In physics, and maths, we’re often interested in “edge cases”. We’re not always interested in these things in and of themselves, but they serve a useful purpose in being able to check our working.
You’ll spend a couple of days grinding through some algebra, doing some awkward integrals, and generally wishing you could relax and have a cup of tea and a biscuit, but you’ve finally generated The Formula™
You’ve ended up with an equation that relates the thing you’re trying to work out with all sorts of other things. But is it right?
One of the things you do at this point is to check to see whether this godawful bunch of hieroglyphs you’ve come up with actually makes any sense. So you’ll look at the various limits you can think of. If you think you’ve just worked out how something moves in response to an electric field, then when you let the electric field go to zero in your equation, it might be a good idea if it tells you that the thing doesn’t move.
Or if you think you’ve just worked out some new general theorem in maths, it’s a bit of a bugger if you find some weird counter-example, some “edge case” that serves to disprove your theorem.
It’s when we try to apply this kind of thinking to gender ideology do we see how useful it can be in other, non mathematical, situations.
We’re all, I think, familiar with “effeminate” men and “butch” women. They’ve been with us for absolutely bloody ages. It did take a while, but we did manage to bash the more restrictive and strait-laced norms on the head to the point where most of us could shrug our shoulders and say “what’s wrong with that?”.
The battle against sexual stereotyping was a necessary and important one1.
I still enjoy those stereotypes, though, in certain circumstances.
Guys seem to have some inbuilt deficiency2. They notice their partner with that “I’ve just eaten a pickled onion dipped in hot chili sauce” look and know something isn’t quite right.
You can’t help yourself. You have to do it. You know it’s not going to end well, but you do it anyway.
“Are you OK, dear?”
And then come the 2 most dangerous words in the English language for any man.
“I’m fine”
Your brain goes into meltdown at this point. Every neuron is screaming at you : why the fuck did you open your big, fat, stupid mouth and ask the question? There is no conceivable way forward from this point, no possible strategy, that will not result in a few hours of absolute misery.
The Neanderthal part of you is trying to be optimistic and telling you that the make-up sex will be amazing.
Evolution is yet to provide men with any defences against this situation.
Effeminate men and butch women buck all of these kinds of stereotypical trends, and even using the terminology “effeminate” and “butch” is to give weight to these stereotypes.
But we’re used to it. It isn’t these days any kind of deal at all, big or otherwise.
And so when it comes to the trans issue, the traditional trans issue, we’re kind of in the position that it just might be true that some very effeminate man is “born in the wrong body”. It seems at least a little bit plausible.
An article in Quillette on this most thorny of today’s issues starts off by mentioning an “edge case”. It’s hard to make any sense of it, which is not the fault of the authors of this piece, but because the case itself is gloriously bizarre.
They describe the case of one Nathaniel Le May who “identifies” as something called
Transmasculine Non-Binary
I’m not even going to try to translate this piece of raving Genderish.
You will probably not be surprised to learn that Nathaniel is unhappy and is complaining about something or other and taking legal action. One does begin to wonder whether this kind of behaviour is another stereotype in the making?
I’m Trans and you’ve offended my glorious transness. I’m going to sue.
So what is the marginalized and oppressed Nathaniel getting his (or her) underpants (or knickers) in a twist about?
Apparently, Nathaniel wants both a bonus hole and a bonus pole. And she/he/whatthefuckever wants the government to pay for it3.
Nathaniel already has a vagina (assigned at birth), but now wants a cock as well.
I’m not sure exactly where Nathaniel wants the extra equipment to be attached, but I hope it’s not her forehead.
If Nathaniel and its partner (if it has one) ever find themselves in the “I’m fine” torture loop, then I think the make-up sex could be very confusing.
So this “edge case” does raise the interesting question of what, precisely, is the “right” body for Nathaniel? Obviously, she thinks she was born in the wrong one.
Of course, what we’re dealing with here is someone who is actually rather mentally unwell. But we’re so bloody frightened of just “saying it like it is” for fear of upsetting someone, that we don’t point out the screaming fucking obvious.
Instead we build up some fanciful and deranged ideology around it all and pretend like it all means something.
Nathaniel needs help - not some Frankencock.
Nathaniel is not really the villain here, the people enabling Nathaniel are the villains. She/he/it is not oppressed, except by the lunatics who speak fluent Genderish.
And as any (hetero) woman knows, whilst a cock might be a nice thing to play with when you’re in the mood, it’s not on its own going to bring you any lasting happiness. It needs to be attached to a decent, honourable, and sane man for that4.
And one we’re having to have all over again because of the rise of the morons who are fluent in Genderish
Only one?
You will, also, not be surprised that the government (Canada) have capitulated to Nathaniel’s demands
And it works the other way round too.
Well, let's give it a try:
[Transmasculine Non-Binary]
Transmasculine means it transcends - goes outside - the normal definitions(s) of masculine with regards to male biological markers and characteristics. So no Y-chromosome, no beard, not very strong, no gonads, prostate, penis et c. Also not acting as a man.
Non-Binary means the person doesn't acknowledge that for humans there are two sexes and genders; as is the case with all such persons, they use the term non-binary to shut down others. It sounds technical and therefore "real", and doesn't really mean anything so the trans- can maek it mean whatever is needed as and when.
So this person you write about is a mentaly ill woman with such a bad case of disassociative personality disorder plus Cluster B-type personality disorder on top of possible body dysmorphia, she thinks attaching a man's penis in front of her vagina will make her happy.
Edge cases are nice - in the social sciences they are often more important than the rest of the hypothesis and body of work, since the edge case can be (often is) what wrecks/exploits/advances the status quo.
Interesting post. I’ve been meaning to ask, does this comment make me look fat?
Seriously, though, it is comforting to me actually (in an odd way) to think of the transgender craze as the weird but not unrelated second cousin of our current obsession with the outward appearance of (especially but not exclusively) the female body. Even as the majority of us become more slovenly, we worship at the altar of Kardashinism, in which grown women fret not over whether they have been generous or gentle or truthful enough (sexist!!!) but whether their sexual organs and everything attached to them (the somewhat extraneous bits) are the stuff of their own and others’ fantasies. It’s ok to be Lizzo as long as you twerk. Ultimately, perhaps we have been distracted by the claims that transgenderism is about gender and inner feelings. It is purely superficial as a movement. It is about the total failure of a generation or more to impress upon our children that, while being neat and presentable and taking care of oneself are all healthy and respectful things, it really is what is on the inside that counts— and lasts. It’s not about people trying to match their outside with their “true self”— it’s the absolute and total rejection of the human being as intrinsically valuable beyond her physical appearance, and the abolition of virtue as the most enduring marker of beauty.