Gaines' Gain Against Biles' Bile

Remember those days when you could have civil, and interesting, conversations with people who disagreed with you? I think it was around the late Cretaceous period, or maybe a fraction earlier.

Not So Gainly Bile

By now you will have all seen one of the world’s greatest ever athletes going off on one, seemingly unprovoked and out of the blue (or BlueSky?), at Riley Gaines who has been a very vocal critic of allowing POC’s to compete in women’s sport.

Not that sort of POC - but Persons Of Cock. The other sort of POC we should probably re-label as a Pigmented Person (a PP, pronounced Pee-Pee)¹.

Here’s the original Tweet or Xweet or Xeet or whatever the eff we should call these things now.

You’re truly sick, all of this campaigning because you lost a race. Straight up sore loser. You should be uplifting the trans community and perhaps finding a way to make sports inclusive OR creating a new avenue where trans feel safe in sports. Maybe a transgender category IN ALL sports!! But instead… You bully them… One things for sure is no one in sports is safe with you around!!!!!

There are so many things to unpack here. I won’t attempt to unpack all of the not-so-invisible nutsack here, but a couple of things did stand out - probably a bit like the things that stood out to Riley Gaines when she competed against POC’s.

I’m sorry. I was going to attempt to be moderately serious, but I’m so fed-up of this endless stream of bollocks from the “uplifting the trans community” folk.

Just as an aside, why is it my job to “uplift” any supposed ‘community’? Why is it Riley Gaines job to “uplift” this particular community?

I’m OK with live and let live provided it doesn’t impinge on the freedoms and rights of others, but why is it my business to be “uplifting” any of these so-called communities?

I’m happy to uplift my local community in any way I can (helping out at the village fete and other such functions, for example), but I’m talking about a real community here.

Hasn’t the trans ‘community’ had enough fawning adoration anyway? Clearly not, but I suppose when your whole existence is predicated on external validation there is never enough adoration to be had. I’ve just about had enough of the histrionics and tantrums when people refuse to accept their claims of womanhood.

First of all notice that Gaines is accused of being “truly sick”, a “sore loser”, a “bully” and of being a danger to everyone in sports.

I’ve never met Riley Gaines but at 5 feet 5 inches she must be one fearsome lady to pose such a danger to everyone in sports.

Note also that in Biles’ view the only possible reason Gaines objects to POC’s in sport is not based on principle but sour grapes. And “all of this campaigning” is just another variant of the truly dumb “why do you care?” argument which suggest that (a) it’s nothing to do with you and you’re creepy and weird for concerning yourself with it and (b) the numbers are so small it’s of minor consequence.

I suppose one should just ignore cannibalism also, since it’s kind of rare and few of us ever meet a cannibal in real life. Can’t we just let them be their authentic selves?

But, you splurt, cannibalism causes real harm. Yeah, and so does allowing POC’s to compete against women. Your point being?

There’s no attempt at any substantive point in Biles’ bile. It’s all just emotive claptrap. Sports, for example, are already inclusive. No one is banned from sport because they are trans. They, like men, don’t get to choose the category they compete in. Those categories have, historically, been based on sex.

A transwoman is not discriminated against because they are trans, but because they are men. Just as every other man on the planet is discriminated against and prevented from competing against women.

Sex is a fixed, objective, category. Gender is not. Even in those extremely rare edge cases we call DSD’s (which have nothing to do with ‘trans’) it is usually clear to which category they belong - and any determination of category in these cases should be made on an individual basis after investigation of the specific biology involved. As a general rule, if you have undergone a puberty that has allowed you to access ‘male advantage’ then you should compete in the male category,

Again, I ask, why is it Gaines’ job to make “trans feel safe in sports”? Is this to be done at the expense of women’s feelings of safety, perhaps? Or do they, unlike trans people, not have a right to feel unsafe? Are their safety concerns somehow less legitimate?

Maybe ditch the whole “feeling safe” crap. For everyone. Choose your sport. Toughen up, buttercup. Do, or do not. Don’t care if you “feel” unsafe². Are you actually unsafe?

We all worry about all sorts of shit and have fearful feelings. Most of the time our fears are unfounded and we’re just letting our emotions get the better of us. Buy a book on CBT if your feelings of fear overwhelm you.

I’m fed-up with our pandemic of mollycoddling.

Trans people are not excluded from sports. They are, just like everyone else, excluded from getting to choose the sex-based category in which they compete.

And then, of course, you get the ridiculous reporting - seriously, you do not hate the mainstream media nearly enough - which claims, based on a couple of dimwit articles, that transwomen have no advantage over women in sports. Here’s one example of this lack of advantage.

This wasn’t a marathon, or even a 1500m race. It was a 400m sprint. Won by a transwoman who clearly possessed no advantage whatsoever.

Look at all those “sore losers” way back in the distance.

The Aftermath

It is almost impossible to overstate just how illogical, incoherent, idiotic, and evidence-free the current version of ‘trans ideology’ is. And people have woken up to it. It’s taken a while, but it was always going to happen simply because the whole shebang is ludicrous. What is more interesting to me is just how and why so many very well-educated and otherwise intelligent people came to support such obvious bollocks.

And Biles has just drawn a huge target on the whole ideology with her outburst. Instead of finding support (outside of the ideologically possessed morons who work for the MSM) she was seriously criticized. She has subsequently issued one of those apologies, which we all suspect she was instructed to do by her PR team after they noticed the public were no longer simping for the trans cause.

These kinds of things make headlines. People read the shite produced by the MSM and think - WTF? I don’t want men competing against women - that’s just wrong. All the airy-fairy talk of ‘inclusion’ and ‘be kind’ and ‘uplifting’ meets the immovable wall of reality. Men are not women. Never will be. Never have been.

And they’ve chosen the wrong battleground. Sports isn’t about being ‘nice’ - it’s about winning. It’s entirely discriminatory in nature. Oh, look at poor Letitia struggling at the back there, let’s just slow down so that she can win gold for once - said no serious athlete ever.

People want to see a fair fight³. They want to see the best pitted against the best and the winner take all. It wouldn’t be much fun (at least not in terms of ‘sports’ fun) in watching Liverpool play a team from the local nursing home⁴. Nobody would consider that to be a fair fight.

So when a Lia Thomas, who we all know possesses (or once possessed) a John Thomas, wins against women, very few of us are going to see that as fair. We can see, with our own eyes, that it is wrong. All of the MSM bleatings to the contrary, that people like Lia Thomas are actually women and should be competing against women, just makes the MSM look stupid. We can see that he’s a strapping lad, even if he’s a bit partial to lippy and a skirt.

Lia Thomas wins the 200m midget freestyle. He really shouldn’t have been allowed to identify as a midget. Tsk tsk.

Being Cruel To Be Kind?

I get it at one level. The importance of feelings has been ramped up so much that many people view “being kind” and being seen to be kind are the most important things. But what if, like ‘affirming’ an anorexic’s self-perception of their body, continual validation and affirmation of a trans person’s new ‘sex’ is actually unkind in the long run?

No doubt the trans lobby would baulk at such a suggestion and claim otherwise but, by now, we’ve seen all sorts of claims they have made just dissolve into nothingness. The Cass review in the UK and the recent review by the HHS in the US - alongside similar findings in some European countries has shown just how thin the evidence base for those activist assertions has been.

The problem for the trans lobby is that the more these issues get reported on, even favourably (as is usual in the MSM), the more people will think about this for themselves and realize that the whole basket of bonkers that is ‘trans ideology’ is the proverbial crock of shit.

And even some of the MSM is starting to write articles that whilst not really nasty will revolt most of their readers. Articles about men’s “chestfeeding”, for example, are not good propaganda for the trans cause, because it makes most normal people feel sick and worry about the health and well-being of the babies who are being used as pawns in some narcissistic (or even sexual⁵) display. If you’re the kind of person who likes to follow up and read the scientific literature you’ll find articles that talk about the importance of validating the feelings of trans people with precious little ‘airtime’ given to whether this is actually a good thing for baby or not.

Most of us do not want to be dickheads. OK, we might find the sight of someone built like Jack Reacher wearing a wig and dressed in a miniskirt mincing around the place to be a bit odd, but we’ll get over it. The problem is that the trans lobby will insist on bringing everyone else into their little drama.

The anger at being ‘misgendered’ is a case in point. This does happen to non-trans people too, you know. It has happened to me, and is usually a signal that I need to get my hair cut. Do non-trans people get all antsy about it and kick up one holy hell of a fuss?

And then you have the problem of non-homogeneity. We’re strongly encouraged by the trans lobby to view trans as a terrible condition in which someone is ‘born in the wrong body’ that requires extensive care to ‘fix’. We are enjoined to be ultra-compassionate to such unfortunate individuals and to recognize their ‘bravery’ and to ‘celebrate’ when they decide to ‘transition’.

The problem is that we know that included in the trans basket are individuals who have other mental challenges or whose trans ‘nature’ stems from autogynephilia.

The Gender Blender and the Hatchet Ratchet

As we all know, the current mess is a result of a movement, largely started in the hollowed halls of academia, that has promoted ‘gender’ over sex. The fact that nobody seems to have a coherent definition of what gender is, or properly understands it, is immaterial.

You’d expect a body such as the WHO, the WORLD Health Organisation, to be stuffed to the gunnels with experts, people who know what they’re talking about. If, for some reason, you missed the whole covid freakshow you might still think that. So what do they have to say about this mysterious stuff we call ‘gender’?

Gender refers to the characteristics of women, men, girls and boys that are socially constructed. This includes norms, behaviours and roles associated with being a woman, man, girl or boy, as well as relationships with each other. As a social construct, gender varies from society to society and can change over time.

This is from their page on gender and health. An entire thesis could be written about this introductory passage alone, but two things of note

• The notion of gender here relies explicitly on the existence of the sex binary. This thing we call ‘gender’ is, it is claimed here, a social construct that arises from the biological binary of sex.

• If it’s a social construct then it is not innate

This is at odds with the activist claim that even some very young people ‘know’ what ‘gender’ they are. It is talked about as if it is some ‘innate’ property. What might be true is that even from a very young age some people might feel they prefer one set of social constructs over another for themselves.

Also of note here is that this definition does not tell us what ‘gender’ actually IS. It relies on examples of just two ‘genders’ and is somewhat circular in this regard. How are we to take this definition and apply it to one of the other so-called ‘genders’? What are the socially constructed norms, behaviours and roles of the Eunuch Gender⁶, for example?

You can read the rest of WHO’s statement about ‘gender’ for yourselves, but you’ll note that most of the rest is actually talking about a sex category, except they use the word ‘gender’. They talk about gender-based discrimination, for example, when they mean discrimination based on one’s sex.

If the (supposed) premier health organisation in the world can write something this muddled and incoherent then how are the ‘normies’ supposed to disentangle the hot mess that is trans and gender ideology?

This leads to a great deal of confusion, particularly in young people. Young people who might be struggling with other issues or extremely fearful of the changes wrought by puberty. Thinking of themselves in terms of ‘gender’ rather than sex gives them a potential opt out.

That’s when the medical ghouls start thinking about getting their hatchets out and lopping off the healthy body parts of youngsters in the name of ‘care’ - because nothing screams ‘care’ quite like chopping the healthy tits off some teenage girl.

Why Do You Care?

The standard activist (and ally) tactic is to imply that this is a minor issue, and that you’re weird and creepy for being ‘obsessed’ with it. They will claim there’s something wrong with ‘right-wing’ people and that they’re rather too concerned over the genitalia of others. This is essentially the nub of Biles’ issue with Gaines. Gaines is portrayed as being deficient (and “truly sick”) for even caring about the issue and that Gaines’ concern stems from some kind of hissy fit over losing.

They are very wrong, of course. Laws have historically been written to improve the lot of women based on their sex, not their ‘gender’. Feminists might claim these haven’t yet gone far enough, but feminism itself is predicated on the existence of a binary sex category and not some ‘gender’ category. Women have been discriminated against because of their bodies, not because of their “socially constructed norms, behaviours and roles”.

Indeed, in one perspective those socially constructed norms, behaviours and roles might themselves be seen as a form of sex-based discrimination.

By re-writing these laws so that ‘gender’ becomes the primary basis on which this category is established impacts everyone. It’s not a minor, or trivial, thing at all. And that’s just one area of concern.

Another area of concern is that we have known for some time that something like over 80% of young people who express some kind of serious ‘gender’ confusion (actually a sex confusion) are cured of this after puberty. The natural process of puberty IS the best “gender affirming care” we know about. It has a much, much, much, higher success rate than getting snip happy with those hatchets.

Most of those with some form of ‘gender’ confusion are actually gay. So “gender affirming care” is actually a kind of very ghoulish conversion therapy. Frightened of the thought of being a gay man? Relax - we have the answer. Just become a woman instead. Then you will no longer be one of those problematic gay people.

If you go the whole hog here and go for the full snip and excavation, you’ll end up with, quite literally, a hole that neither looks nor performs anything like an actual vagina. And you’ll quite likely have some serious complications and have to be on drugs and dilation for the rest of your life.

Woman, as we know, have to regularly stuff something up their vaginas because the things just close up if they don’t get used.

There are many reasons to care. Important reasons to care. And preserving women’s sports is only one of them, and not even the most important one. It is, however, a great ‘propaganda’ tool for common sense. The more ‘women’ keep beating women in sporting events, the more will the whole delusion of trans ideology be brought to the fore.

None of this implies (or should imply) we need to be dickheads towards trans people. I don’t want to see even an autogynephile abused because of their sexual kink provided they can keep their behaviours under appropriate control and not attempt to invade women’s spaces to get their rocks off.

We need to be consistent, fair, and firm. It’s all about sex not ‘gender’.

1. You can tell I’m a bit fed up with all these fucking divisive labels can’t you? I seriously hate this white vs POC crap that has been foisted upon us. The term PP is not meant to ridicule people, but the divisive ideology that underpins the whole critical race thing.

2. This is not a ‘universal’ here. There are situations when we should pay attention to feelings of being unsafe. I think we’ve gone overboard and applied this ‘feelings’ malarkey to almost everything, but consider a woman walking home alone at night encountering a man. I think in those kinds of situations “feeling unsafe” is entirely understandable and also legitimate even though a large majority of men would pose no danger at all. The fact that some men pose a danger, and a significant one at that, is enough. The ‘feeling’ of being unsafe translates to actually being unsafe in rare cases (not rare enough, sadly). I also happen to think women’s fears when faced with a man in a space reserved for women, like a changing room at a sports venue, are also legitimate for much the same reason.

3. If fairness was not such an important issue, why would we even care about doping?

4. It might be lots of fun in other darkly humorous ways

5. An autogynephile’s impulse to ‘be’ a woman is sexual in nature

6. WPATH, the self-styled world ‘authority’ on transy genderish, included a section on the “Eunuch Gender” in a recent version of their guidelines.