Makes you think, really

This is ever so slightly odd:

Carrie, 56, and her husband David, 65, the Songs of Praise presenter and former pop star from the band Linx have four children. The three oldest were born girls; now all are “trans/non-binary”.

“Olive Gray, the oldest, is 26 and non-binary,” says Carrie. “Olive uses the pronouns they/them. Nineteen-year-old Tylan [a star in the Channel 4 soap Hollyoaks] is non-binary masculine, and uses the pronouns they/he so that is quite a big change. Our third child, who is 15, is currently called Arlo. They are non-binary — they would say they are a demigirl.

So, let’s assume that the current story is entirely correct. That some women are in fact just born into male bodies, vice versa. Hmm, OK.

There’s some incidence of this across the population. Given the only recent acceptance of the idea we’re not really sure what that incidence is. But we can run with the idea that it’s unlikely to be higher than Teh Gays. Which, for women, is about 1% of the relevant population.

So, all three of the girls out of the four children are this some version of trans. With an assumed 1% incidence across the population that’s a most, most, unlikely outcome.

Well, sorry, among 25 million families it’s a certainty. But most unlikely to any one family. (OK, so we’ve not got 25 million families of 3 girls, 1 boy, but the point is obvious.)

Given the unlikelihood on that statistical basis we’re predisposed to believe a different explanation. One could be that it was always thus. But given that previous generations didn’t offer the choice – nor the surgery – it was never bred out. Or, there’s something about the dynamic of this particular family that’s led to the concentration of unlikely events.

Even, that we have grossly extended adolescence these days, meaning that the teenage attempts to wildly differentiate from both parents and siblings last rather longer. Do demisexual, non-binary masculine, non-binary (possibly unlikely given the motorboatability there) end up replacing goth/punk/Barbie/jock/ as methods of shocking the parentals and distinguishing the individual?

No, of course, I’m entirely wrong, couldn’t possibly be. But given the way that right on and woke means being terribly understanding of the kiddies these days ever more shock must be applied to appall them, right?

34 thoughts on “Makes you think, really”

  1. Well no actually. You’re falling into the same trap ‘Sir’ Roy Meadows did, assuming that the odds of two outcomes are completely independent. When in the case of Sally Clark the odds of her having two cot deaths were not, the odds of having a second after having had one was not the same as having the first one. The same applies here – its entirely possible that the genetic combination of that couple creates girls predisposed to transgenderism, and if they have one such daughter the odds of two is not the same as the odds of one squared.

  2. One of the most tragic outcomes of the tranny madness which afflicts our downwards-spiralling society is the damage it does to girls. It is a misogynistic movement at heart: most of its members* either hate women cos they wish they could be one or are narcissistic perverts who want to subvert and undermine womanhood.

    The fallout from this leads to insecure teenage girls rejecting their femininity, their female bodies and – in some cases- their sexuality. In the worst cases this leads to them subjecting themselves to medical mutilation. I hope this does not happen to these girls.

    Woke parents encourage this madness as it is part of their toxic religion. Probably, in this case, there has been a lot of evangelical blather about female sinfulness too.

    It is perhaps not too late to take the youngest child away from her demented parents. Then drag them out into the street and horsewhip them for what they have done or allowed to be done to their offspring.

  3. @MC
    teenage girls rejecting their femininity, their female bodies
    Looking at the family photo the 2 eldest don’t seem to be rejecting their female bodies at all.

  4. Considering that autistic girls are the the ones most likely to be persuaded to go trans, I would say that it’s not a genetic condition that makes them trans, but a genetic predisposition to autism. And the parents being woke have allowed their children to think about going trans rather than accept who they are as they are.

  5. Bloke in North Dorset

    In the past parents humoured kids when they said things like I really want to be a boy/girl and dismissed boys dressing up in their mums’ clothes as just a fad. No fuss made and chid moves on, with a few sad exceptions.

    Now we’ve got a state sponsored industry that specialises in telling these kids that they are special, their parents are evil, and they can be who or what they want to be. Sadly that Genie is not going back in the bottle unless we shut down the Internet.

  6. It could be like cot death, that one incident is a signal of the likelyhood of an underlying cause so making a second one *more* likely than baseline, not less likely.

    I’ve had a brown baby, wow, what are the chances? 5%. Wow, I’ve had a *second* brown baby! Wow! A 0.25% chance! Amazeballs!

  7. Tim is 100% correct. This is a confluence of Calhounian rattism and social contagion.

    its entirely possible that the genetic combination of that couple creates girls predisposed to transgenderism

    Puhlease. There’s no tranny gene. There’s no gay gene (the boffins checked). Which is what you’d expect from a Darwinian pov – genes didn’t evolve to help you fail to procreate.

    It’s an open question if pollution can cause sexual deviancy. Apparently we’re a lot less violent than previous generations, which some people ascribe to environmental factors. This passivity isn’t entirely a Good Thing.

    But I think the main lesson here might be: marry a white woman, repent at leisure. If he’d taken a nice Caribbean or Nigerian lady for a wife she’d have chased those demons out of their children a long time ago, instead of Munchausening them into parodies of masculinity for social media clout.

    For God judges the righteous, and is angry with the wicked every day. The Bible also has some pretty spicy things to say about genderbending, it is described as an abomination to the Lord.

  8. In the US they have the concept of a LUG: Lesbian Until Graduation. The premise is simple: while at college you profess lesbianism (while probably never acting on it); but as soon as you meet Mr Right, you’re heterosexual. It’s a smart way to deflect peer pressure to have sex.

    The fad for “non-binary” is just the same thing: an escape from the pressure to sleep around. Prude that I am, I broadly welcome this development.

  9. Bad genes, bad parenting and one parent without any fundamental belief so looks to fill the gap with wokism (the Songs of Praise presenter that is).

    Also his wife is called Carrie Grant, gender confusion abounds.

  10. Bloke in North Korea (Germany province)

    Even if the outcomes are completely independent you get as many “throws of the dice” as there are families of this or greater size. And if you are feeling honest, as many as there have been such families in the whole of time. And then you focus on the one unusual set of coincidences and marvel at the column inches it gets to fill.

    Of course, I think we can fairly discount the hypothesis of the outcomes being independent in this case, just pointing out you gotta be really careful with the statistics of these things, especially when your attention is biased to the extremes.

  11. “Non-binary” is all about social status. The term implies that the rest of us are all simple ones and zeros, while they are more sophisticated than that. Therefore, it is most likely to be found among the most status-conscious classes – for example, the kind of people with media connections who can get articles written about their families – and in teenagers looking for a fashionable identity to boost their social standing. People who claim to be “non-binary” are really saying “I’m special and you’re not”.

  12. “Pop star”,
    “Star” in Hollyoaks
    “Currently called”

    This shows the escalation of titles and the ‘me’ culture which needs external validation. No wonder they hate Jordon Peterson so much as he takes out the very foundation stones of their belief in the meaning of their little unimportant lives.

  13. . . . why is the white wife dressed up like the Unbongo advert?

    First thing I noticed after the mixed raceness. Maybe she’s been trying to live out a dainty-little-momma fantasy from a music video she saw on MTV when young:

    Linda McCartney – Seaside Woman (Version 1) Official Video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEm-7z46LFM

    Incidentally, the animator there, Oscar Grillo, was involved in an ad campaign for a sugary drinks company, producing designs perhaps inspired by a character featured in other sugary products. When the ad agency heard a silly song by some white Nordic types, they combined the culturally colourful styles and we were blessed with this naughty little bit of ’80s genius:

    Kia-ora “Too orangey for crows”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aS44El_V7SM
    (also with a dainty-little-momma!)

    Original song:

    Fido by Caramba
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1g0dObhPzlk

    Caramba’s release of their version of the ad music:

    Fedora by Caramba:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3p7hEZpHgbA

    Goes a bit weird, that (they are Nordic). I rather like this adaptation:

    KIA ORA ADVERT – LAB RAT DUB
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hcvu1fet5OE
    (better audio at that MP3 link)

    .
    Them was the days (even if they were a bit shit). Grab the videos while you still can.

  14. (oh bollocks, I forgot about the multiple links exclusion)

    .
    . . . why is the white wife dressed up like the Unbongo advert?

    First thing I noticed after the mixed raceness. Maybe she’s been trying to live out a dainty-little-momma fantasy from a music video she saw on MTV when young:

    Linda McCartney – Seaside Woman (Version 1) Official Video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEm-7z46LFM

    The kids will quickly notice the pretence and throw some right back.

  15. Incidentally, the animator there, Oscar Grillo, was involved in an ad campaign for a sugary drinks company, producing designs perhaps inspired by a character featured in other sugary products. When the ad agency heard a silly song by some white Nordic types, they combined the culturally colourful styles and we were blessed with this naughty little bit of ’80s genius:

    Kia-ora “Too orangey for crows”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aS44El_V7SM
    (complete with a dainty-little-momma!)

  16. I know quite a few people who say they wish non-binary had been an established ‘thing’ when they were younger. For them, it’s not about having surgery etc.. just about them not having any interest in the traditional gender role they, as youngsters, felt they were ‘supposed’ to fall into.

    Is it just a trendy new way for the privileged classes to label what was ever thus? Yes, to some material extent. There were always ‘tomboys’ and ‘sissies’ (and many more minded like them, but who pretended otherwise) but both of those terms were pejoratives (especially the feminising one, natch) so of course now that there is a cool new option that confers social status, instead of marking one out as being incorrect in some way, lots of people are jumping in it. If you don’t like the non-binary thing then go get angry at people who insist on telling kids how that they are supposed behave, wear and present themselves based purely on their junk.

    We cannot look at our understanding of the prevalence of the characteristics that make someone believe they are non-binary from before there was a ‘socially acceptable’ way to let your friends and family know that you had those characteristics. Most people won’t choose an option they don’t know exists. We have absolutely no idea what proportion of people would consider themselves non-binary if it was something that was open to them, and accepted in the world, during the period in their life that they started figuring stuff out.

    And as non-binary doesn’t require surgery or pills.. I don’t understand why we don’t universally welcome this experimentation. It’s not a bad thing just because a lot of insufferable twats are into it. I’d love to see it pull aside from The Trans Issue entirely (because it’s simply not the same thing) and whatever social status comes from it can hopefully be whittled down… non-binary is just a different way of seeing yourself and presenting yourself. People want a way of opting out of the traditional gender ideas that is easy.. that doesn’t need to be explained it justified every time it comes up.

    I am too old and introverted to start putting a new label on my head. But my gender is officially ‘irrelevant and none of your business’.. which is probably closer to ‘non-binary’ than anything else. And I am a very ordinary heterosexual male who was born in (an ugly version of) the correct body. It’s not that I am not male, just that being male is not important to me and doesn’t figure in the ‘things about me’ that I want other people to think matter.

  17. Recently a complaint here from a non-binary asexual person who complained about their doctor because the doctor refused a treatment/drug because of known issues relating to low libido….what became obvious is that they literally did not know the definition of what they were claiming to be and they were just trying to dress up the old fashioned idea of celibacy but be all trendy

  18. In much the same way the bisexuals are trying to recast themselves as pansexual a lot of this is just new terms for old things dressed up to look trendy or remove the negative connotations

  19. Nowt queer as folk and nothing new under the sun. But there are trends, and there are different ways of organising a civilisation some more amenable to longevity than others. And so the social value based on marginal identity has propelled traits which a novelist sketches for their character in the first page or two into the ingredients for “Identity”, and the v various trait cocktails now have Proper nouns with pronouns to match that a reader needs to look up in the glossary.

  20. “I don’t understand why we don’t universally welcome this experimentation. It’s not a bad thing just because a lot of insufferable twats are into it.”

    Sadly it is. Because we all know how this story plays out. Letting people get on with being ‘non-binary’ if they want to soon becomes ‘you called me by the wrong pronoun, thats a hate crime, I’m calling the police!’ and ‘Celebrate Non-Binary day or else bigots!’. You may want to be left alone to do your own thing, and I think most people on here have no problem with it. The problem is the Left will weaponise you against us, we’ve seen it with every other social movement the Left jump on.

  21. @Jim

    So we should not let people get on with being what they are because some people (who, let’s face it, mainly aren’t that thing themselves) will see some power that can abuse?

    Should we also push back against people who are black? Gay? Female? The characteristics where such weaponisation tactics were honed are all somewhat immutable. Yet, ‘The Right’ (because we’re being sweeping, here), each time, went after the people with the characteristics. Not, or not only, the people weaponising them.

    Maybe a bit more leaving people in peace rather than dragging them into proxy wars, from everyone, would be good. Maybe these groups wouldn’t lean left so reliably if they didn’t see so much hostility from the other side?

  22. Maybe a bit more leaving people in peace rather than dragging them into proxy wars

    Not giving a shit about pronouns, non-binary, or any other self-declared characteristic we’re all increasingly being forced to celebrate is leaving people in peace.

  23. “So we should not let people get on with being what they are because some people (who, let’s face it, mainly aren’t that thing themselves) will see some power that can abuse?”

    Yup, sadly. Because the people who want to be left alone are the ones who need to tell the Left to sling its hook when they come along with their ‘support’. But they never do, they lap it all up, thinking the Left actually like them and are ‘on their side’ which of course they aren’t one jot, as the working classes, women and increasingly non-Muslim Asians and gay and lesbians are finding out. When your group has no more use to the Left you’ll be dropped in it faster than you can say ‘The Left is the movement for the working man’.

    We’ve seen this play out time after time – if as a group you allow the Left to weaponise you then you deserve all you get, because this isn’t playschool, the Left are playing for keeps, and if you side with them then you are in the target zone.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *