entitled to laugh at them. It’s the same with this.

There is a tiny number of children born with undeveloped genitalia whose gender is unclear. They deserve all the help they need and we should all wish them well, but that’s as far as it goes.

You can ride whatever hobby horse you like and climb aboard whatever bandwagon you like. Just so long as you don’t insist everybody else has to ride it or climb aboard as well.


I admit that I’m unsure about the logic behind gay pride parades. I really couldn’t give a toss if people are gay or indeed anything else as long as they observe that old condition about doing it with other willing adults. But to loudly proclaim what they do in a big public display seems deliberately provocative to me – as if they are trying to create a disturbance. And then we get our little shouting match between the right-on “strut your stuff” brigade and the old fogey “wouldn’t have beeen allowed in my day contingent. In other words: the customary divide-and-rule policy. And who honestly gives a shit what folk do with their genitalia in private?


Should have been closing quote marks after “wouldn’t have been allowed in my day”.


I would like to know when someone is going to organise a ”Heterosexual Pride March”?


This is probably one of the very few sites where I could get away with saying this, but I have felt for a long time that, generally, this issue really boils down to attention craving by bored, lazy people who are terrified that their lives are meaningless to other people too.
I admit, however, that I am talking from the perspective of a person who has been fortunate enough to have had to work all his life at a university job which simply doesn’t allow for “boredom time”. Not that I have ever found it difficult to overfill my time with hobbies either.

From what I understand of paedophile rings too, despite the bottom apparently falling out of one man’s allegations of high-level addiction to this abomination, it is the people who either have everything, or have so much free time that they feel they have everything, who are looking for increased excitement in life in weird places which seem, to them, to offer “meaning” which they have not experienced since their mothers abandoned them long ago.
Perhaps that all sounds rather callous, but I do pay attention, and I can definitely see a pattern along these lines.

Of course I am not saying that all bored, rich people are paedophiles, or that they have transgender tendencies, but I am saying that nobody should be so rich that they don’t know what to do with their lives except to crave attention.


“….attention craving by bored, lazy people who are terrified that their lives are meaningless to other people too.”

Well, yes – welcome to the affluent consumerist West who spend their every waking minute obsessing over the state of their hair, clothes, “attitude”, “image” etc. Granted – they were encouraged to do this by a ferociously exploitative capitalism ever eager to create constant dissatisfaction to fuel sales as well as creating ever multiplying demographic groups. This latter phenomenon was one of those handy multipurpose propositions i.e. it was necessary in order to boost sales while also intensifying the old divide and rule strategy. I sometimes wonder if these multiplying gender definitions have something to do with this marketing/political strategy ploy?




Say you had a 10-11 year old son and you took him to a strip club with you. He’d see some topless women. The next day you’d get a visit from social services to put the kid on the at risk register. You’d get freighted off by the boys in blue, and depending on their mood at the time they might charge you with child abuse and take the kid into care.

Say you took him on the Gay Pride march instead – and parties of primary school children have been as part of legally required programmes – “because nobody can be left out.” He might well see full frontal nudity, all kinds of ultra weird S and M shit, gays having sex in public, God knows what else. Certainly makes Sodom and Gomorrah look pretty tame. I don’t know what effect that would have on a young kid, but it sure as hell frightens me.

On these things you can see very young kids mincing around in revealing clothing and being leered at by adult homosexuals.

But if you did that, you’d be lauded as right on, politically correct, liberal, enlightened, and a model of good parenting.

What is it about these gays and trannies that they need to make an exhibition of themselves in front of the vast majority of people who couldn’t care less about how they get their jollies?

Why can’t they just get on with it and leave our kids alone?

William HBonney

He might well see full frontal nudity, all kinds of ultra weird S and M shit, gays having sex in public

You’re very well informed, but you’ve forgotten the central issue, the Zionist angle….

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins

Great comment mark: does anybody really remember the ‘Istanbul Convention’ and apparent absurdity & the blatant latent hypocrisy & lies of the Bulgarian PM Borisov ?


And this, ladies & gents, is precisely why the vast majority of Bulgarians rest in poverty.
We really do have more pressing matters to discuss, like Corruption …


And these pathetic distractions, (when laws exist for the prosecution of violence inside or outside of any marriage), merely accelerate the systemic death of the true Bulgarian Culture, by design, with the imposition of Sociopathic Agendas … and yes I mean the designs of the Corrupt, who don’t give a flying fuck about Culture or Bulgaria, in future.

Some body, including Interpol, should be asking questions to PM Borisov about the private ownership of CEZ Electricity providers, not some transgender agenda !


On this planet earth, we have a species – Homosapien, which has evolved over tens of thousands of years.
We divide Homosapien into two categories of sex – male and female. How do we divide them? We divide them by identifying chromosomes – male XY, and female XX. In a very minute number of cases, humans are recognised as being “intersex”.
Sex is based on biological, scientific fact, it is absolute.
Gender on the other hand is a social construct, where people can identify as whatever gender they choose, or to be gender neutral, however one thing is of vital importance – human beings can NEVER change sex, it is impossible.
What we are experiencing at the moment, is gender being used as a political tool, to allow male bodied persons to enter female safe spaces, and to force/coerce females into doing anything the male bodied person wiches.
In the UK at the moment, around 50% of all transgender prisoners- males ID’ing as female – are incarcerated for sex crimes, Karen White being just one example.
There was a UK fell runner Lauren Jeska who is transgender. Jeska won several UK titles in the Women’s category, before brutally attacking two members of British Athletics, when they were querying Jeska’s sex.
There are several other male bodied athletes competing in the women’s category in various sports – Kate Weatherly (NZ Mountain biking), Rachel McKinnon (Canada track cycling), Laurel Hubbard (NZ weightlifting), Hannah Mouncey (Australia handball).
All of the above have very obvious male advantages when it comes to competing against women at sport, but alas, the sports ruling bodies – IOC, UCI, IAAF etc – seem to have closed their eyes and looked the other way, as if they wish to see women forced out of women’s sport by – MEN!
Several notable ex women athletes have spoken up – Martina Navratilova, Sharron Davies, Kelly Holmes, but have been brutally shouted down and threatened by transwomen and their “woke” folloowers.
At the Rio 2016 Olympics, all three medalists in the women’s 800 metres were XY chromosome athletes, the most notable being Caster Semenya.
Although there are more important issues in the World at the moment, it is worth drawing attention to this, because it has the potential to negatively affect 50% of the population.


“We divide Homosapien into two categories of sex – male and female. How do we divide them? We divide them by identifying chromosomes – male XY, and female XX.”

Correction: for “We” read “Antidiluvean, shit-for-brains dickheads.”

In a very minute number of cases, humans are recognised as being “intersex”.

Read instead “Proportionally similat to those in other societies, up to half a million or more North Americans suffer from significant genetically induced disorders of the ‘normal’ sex-determining human chromosomal structures.”

Boot Hill
Boot Hill

Hear Hear. Jonny Yaniv is not doing anything extreme for a transgender person as far as I can see. If she wants her hairy balls waxed by professional cis-female depilators that’s surely within her rights. Probably she has a significant genetically induced disorder or her normal sex-determining chromosomal structures, as described above. You go girl.


Well Boot Hill, what you are suggesting, is to allow a male bodied person to sexually abuse a female, because I don’t know what else you would call it – forcing a member of the opposite sex to touch your genitalia.


Well, thankyou for your ignorant response. I said a very minute number of cases, which is around 1 in 1500 to 1 in 2000 births, I would call that minute.
You are suggesting a figure of 1 in around 750 which is still minute.



“…thankyou for your ignorant response.”

You’re welcome. Thank you for yours.

“You are suggesting a figure of 1 in around 750 which is still minute.”

No, I am taking a guess at the figure for the entire range of physical sexual anomalies related to male/female primary and secondary expression, including hormonal, psychological and other expressions, whether SRY or otherwise engendered.

S/he is bringing a civil lawsuit against a bunch of female beauticians who, apparently, wish to reserve the right to refuse service on any grounds, with or without explanation. I personally support such a right in any privately (as distinc5 from state) owned business, anything else risking the “tyranny of the majority”. Also, as there are, presumably, c.f. male gynecologists, plenty of male beauticians who would be happy to serve her, I’m not sure why one of them would be objectionable re depilatory services per se unless s/he were pursuing some wider objective.

However, s/he has apparently chosen to take her right to be served by any business, private or otherwise, to civil litigation. At that point, provided that the courts agree to hear the case (and legal costs follow the line of any judgement) it becomes solely a private legal matter, anything else risking “the tyranny of the majority”. In a different jurisdiction, courts held that, although gay marriage had not at that time been legalized, the committed Christians running a private bakery were at fault for refusing to sell a wedding cake to a homosexual couple. While the best advice is to avoid as far as possible placing oneself in the hands of lawyers, it is up to the plaintiff to choose whether or not to sue and it is up to the courts to decide whether or not to hear the case and, if they do, to determine their judgement. Not yours, mine or anyone else’s. Otherwise is to risk “the tyranny of the majority”.

Subsequent to the initial judgement, it is equally the right of either side, alone or with the support of any group wh0 feels they also have been negatively impacted, to seek leave to appeal, on and up to the amendment or introduction of appropriate legislation or “official policy”. Legislation and “official policy” are, of course, often a combination of “the tyranny of the majority” with the asininity of the law and the “rules”, but they do provide the only broadly socially defensible thus “peaceably challengable” expression of both.

There are no “tiny minorities” in the case of an individual’s subjection to natural or social “affliction”.


If I may have another go at this, I’ll link to two pieces that I looked out while waiting for a delayed lunch. I haven’t had time to check them fully but at first reading they look OK on the reasonably accurate journalism score. Both show the subtleties involved in considering the greatly expanded understanding of genetics we have uncovered since only a chromosome count seemed to form the entirety of gender expression (subtleties that clearly go right over the head of many agenda-driven militants on all sides of the matter).

https://theconversation.com/ten-ethical-flaws-in-the-caster-semenya-decision-on-intersex-in-sport-116448 deals with the complicated ethics of the Semenya case (who, incidentally, is conjectured but not confirmed to have the old XY = unequivocal male problem) and

https://theconversation.com/what-makes-you-a-man-or-a-woman-geneticist-jenny-graves-explains-102983 goes into the broad outline of the now much more and still rapidly multiplying complexity a properly nuanced consideration of the biology of sexual expression involves.

Do I expect this info will make a difference to your, andyoldlabour’s, mission to untie complicated knots using antique swords? Not really, but who knows?


The “big issue” is identity itself …identitarian Being. Who are we? Who really are we?

That the current answer is: “We don’t know” is a given. Radical eliminitivism of ourselves seems to be the answer – especially ecologically. But biologically and psychologically: we are confused …very confused.

That we think we are not confused: and rationally certaintise that belief ontologically (creating fixed identitarian concretised-existent Beingness) encapsulates the entire problem of the 21st century philoso-political narrative. There is no fixed; individuated; independent; individual; time-independent; or mind-dependent Being. Our ontological constructivism is totally out of control.

This cannot be addressed in its symptomology – the individual confusion identitarian politics creates – it has to be addressed at the roots of the culture that is creating the symptomology. This is not a superficial issue: nor one that will simply go away. It is paradigmatic. Identity is largely a performative role – one we create in our interactionism with culture and environment. There is very little ‘innate endowment’ that is genetically hardwired. Most of our identity is acquired and ‘epigenetic interactionism’.

Welcome to psychology wars. If you do not follow such things – there are two main schools. Chomsky/Skinner radical behaviourism and cognitivism – which is ‘diembodied’ – versus Piaget/Lakoff’s embodiment. Of course, there are many more protaganists than that – but the debate is highly political, as I see it. Conservatives and Classic Liberals – like Harvard’s Steven Pinker – favour Chomsky …and progressives favour Lakoff.

I’ve tried to introduce the concepts of ’embodiment’ and ‘disembodiment’ before by raising the question: “How can we do politics if we do not know who we are?” Or as George Lakoff would put it: “How can we do 21st century politics with 18th century minds”. Minds that are extremely maladjusted to the 21st century postmodern technocratic environment. The short answer is that we cannot: and the results – or cummulative consequentionalism of the results – are apparent in out blatant disregard for our environment.

We are carryine the ontological baggage of centuries in our cultural conditioning. Cultural conditioning that orients us away from the environment and self-recursively introspectively ever inward …to the point of totalised introversion and dissociation from biophysical ecological reality. Our solipsism is killing us.

I’ll have to leave it there, because I already know that no one else can, or perhaps even wants to, what embodiement entails for identity and politics. Which is perhaps the greatest debate that we are not having as a society: because we think we already know who we are. We do not. It is only in the last 40 years that science has become to realise cognition might be embodied. Well, hello – WTF have you been thinking for the last two millennia!

And if we do not know what disembodiment entails: that is because philoso-politically …we still think that way. From Aristotle – following Plato – we have immaterial independent minds floating around somewhere in a world of forms and substances. As confirmed by Descartes – the mind is an unextended thinking thing …or zeropoint of self-absorbtion, as I call it.

Where is it? I can make this radical claim: putting mind in body and body in environment is the political Zeitgeist issue no one is considering. Embodiment changes identity and politics radically and forever. Something we should address before it becomes to late.

Question This
Question This

No its not about who are we at all,its about what sex are we & that’s a simple question to answer, look between your legs, I accept for a tiny minority that may be confusing.

This problem comes from our distancing ourselves from the natural world & i don’t accept that’s anything to do with evolution, its political ideology, because i’m damn sure there were no neanderthal transgenders.

It’s Neo-liberalism preventing the rest of us being what we want to be & know what we are, a part of the natural order of things! I’m not in the least confused by this.


QT: surely you could see I am taking the overarching view? I maintain we cannot have a proper adult debate without the deep contextualisation of the archetypal ideas that are playing out. Clearly, no one here agrees.

Ideas do not just pop up in our heads: they come from somewhere …but not just independent minds. The simple way to account for this is that we do not construct the language. Private independent languages do not make sense and cannot communicate ideas or coordinate behaviours. If we can accept that language is a largely a shared public domain – socially agreed – then we can start to see where ideas and identities come from. They are not wholly our own. Currently: identity is mainly culturally created and socially acquired. The reason that some people are choosing to reject this is not their social deviance: it is symptomatic of a broader cultural degeneration. We are all victims of capitalist cultural deviance. Shouldn’t we be at least a little empathetic toward the most confused?

Language and culture orientate us in certain ways. Technological postmodernity orientates us self-referentially inward toward ourselves. Modern culture is hedonistic, narcissistic, and solipsistic. You and I may not be: but culture is largely a hyperreal spectacle. Taking the overview does not invalidate the individual who has managed to avoid being confused. But surely you would not deny that the culture itself is confused in its identity? And we are all victims of this neoliberal epoch of violence?

If we only take the individualist view of this: we will never move to a less confused, more authentic identitarian successor culture. The world is extremely fucked up; sectarian; identitarian; and self-absorbed. Where do those proto-identities come from? Out of our heads? Or are they intrinsic in the neoliberalised culture we are automatic subjects of: whatever we think?

The generation of a political ideology like neoliberalism belies the culture of individual, independent genesis. Even if you trace it back to Walter Lipmann: where did he get his ideas from? From millions of ideas absorbed into cultural linguistics. Ideologies evolve from philosophical ideals. The way culture has evolved is deeply sick: there’s hardly an argument to be had there, is there? Understanding why involves deep transpersonal insight, says he to himself.

I am not alone in concluding that it is not possible to be well adjusted to this sick culture. Krishnamurti said it long ago. I guess it is a waste of time trying to understand the deep reasons why? I do not suppose that our identitarian crises; our cognitive crises; our psychological crises; our mental health crises; our economic crises; and our ecocidal environmental crises could all have a singular cause? One that is the inexistant existency of a self, a mind, or a fixed own-being identitarianism …which is why culture is breaking down? Or that all of this is predicated on the individual roots from which culture, political ideology, economy, ecology, and economy share?

We do not just have gender issues: we have everything issues …manifest as a permanent everything crisis. One that you are right is saying takes us away from the natural order. The roots of which bifurcation I was trying to expose.

Neoliberalism and identitarianism share the same root: one that can be healed by a new theory of mind based on embodiment. For the no one who is interested.

Question This
Question This

I do really enjoy reading your philosophizing, though perhaps your posts are sometimes a little difficult for the likes of simpler uneducated people like me to absorb. So forgive me if i haven’t seen the bigger picture here.

But this is a bigger issue than a few men dressing as women hiding their genitalia because they are confused about what they are. Its bigger than individuals rights not to have their feelings hurt.

I refer you to a reply i just made to Mark I hope the link works, but you’ll find it if you scroll down.

As you rightly point out this is a move away from the natural order. My go to place for guidance on how to conduct my life comes from the laws of nature my values & principles are based on those provided by my deep respect for the natural world.

This is a fight for survival, its a political battle but none the less a very serious fight against the tyranny of Neo-liberalism. Its a dirty nasty scrap, there’s no room for being nice & not hurting peoples feelings.


I agree we are in a struggle for survival. In the vain hope that somehow humanity may move toward a positive successor state to late epochal neoliberalism – rather than just tear ourselves apart for the access to the last drop of oil, the last unit of cryptocurrency, and the last sheaf of GMO biotech wheat …we would have to understand the generation of the identitarian ideas that got us here. The cognitivist computer metaphor is apt: GIGO …garbage in-garbage out.

Civilisational culture is unnatural: predicated on separation (dualism); hierarchy (dominion); and self (sense of ownership = private property rights; sense of agency = instrumental reason). The ‘society of self’ is solipsistic, hedonistic, narcissistic …and degenerately so. Separation is at the roots of the language and cultural conditioning …so much so that sociolinguistics can be taken as the cultural Code. A culture that thinks ritualistically in dualisms can only deconhere over time.

It’s as simple as this. It’s a simple binary choice where only one answer is valid (Law of Identity). Every choice in the meta-system of choices denies the existence of half of the universe (Law of Excluded Middle – no compromise position available. If not A: B must be true).

If you look at the singular perspective – no problem – but over an indeterminate duration and an infinity of choosing …the perspective of language is very limited. Along with all the infinity of dichotomising differentials that have been made to form the sociolinguistic Code …there is perhaps an even greater enemy – repetition.

Repetition takes somewhat arbitrarily defined concepts and makes them ‘real’. It is these axiomatised concepts of self and other fixed identitarian indentities we are acculturated into. Unfortunately for you and I, just as the inevitable consequences of infinite assumptions and axiomatised dualised cognition are hitting crisis point.

The ability of language to make sense is not arbritary and therefore infinite. According to Chomsky, we can just add grunts and hisses and the next generation will use their innate Universal Grammar to expand the language. Language is limited by its core concepts – which can be said to be embodied. This makes language quite finite. When the word count and excessive ideation exceed the conceptual structure of language to convey sense …language begins to deconhere into arbritariness and loss of meaning. When language breaks down by becoming over-abstract meanings can’t ‘transact’ …culture breaks down too. Which is where we are at.

The solution is to quell the proliferation of evermore abstract ideation by switching from ontology to epistemology – ideas that refer to actual concrete realities (like penises and vaginas). But that also rules out abstract entities like ‘minds’; ‘selves’; and independent identities categorised as Being. Ergo: we need a new culture predicated not on separation – but on connection, interaction, and inter-relatedness …aka embodiment. That is when we realise the problems are not confined to single issues. The problem is the monolithic ontology of dualism: playing out as it always will …destructively.

Question This
Question This

Errm, not sure i’m qualified to even read that let alone understand it , so again if i didn’t quite understand what you were conveying, sorry.

But yes I agree humanity is on the last furlong in its race to extinction, because the more complex we make civilization the greater the pace toward the finish line.

One thing i did get from your reply is the part on the human condition, where we have this uncontrollable desire, need, to ‘own’ property, to have control over things, (perhaps including the narrative of the meaning of our increasingly shallow lives) which i think is the single most harmful action our species imposes on the natural world, “control”, that’s what liberals are managers & control freaks.


“The ability of language to make sense is not arbritary and therefore infinite. […] Language is limited by its core concepts – which can be said to be embodied. This makes language quite finite. When the word count and excessive ideation exceed the conceptual structure of language to convey sense …language begins to deconhere into arbritariness and loss of meaning. When language breaks down by becoming over-abstract meanings can’t ‘transact’ …culture breaks down too.”

Or (different strokes being for different folks; different rhymes for different climes):

If names be not correct, language is not in accordance with the truth of things. If language be not in accordance with the truth of things, affairs cannot be carried on to success.

When affairs cannot be carried on to success, proprieties and music do not flourish. When proprieties and music do not flourish, punishments will not be properly awarded. When punishments are not properly awarded, the people do not know how to move hand or foot.

Therefore a superior man considers it necessary that the names he uses may be spoken appropriately, and also that what he speaks may be carried out appropriately. What the superior man requires is just that in his words there may be nothing incorrect.

–Confucious, The Analects, Chapter 13, James Legge translation

However, it remains, still, the case that:

The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it.

–Karl Marx, Eleven Theses on Feuerbach

Boot Hill
Boot Hill

I’m not sure its possible to have a rational discussion with someone who writes:

“The generation of a political ideology like neoliberalism belies the culture of individual, independent genesis. Even if you trace it back to Walter Lipmann: where did he get his ideas from? From millions of ideas absorbed into cultural linguistics. Ideologies evolve from philosophical ideals. The way culture has evolved is deeply sick: there’s hardly an argument to be had there, is there? Understanding why involves deep transpersonal insight, says he to himself. etc blah blah ”

But then the writer apparently lucidly states:

“one .. can be healed by a new theory of mind based on embodiment.”

Is this embodiment the same as feeling around in my underpants and saying “Look I have embodied a penis! I am female, ….. but wait a sec… am I really a male?”

Well, if I say I am male, its straightforward.

If I say I am female, well its going to be complicated. I’d say that looking at the crude results available today, the surgery is not quite there yet.

Ideally you’d want some sort of machine that operated on a sub-molecular level which just genetically altered your body into whatever female type you wanted. And back again of course in case you decided that being female was not what you wanted after all. Perhaps you want to become some weird hybrid, its okay, just pay more money for the optional extras.

I think until this sort of thing becomes technically possible its just best to stick with what you’ve got. Otherwise you’re undoubtedly headed for a case of schizophrenic surgical self-mutilation.


“I maintain we cannot have a proper adult debate without the deep contextualisation of the archetypal ideas that are playing out. Clearly, no one here agrees. […] Neoliberalism and identitarianism share the same root: one that can be healed by a new theory of mind based on embodiment. For the no one who is interested.”

Oh stop rabbiting on about this purely illusory aspect of ‘the problem’. A lot of people are proto-interested, i.e., they agree, they just do not know how, in the context of their individuation, to be ‘interested’ enough to begin to find the courage to realize it. We=they don’t need a statement of the problem–history is littered with them*–we=they need an insight into how to take a first step into (not ‘towards’) an un individuated ‘solution’.

*Jesus said: Do not worry from morning to evening or evening to morning about what you are going to wear.

His disciples asked [of] him: When will you appear to us? When will we see you? Jesus replied: When you strip naked without shame and trample your clothing underfoot just as little children do then you will look at the son of the living one without being afraid.

Jesus said: You often wanted to hear the words I am speaking to you. You have no one else from whom you can hear them. The days will come when you will seek me and you will not be able to find me. The pharisees and the scribes have taken the keys to knowledge and have hidden them. They did not go in and they did not permit those desiring to go in to enter. You should be as clever as snakes and as innocent as doves.

–The Gospel of Thomas, Saying 36 et seq, Stevan Davies translation