Women like her do stir *some sympathy in me, because they are clearly doing all this as a salve to their own suffering - but of course their way of coping consists of calling others to follow them jumping off the cliff so they aren't as lonely on the way down.
I see the same self-unacceptance in Judith Butler. Its obvious to me JB is a self-hating lesbian who invented the whole gender pretzel logic so she could conceal her lack of self-acceptance by just relabelling herself as something like nonbinary.
I cannot bear Judith Butler. She constantly talks in circles and contradicts herself at every twist and turn, along with the usual cranes of gas-lighting. Why anyone would ever listen to her, let alone put her on a pedestal as an 'authority', is beyond my comprehension. Truly.
Thank you for taking the time to reply. I'm quite interested in what people have to say about Butler - partly because I am a Philosophy grad and I do understand the language she uses (mostly and with much effort). The problems I have with her are several-fold.
Firstly the issue of motivation - what I said is not a nice observation - I think she tries to construct a way of fitting in by "queering" identity (ie if there are no boundaries or "normal" I can't be on the wrong side of them and be badly treated). IE trying to "change normal to fit into it" - at massive cost to others.
Secondly (your point precisely) she has absolutely no qualifications in the subjects she has so much influence on. JB is a Lit prof - sexology, psychology, sociology, reproductive science - these are all well established academic fields so why is an Arts academic setting the public policy agenda?
Coincidentally, I've just come across an article on substack that I'm currently in the middle of reading and there was a segment on Judith Butler and her theory on 'gender as a performance'. Which to me is an extension and perversion of the concept of the 'gender/sex roles' that underpins the sociological nature v nurture debate.
'These trans narratives don’t just live on social media. They bleed into real life—reinforced and legitimized by academic theories, especially Judith Butler’s theory of gender as performance. These ideas have moved beyond universities and into public policy, healthcare, and everyday discourse. The frameworks lend moral and intellectual authority to behaviors that might otherwise be seen as inappropriate, offensive, or degrading—reframing social contagion, identity mimicry, or even cultural appropriation as admirable self-expression.
Criticism of these narratives is often met with instant censorship: “wrong” questions and dissenting comments are deleted, critics are blocked or vilified, and entire conversations disappear into an impenetrable echo chamber. Warnings about harm, medical malpractice, or the exploitation of children are drowned out by a culture that treats affirmation as sacred—and anything less as transphobia or bigotry.'
'I think she tries to construct a way of fitting in by "queering" identity (ie if there are no boundaries or "normal" I can't be on the wrong side of them and be badly treated). IE trying to "change normal to fit into it" - at massive cost to others.'
Precisely🎯. The very basis of transgenderism and transhumanism is built on this very flawed notion. It's as if she's taken total inspiration from Martin(e) Rothblatt & Co.
My biggest issue with Butler is that she believes that reality is ENTIRELY constructed through language, as if there is no inherent reality which undergirds the language that we use. And anyway, doesn't "gender as a performance" stop the minute someone sees what you have on the operating table? Or looks at a sex test result? The activists never seem to think of these things.
4:36 The thing is that no matter what the people who support this stuff say, they are all aware deep down of the fact that sex is binary, immutable and sometimes particularly significant. There's much less opposition to viralised women accessing male spaces than the other way around, and they know that.
I'm sure there must be a "pretty" male trans identifying lawyer the organisation could employ as a mouthpiece.
Kate/Chase here is at least presumably never going to be outed as a sex offender.
I would venture to say 'most of the time' particularly significant ie 99.999%. Especially when it comes to everything physical and most definitely health related.
Every minute element of the supposed 'transition' process is based on those very differences. Either trying to attain those differences or erase and hide them and the side effects and problems from doing so. The bedrock of transgender 'care' is dealing with all those differences.
I think also “victimhood” is a key ingredient in any cult. They must constantly convince their members they are oppressed victims and must die on the hill. Transgenders rights are human rights! (Until you look into it and realize these “rights “ are human rights violations on women and children.
Yes. Transgender rights are perversely(like everything else perversity is always at the heart of it) 'rights to abuse', diminish and erase the lives of women and children and to be protected in doing so, as a Human Right, in order to legitimise and give authority to continue to perpetrate such abuse. The whole thing is perverse, non-sensical, irrational, confusing, gas-lighting, contradictory, hypocritical, crazy, etc.
It's an example of how evil manifests and shows up in this world.
Professional victimhood really does seem to be intrinsic to the fantasy life and very "identity" of both male and female contemporary opposite sex impersonators/mimics. It's nothing short of extraordinary when one considers the political heft and privileges that this purportedly tiny minority has managed to accrue for itself over the past decade.
My humble piece of advice to those like Strangio is to get nice and used to "losing" now that the majority of society has seen what these people would do to innocent children and neurodivergent adults given half the chance - but what do *I* know, I guess? 🙄
I've been observing her lack of critical analytical skills for years. I frankly don't know how she passed the bar. The only place she could get hired as a lawyer would be low paying NGOs where she exists largely as a performative public face.
Actually, I got a cheeseburger. Mad Mac's restaurant in Lake County, California. Susie and Mac lost their dearly beloved canine today, and still came in to serve us folks up some tasty eats. Hope you have a place like that to go to sometimes, dear dragonfox2.0 and Lida H. ❤️❤️❤️
Chris Hayes has let his uncontrollable desire to kill or maim others get out into the open. His show should be taken off the air, and this man taken to Bellevue.
It wasn't a narrow decision. While the ruling was based on a failure to satisfy Fourteenth Amendment requirements, the concurring decisions went further into the claims failing at every level: that they did not qualify as a suspect or quasi-suspect class, that children are incapable of giving informed consent, and that the record revealed the state had ample justification for regulating medicine, particularly where there was no evidence the extreme treatment was beneficial.
The court also specifically stated that it is not sex discrimination because "the law does not prohibit conduct for one sex that it permits for the other." Nor does it discriminate on the basis of identity: "SB1 does not exclude any individual from medical treatments on the basis of transgender status but rather removes one set of diagnoses—gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder, and gender incongruence—from the range of treatable conditions."
Finally, the majority reiterated that Bostock only applied to Title VII claims which prohibit discrimination in employment.
So everything she says is utterly without foundation, not unlike her brief.
Interesting that the 3 Justices who held against the majority decision Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson are all women! All Democrat appointees, what does that say about this.
Women like her do stir *some sympathy in me, because they are clearly doing all this as a salve to their own suffering - but of course their way of coping consists of calling others to follow them jumping off the cliff so they aren't as lonely on the way down.
I see the same self-unacceptance in Judith Butler. Its obvious to me JB is a self-hating lesbian who invented the whole gender pretzel logic so she could conceal her lack of self-acceptance by just relabelling herself as something like nonbinary.
I cannot bear Judith Butler. She constantly talks in circles and contradicts herself at every twist and turn, along with the usual cranes of gas-lighting. Why anyone would ever listen to her, let alone put her on a pedestal as an 'authority', is beyond my comprehension. Truly.
Like so many others Butler = Word Salad.
That's it! 'Word salad'.👏🏾
Thank you for taking the time to reply. I'm quite interested in what people have to say about Butler - partly because I am a Philosophy grad and I do understand the language she uses (mostly and with much effort). The problems I have with her are several-fold.
Firstly the issue of motivation - what I said is not a nice observation - I think she tries to construct a way of fitting in by "queering" identity (ie if there are no boundaries or "normal" I can't be on the wrong side of them and be badly treated). IE trying to "change normal to fit into it" - at massive cost to others.
Secondly (your point precisely) she has absolutely no qualifications in the subjects she has so much influence on. JB is a Lit prof - sexology, psychology, sociology, reproductive science - these are all well established academic fields so why is an Arts academic setting the public policy agenda?
Coincidentally, I've just come across an article on substack that I'm currently in the middle of reading and there was a segment on Judith Butler and her theory on 'gender as a performance'. Which to me is an extension and perversion of the concept of the 'gender/sex roles' that underpins the sociological nature v nurture debate.
Anyway, here is the link to the article:
https://open.substack.com/pub/sexrealitybites/p/ive-watched-thousands-of-trans-tiktok?r=2k3bax&utm_medium=ios
The author of the article states this:
'These trans narratives don’t just live on social media. They bleed into real life—reinforced and legitimized by academic theories, especially Judith Butler’s theory of gender as performance. These ideas have moved beyond universities and into public policy, healthcare, and everyday discourse. The frameworks lend moral and intellectual authority to behaviors that might otherwise be seen as inappropriate, offensive, or degrading—reframing social contagion, identity mimicry, or even cultural appropriation as admirable self-expression.
Criticism of these narratives is often met with instant censorship: “wrong” questions and dissenting comments are deleted, critics are blocked or vilified, and entire conversations disappear into an impenetrable echo chamber. Warnings about harm, medical malpractice, or the exploitation of children are drowned out by a culture that treats affirmation as sacred—and anything less as transphobia or bigotry.'
I agree with the author's expressed viewpoint.
me too
'I think she tries to construct a way of fitting in by "queering" identity (ie if there are no boundaries or "normal" I can't be on the wrong side of them and be badly treated). IE trying to "change normal to fit into it" - at massive cost to others.'
Precisely🎯. The very basis of transgenderism and transhumanism is built on this very flawed notion. It's as if she's taken total inspiration from Martin(e) Rothblatt & Co.
My biggest issue with Butler is that she believes that reality is ENTIRELY constructed through language, as if there is no inherent reality which undergirds the language that we use. And anyway, doesn't "gender as a performance" stop the minute someone sees what you have on the operating table? Or looks at a sex test result? The activists never seem to think of these things.
Yes, I quite agree with you.
❤️❤️❤️
4:36 The thing is that no matter what the people who support this stuff say, they are all aware deep down of the fact that sex is binary, immutable and sometimes particularly significant. There's much less opposition to viralised women accessing male spaces than the other way around, and they know that.
I'm sure there must be a "pretty" male trans identifying lawyer the organisation could employ as a mouthpiece.
Kate/Chase here is at least presumably never going to be outed as a sex offender.
'sometimes particularly significant'
I would venture to say 'most of the time' particularly significant ie 99.999%. Especially when it comes to everything physical and most definitely health related.
Every minute element of the supposed 'transition' process is based on those very differences. Either trying to attain those differences or erase and hide them and the side effects and problems from doing so. The bedrock of transgender 'care' is dealing with all those differences.
She is a professional victim representing the largest group of self-proclaimed victims the world has ever seen.
I think also “victimhood” is a key ingredient in any cult. They must constantly convince their members they are oppressed victims and must die on the hill. Transgenders rights are human rights! (Until you look into it and realize these “rights “ are human rights violations on women and children.
Yes. Transgender rights are perversely(like everything else perversity is always at the heart of it) 'rights to abuse', diminish and erase the lives of women and children and to be protected in doing so, as a Human Right, in order to legitimise and give authority to continue to perpetrate such abuse. The whole thing is perverse, non-sensical, irrational, confusing, gas-lighting, contradictory, hypocritical, crazy, etc.
It's an example of how evil manifests and shows up in this world.
Professional victimhood really does seem to be intrinsic to the fantasy life and very "identity" of both male and female contemporary opposite sex impersonators/mimics. It's nothing short of extraordinary when one considers the political heft and privileges that this purportedly tiny minority has managed to accrue for itself over the past decade.
My humble piece of advice to those like Strangio is to get nice and used to "losing" now that the majority of society has seen what these people would do to innocent children and neurodivergent adults given half the chance - but what do *I* know, I guess? 🙄
❤️❤️❤️
"the charisma of a cabbage" 🤣🤣🤣. I'm done in!
The first spokesperson for the ACLU who believes in banning books - congratulations to her and to the ACLU on this achievement!
Chase is not a very good lawyer if she can't understand the basis of sex discrimination!
I've been observing her lack of critical analytical skills for years. I frankly don't know how she passed the bar. The only place she could get hired as a lawyer would be low paying NGOs where she exists largely as a performative public face.
Exactly.
Nope. Arcus is Stryker....the medical equipment guy
Love your insights! Laughing! Nicely played.
Another Saturday night and I ain't got no money
"...I got some BODY 'cause I just got paid..." 🤣
👍
That sucks... xo
Actually, I got a cheeseburger. Mad Mac's restaurant in Lake County, California. Susie and Mac lost their dearly beloved canine today, and still came in to serve us folks up some tasty eats. Hope you have a place like that to go to sometimes, dear dragonfox2.0 and Lida H. ❤️❤️❤️
🥇
Chris Hayes has let his uncontrollable desire to kill or maim others get out into the open. His show should be taken off the air, and this man taken to Bellevue.
I reject troonery wholesale.
It wasn't a narrow decision. While the ruling was based on a failure to satisfy Fourteenth Amendment requirements, the concurring decisions went further into the claims failing at every level: that they did not qualify as a suspect or quasi-suspect class, that children are incapable of giving informed consent, and that the record revealed the state had ample justification for regulating medicine, particularly where there was no evidence the extreme treatment was beneficial.
The court also specifically stated that it is not sex discrimination because "the law does not prohibit conduct for one sex that it permits for the other." Nor does it discriminate on the basis of identity: "SB1 does not exclude any individual from medical treatments on the basis of transgender status but rather removes one set of diagnoses—gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder, and gender incongruence—from the range of treatable conditions."
Finally, the majority reiterated that Bostock only applied to Title VII claims which prohibit discrimination in employment.
So everything she says is utterly without foundation, not unlike her brief.
'Chase' ffs.
It's never 'Harold' or 'Cyril'.
Has she been sucking helium?
Interesting that the 3 Justices who held against the majority decision Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson are all women! All Democrat appointees, what does that say about this.