Err, what?

The high rates of trans exclusion from potential dating pools are undoubtedly due in part to cisnormativity, cissexism, and transphobia — all of which lead to lack of knowledge about transgender people and their bodies, discomfort with these unknowns, and fear of being discriminated against by proxy of one’s romantic partner.

Wait a minute. Who we fancy getting our rocks off with is built into us from the get go. Yes? Gays are born not made?

Yet a continued preference for a woman – say – is cisnormativity, cissexism, if we choose that over some mildly sculpted simulacra?

It’s as if trans campaigners have absolutely no idea at all how sexual attraction works in human beings.

Sure, if all transwomen – have I got that the right way around, he definition is the destination, not source? – looked like Caroline Cossey there’d be a higher take up but anyone hand on heart want to say that is so?

49 comments on “Err, what?

  1. Maybe he shouldn’t have abandoned his kids to live as “Carrie” at the age of 44?

    Just a thought.

  2. From which the conclusion:

    It’s very hard to accept yourself when you know that many others don’t see you as normal, let alone desirable.

    An ugly bloke is more desirable than an ugly bloke sans todger in a frock?

    It’s easier to accept oneself before converting to something one isn’t than after?

    I’d not have stumbled across those truths without guidance.

  3. This sort of bollocks really gets on my tits (no, I have not had a sex change).

    I’ve had the same thing online when I have quite bluntly said on a profile that I do not want to ‘date’ (sometimes – ahem – fleetingly!) a fattie. Or someone over a certain age. I mean, what is the point in wasting my, and their, time? Just being fair to them and myself!

    Cue patronising abuse from right-on pillocks saying I need to loosen up.

    There’ll be no ‘loosening up’ of anything at all – Rocco movie running in the background or not. At all. Ever.

  4. Yeah but, no but, she’s had the op, she’s a woman, well fit, innit! Whotchu worried abaht! Get in there my sahn!

  5. Why are you expecting consistent claims from such people? They have been immunized against cognitive dissonance.

  6. The high rates of trans exclusion from potential dating pools are undoubtedly due in part to cisnormativity, cissexism, and transphobia

    Nothing to do with looking like Harold Bishop, then.

    I don’t think convincing Thai ladyboys have a problem finding paramours (they still die at 30 tho), but the prognosis for middle aged white transgenders is awful in every respect.

  7. Remember, homosexuality is set at birth and can’t possibly be changed without causing psychological damage, but gender is a social construct and can be changed with no risk.

    In the U.S., fifteen states have enacted legislation banning both gay conversion therapy and trans non-conversion therapy. It’s an incredible level of cognitive dissonance.

  8. Lockers – explain how multi-bazillionaire gap-toothed tyrant Elton John still gets a shag then (allegedly)

  9. A friend of mine has a brother-in-law who’s decided, after sixty-something years on the planet, to become a sister-in-law. My friend’s comment on this rather summarises a problem a lot of people have: “I have no objection to anybody being whatever they want to be, but when someone built like a rugby prop forward sits in front of you in a lacy dress explaining how they’ve always been in reality a delicate and sensitive woman, all the while vigorously scratching their balls, there is a degree of cognitive dissonance.”

  10. The poor bastards are suffering from mental illness. It would be kinder to try to understand that than to mock their drivel just because it’s illogical and unrealistic. Have some pity.

    So much for Worstall’s customary commenters: now, how about the transpersons?

  11. @Steve
    “explain how multi-bazillionaire gap-toothed tyrant Elton John still gets a shag then (allegedly)”

    With lashings and lashings of olive oil, (no relation to Jamie Oliver,) apparently.

  12. Btw, are you channelling Caroline Aherne?

    Every day!

    Money, talent, skill can be attractive in their own right?

    It’s a little bit funny.

    With lashings and lashings of olive oil, (no relation to Jamie Oliver,) apparently.

    At least it’s heart-healthy, eh?

  13. As someone who considers gender-changing a load of old tosh, I can’t help but repeat the adage that ‘if the operation is good enough, why not?’ After all, it’s mainly done in the dark after a skinful, isn’t it?

  14. Judging from this article, it clearly is possible to get laid no matter how you want to be described:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-6847005/Transgender-men-PREGNANT-year-testosterone-injections.html

    “Wyley Simpson, 28, was shocked to find out he was pregnant in February 2018 after living as a man since he was 21.

    Mr Simpson, from Texas, began taking testosterone therapy in 2012 and had his breasts removed in 2013, but still has a vagina and female reproductive organs.

    He became pregnant after having unprotected vaginal sex with his fiancé, Stephen Gaeth, 28, and gave birth to Rowan via c-section in September last year.”

  15. I would imagine “lack of knowledge about transgender people and their bodies” is something most of us wish to cherish & guard.

  16. “have I got that the right way around, he definition is the destination, not source?”
    Transalpine is the other side of the Alps, Cisalpine is this side of the Alps.
    Transylvania is the other side of the forest, Cissylvania is this side of the forest.
    Trans-X molecules have a functional group on the other side of the main body, cis-X molecules have a functional group on the same side of the main body.
    Need to keep the nomenclature right to ensure understanding.

  17. Having been to Romania, I can confirm that Transylvania is definitely to be avoided. Although exactly which side of the forest it is was unclear. There’s an awful lot of forest

  18. Of all people the Radfems have more sexual language for this.

    Not Transwoman for pre-op M->aspiring F, but TIMs – Trans Identified Men.

    I ate to think how it is spelt in Welsh,

  19. 22 comments and NiV still hasn’t shown up to say we’re all bigots/racist /trannyphobes for not wanting to shag a man pretending to be a woman. (or the other way around if you are a woman and /or prefer sausage to taco)

    Is this a record?

    It’d be interesting (*), to know a couple of things.
    1) how many trans are gay – ie originally men who after op want a man. Is it that they’re gay and can’t accept it, so find another “socially acceptable” way to act on their urges

    2) what percentage of trans would want a trams partner or would specify a not trams partner? Cos if they aren’t going to accept it, why should we?

    * – Not interested enough to Google it. Just waiting for my dinner to be delivered and wanted to make a point /join the conversation.

  20. I have a large brown spot on the end of my nose.

    I am waiting patiently for society to decide to collectively decide it needs to deeply consider the sexual mores of we brown spotted nosers. Society hasn’t realised that brown spotted nosers are only marginally less common that trans people. Although we are better mannered.

  21. “So much for Worstall’s customary commenters: now, how about the transpersons?”

    I am given to understand that at least one of our honourable host’s regular commenters is such a person.

    I am not sure which view better represents this house, that that having trans-rights-stuff shoved down our throats constantly as a matter of policy, like a boot stamping on a human face forever is objectionable, or whether transitioning itself (and being honest thereafter about having done so) is objectionable.

    I tend to the former view, and infact abhor the latter. I couldn’t be a liberal without allowing people of sound mind to cut their gonads off at their own expense (and sequelae at their own expense) if that is their true desire for the one short life we all get. The liberal flip-side of that is that yhou are open and honest about having done so, don’t insisti on having been really truly born as what you are rather than what you were. Especially in the unlikely even’t that you’re looking for a shag from me.

  22. I tend to the former view, and infact abhor the latter. I couldn’t be a liberal without allowing people of sound mind to cut their gonads off at their own expense (and sequelae at their own expense) if that is their true desire for the one short life we all get.

    This I think is the opinion of most people here. And can be surmised as
    “do what you want, Sonny Jim, just don’t expect me to pay for it, or like it.”

    Unfortunately a lot of people these days conflate approval and tolerance.

    And what annoys me most (well, seconds most) is being forced to pay for it with the NHS. Which is more a problem with the NHS than tranniez. The main objection I have is the politicos and the activists trying to force everyone to go along with the insanity.

    As an aside, I’m currently in a country with a decent healthcare system. Oh my, does it oppose the shortcomings of the NHS when you see a proper system in action. Envy of the world my arse.

  23. @ BiG
    Well said!
    One of my friendly acquaintances (we weren’t close enough for me to describe him as a friend as we only met for races), a harmless civil servant, was driven out of town because someone had found out that he liked dressing in women’s clothes and denouned him as a “pervert” suggesting that he was a danger to innocent children. He only told me that he was a transvestite while he was being driven out (probably he thought I might wonder why he hadn’t turned up for a race) and the supermarket cashier looked daggers at me for even speaking to the poor guy. She didn’t walk over and physically beat him up although she was bigger as well as younger than he was …
    The mere thought of homosexual activity revolts me but those who are attracted to it do not do so any more than those ill-guided individuals who eat caulifower cheese, over-boiled cabbage or lentils.

  24. NHS for the op, at least the removal in the direction more usually performed, might well represent a cost saving over the occasional nutter (or is that de-nutter) who performs the job solo and untrained with a kitchen knife, and then requires some considerable time on intensive care therafter.

  25. You’ll get far more sympathy for coming out as a cauliflower cheese.

    Can prosecute anyone denying your self-identity.

    Much better than a mere personal preference.

  26. I am not sure which view better represents this house, that that having trans-rights-stuff shoved down our throats constantly as a matter of policy, like a boot stamping on a human face forever is objectionable, or whether transitioning itself (and being honest thereafter about having done so) is objectionable.

    Can we tolerate the latter and not get the former?

    Honest question, I don’t know the answer. But it seems as if the trend in recent years is: appeals for tolerance -> demands for “equality” -> mandatory, taxpayer-funded celebration -> the police kicking down your door for being insufficiently worshipful of [insert favoured client group here]

    Doesn’t necessarily mean there needs to be a slippery slope, but we’ve been sliding down said slope for a long while nevertheless.

    So… what if tolerating madness is a mistake? Gender theory is, I reckon, insane in the sense of being unable to distinguish fantasy from reality. Talking about feminine penises and whatnot is as mad as espousing Soviet Communism, also leading to bad outcomes.

    Possibly worse outcomes in the longer term since True Communism has been tried umpteen times and gendertrending only became fashionable five minutes ago – so we just don’t know yet.

    If there’s a biological substrate to reality, isn’t adopting a mental model in opposition to that reality potentially dangerous? Like if we suddenly decided that gravity was a social construct, and started toddling off the sides of cliffs?

    What if Winston ended up in Room 101 because the folks in Airstrip One started off tolerating and humouring the Inner Party? Nassim Taleb’s dictatorship of the small minority and all that.

  27. Whenever I see someone complaining about other people’s disinterest in them, in any respect, be it business partnership, friendship, romance, sexual, it makes me very wary, even anxious. My worry is this: relationships are very personal, predicated on the chemistry between individual personalities. They either click or they don’t. None of us is born with any sort of entitlement in this respect, so what’s the point of complaining? I always suspect the complainant is hoping to activate the antennae of some nannying social justice warrior into mounting a campaign to curtail the freedoms of the public at large. I’ve seen this most often in situations involving children and teenagers, when they are singled out to be nagged and scolded into striking up “friendships” with some kid who never gets invited to birthday parties, or who never gets invited to the dance. I’ve seen this “encouragement” run to threats by teachers to banning events like the school dance, excursions, or the classroom exchange of greetings cards. And I have seen those threats carried out. Always by female teachers, and always with disastrous results. Disinterest in the targetted “no-mates” kids would turn to sullen, hostile, resentment.
    I have no doubt that such aspiring arbiters of social intercourse would delight in any prospect of dictating the private personal relationships between adults, if only they could. Such people need to be squashed.

  28. “Does that have a definition?”
    All the disadvantages of a woman without the advantages?

  29. John 77,

    My sympathies to your aquaintance. And you’re right about the boiled cabbage eaters!

    Steve,

    “Can we tolerate the latter and not get the former?”

    We’ve always had the former, and always will. We just take turns wearing the boot.

    Previously, the police would be breaking down the doors of the homosexuals and cross-dressers. Now they’re breaking down the doors of homophobes and transphobes. It’s the same phenomenon, and the same sort of people doing both. Only the target has changed.

    You can’t have intolerance without somebody getting the boot in the face. You can’t have a society that enforces its norms this way without that enforcement one day coming round and biting you.

    And this is the lesson humanity never seems to learn. Everyone is fine with society enforcing norms when it’s “our” norms being enforced on “them”. But the symmetry of the situation is that everyone is a “them” to somebody else’s “us”, and if we choose to live in a society that enforces norms then yes, it is utterly and inescapably inevitable that one day the police will be booting down our door. One day, we will be the ones considered “mad” by society, and not tolerated. That’s how norm-enforcement works.

    You’re just seeing yourselves (i.e. mainstream society) as others have always seen you from the outside. This is exactly what people like Alan Turing and Oscar Wilde saw – society shoving it’s opinions down everyone’s throats constantly as a matter of policy.

    The future is a boot stamping on a human face forever, because our answer is always to fight to be the one wearing the boot. We never think to recognise the boot itself as the source of all our woes, and stop using it altogether.

  30. If you want to bang trannies then you ain’t hetro. 3.3 % of ‘straight men’ are liars.

  31. I’ve made it a rule never to date someone who in my opinion is mentally ill, no matter how attractive they maybe. As I believe the majority of trans are at best severely deluded then that solves the problem for me plus of course most m to f trans look like blokes in a dress and i don’t swing that way. I also thought that with the constant promotion of transexuality in the media that there must be thousands of them. Are we now saying that transexuals are not attracted to other transexuals ? Bigots.

  32. “And this is the lesson humanity never seems to learn. Everyone is fine with society enforcing norms when it’s “our” norms being enforced on “them”. But the symmetry of the situation is that everyone is a “them” to somebody else’s “us”, and if we choose to live in a society that enforces norms then yes, it is utterly and inescapably inevitable that one day the police will be booting down our door. One day, we will be the ones considered “mad” by society, and not tolerated. That’s how norm-enforcement works.”
    You think this is wrong NiV? Why?..
    A society is a society because its members share a consensus of behaviour. Therefore it must punish members who step outside that consensus or there will no longer be a society. There will always be margins of behaviour which test that consensus. It is at those margins that societies change. Because a healthy society is not a fixed thing. It is always in a state of constant mutation, adapting to the present. But it must preserve that consensus or disintegrate.
    You seem to be doing your best to facilitate the latter.

  33. Now I strongly suspect that any society accepts men pretending to be women, for any reason, is heading down the dustbin of history. Because it’s accepting fiction as a fact. And then, what other fictions will it accept as facts? In this it’s similar to communism. A tempting fiction that has never, in practise, worked. Beneath the wrapping of a woman, must people expect to discover a woman. Not a man pretending to be one. And for all sorts of reasons most people prefer the contents to agree with the label on the tin.

  34. ” I strongly suspect that any society accepts men pretending to be women, for any reason, is heading down the dustbin of history. Because it’s accepting fiction as a fact. And then, what other fictions will it accept as facts?”

    Precisely. You are being fed peasant, that in front of you isn’t a stone its a loaf of bread. Once you can force people to say black is white, then you’ve won, because you can make them agree to anything. And that is the prize here, nothing to do with the ‘rights’ of mentally ill nutters in dresses, its about the thought control of an entire society.

  35. ” what percentage of trans would want a trams partner ”

    Lets keep trainspotters out of it, they’re discriminated against enough already!

  36. “You think this is wrong NiV? Why?..
    A society is a society because its members share a consensus of behaviour. Therefore it must punish members who step outside that consensus or there will no longer be a society.”

    Why? Because I’m a libertarian.

    Society’s consensus today is that homophobia and transphobia are evil. Anyone who steps outside that consensus will be punished. You think this is wrong?

    “Now I strongly suspect that any society accepts men pretending to be women, for any reason, is heading down the dustbin of history. Because it’s accepting fiction as a fact. And then, what other fictions will it accept as facts?”

    How about that homosexuality and cross-dressing are “sins”, and have been forbidden by the creator of the universe, who is normally depicted in classical art as an old bloke with a bushy white beard wearing a dress. The creator of the universe requires that anyone who breaks any of his many rules – on subjects as diverse as eating shellfish and wearing clothes of mixed fibres – should be punished. How’s that for fiction?

    Homosexuals have been persecuted for 3,500 years on the basis of a work of transparent fiction including flying people with wings and zombies and animals with the heads and body parts of other animals stuck on them and talking donkeys who can see the elite invisible assassins sent by God and outwit them with great cunning. There is no limit to the stupid things people will believe, and will use as an excuse for putting the boot in to people with lifestyles and beliefs they don’t like.

    So now you’re getting a taste of the boot yourself, on the basis of what you consider to be nonsense fiction. OK. So?

    7 And the shapes of the locusts were like unto horses prepared unto battle; and on their heads were as it were crowns like gold, and their faces were as the faces of men.

    8 And they had hair as the hair of women, and their teeth were as the teeth of lions.

    9 And they had breastplates, as it were breastplates of iron; and the sound of their wings was as the sound of chariots of many horses running to battle.

    10 And they had tails like unto scorpions, and there were stings in their tails: and their power was to hurt men five months.

    11 And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon.

    Oh, really? And then, what other fictions will we accept as facts?

  37. “Society’s consensus today is that homophobia and transphobia are evil. Anyone who steps outside that consensus will be punished. You think this is wrong?”
    Irrespective of what laws overly “progressive” politicians might have passed there’s absolutely no consensus on those. Or we wouldn’t be having this discussion. The words themselves are meaningless. Phobia = fear & very few people fear either. The emotion might be dislike or disgust but rarely fear. Why fear something quite so pathetic? Although one might genuinely fear someone like you, determined to dismantle the society he lives in. What are you going to do when you’ve done so? Remember it’s the consensus around acceptable behaviour keeps you safe.

  38. “Irrespective of what laws overly “progressive” politicians might have passed there’s absolutely no consensus on those. Or we wouldn’t be having this discussion.”

    Then by that definition there was never a consensus on the opposite position. Or you wouldn’t have needed laws and norms to be enforced. Moses wouldn’t have had to make his rules. People like Alan Turing wouldn’t have existed to be threatened with jail.

    “Although one might genuinely fear someone like you, determined to dismantle the society he lives in.”

    Possibly – it depends on whether you’re the one wearing the boot, or the one being stamped on.

    While you’re wearing the boot, it obviously makes sense to fear the people who want to take it away from you. But eventually, everyone takes their turn at being the one stamped on. Unfortunately, by then it’s usually too late to do anything about it.

    “Remember it’s the consensus around acceptable behaviour keeps you safe.”

    And it’s the same consensus that puts me in danger. And you. And everyone else.

    It used to be the homosexuals in danger from the ‘consensus’ around the unacceptability of their behaviour. Today, it’s the consensus around the unacceptability of homophobia and transphobia (and you know exactly what the words mean) that keeps homosexuals and TGs safe. But because we live in a society that thinks the right way to enforce its norms is with the boot, that now puts the homophobes and transphobes in danger.

    It’s the same society. The same methods. The same boot. Nobody has dismantled anything. And that’s the problem.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.