I thought that might get your attention.

And now, in the interests of raising awareness and fostering sensitivity, in the name of visibility, I bring you the travails of the modern cross-dressing man:

You’ve heard of foot fet!sh but are you prepared for transgender toe dysphoria pic.twitter.com/kIuJTGsjxV

— Exulansic (@TTExulansic) April 12, 2026

You see, that second toe “feels like a man toe to me.”

Oh, and the sound of his pee. That also induces feelings of dysphoria. Which I suppose one might rephrase as awareness of the pretence. The attempt to falsify and deceive. So as to venture where one shouldn’t:

Possibly on account of being a mentally ill man getting his kicks, his affirmation jollies, in the women’s toilets.

Consider this an open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

Not ball, rock. (h/t, Elephants Gerald) || On bats and regurgitation. || Tidy, yes, but tricky to remove. || In case of fire. || Nommy-nommy-nom. || Nommy-nommy-nom 2. || So how was your day? || Wiggling. || When they do this, I’m pretty sure you’re supposed to break their ankles. || Alum. || Last days of the Cavendish Hotel, 1962. || Yes, but does he look girly, girly? || I quite like the idea of Delusion Visibility Day. || She wants to talk about her manhood. || Door policy. || For enthusiasts of toilet plunging. || Kiddie pool pervert meets police. || The progressive retail experience, parts 716, 717, 718, 719 and 720. || Companion, at height. || Suboptimal scenario. || Chernobyl fungus. || Not our finest offering. || Expensive stuff. || Hyphen needed. || And finally, they’re anti-fatigue lasers.

To enable extra commenting options – including @username mentions, comment editing, upvotes, custom avatars, and live notifications – scroll down to the black ‘Meta’ box at the very bottom of the page and click register. It’s free and quite painless.

For additional rumblings, follow me on X.

Lifted from the comments, which you’re reading of course, this strikes me as broadly accurate:

Much of the content here that’s about crime, antisocial behaviour and recreational malice is informed by a fairly visceral dislike of expectations of exemption and immunity – and actual immunity – from normal moral consequences. Consequences that I would expect to befall me, were I sufficiently selfish and unpleasant to engage in similar behaviour.

Hence the term The Unspanked.

Likewise, were I to move to a distant country, hoping to flourish, it would not occur to me to behave as these vibrant newcomers do. Or in ways seen quite vividly here. Were I to repeatedly violate the values and decencies of the indigenous, as if I owed nothing to those on whom I impose – as if their values, their expectations of reciprocation, were contemptible – then I would very much expect my welcome to be withdrawn.

And quite promptly.

Update, via the comments:

Rafi adds, drily,

Indeed. The convolutions of which, we’ve poked at before.

While Chow Bag quips,

Well, yes. There does seem to be a lot of frantic, rather neurotic calculation as to whether normal rules should apply, depending on the pigmentation or cross-dressing tendencies of the perpetrator, to whom indulgence must be extended. If you squint and pretend. If you perform the necessary contortions.

And so, we arrive at scenes like this, or these, in which malevolent bedlamites, beings clearly driven by spite, expect to be spared normal consequences, to which the rest of us would be subject, and merrily exploit their assumptions of immunity. Behaving in ways that, for anyone else, would likely result in a good kicking.

Needless to say, this is not a recipe for a fragrant tomorrow.

As illustrations go, this one is worthy of note:

There are many things to dislike about progressivism, even just from a purely aesthetic point of view, and so we spend a lot of time on here ridiculing it on that basis, but it’s important always to remember that the main problem with progressivism is that it’s not true.

It’s… https://t.co/Wqs5FaS6JZ

— wanye (@xwanyex) April 7, 2026

Readers will note Mrs Newsom’s assumptions of accidental criminality – among occupants of San Quentin, a maximum-security prison – and her obliviousness regarding how much effort is required – how many accidents – to actually end up in a prison of any kind.

Such wildly inaccurate conceptions of the criminal demographic and of the psychology and motives in play, as expressed by the criminals themselves, have been noted here before, with corrective – one might say eye-widening – statistics and illustrations.

Update, via the comments:

Among the scrupulously progressive, there’s also a failure to grasp that criminal and antisocial behaviour is rarely confined to one sphere.

We might, for instance, revisit the outpourings of Nora Loreto, who insisted, quite emphatically, that habitual car theft is a “victimless” crime. Ms Loreto was far too busy applauding herself for mouthing the approved attitudes to consider what it is that stolen cars are very often used for, and by whom, and the rather significant overlap of car theft with getaways and other untoward activities, including human smuggling.

In the case mentioned here, a trio of burglars – with over 200 convictions between them – also amused themselves by stealing cars, endangering other motorists in truly alarming ways, and assaulting and mugging the elderly and bedridden cancer patients.

But hey, accidents happen.

And among progressives, contrivance and obvious falsehoods function as luxury goods, as markers of in-group status. Like rhetorical jewellery.

Consider this an open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

Via the comments, and from the land of unfinished thoughts:

Housing is a human right and evictions are an act of policy violence.

My HELP Act would give a lifeline to families facing eviction and vital resources during this time of crisis. pic.twitter.com/RyU1dkBe05

— Ayanna Pressley (@AyannaPressley) April 3, 2026

Ms Ayanna Pressley, a congresswoman with gratuitous pronouns, and mouther of the words above, acknowledges that the most common cause of eviction, by far, is the repeated and habitual non-payment of rent. Efforts at eviction generally being a last resort, a desperate and costly attempt to limit further loss or damage. To limit further theft and trespass.

Ms Pressley then complains that this behaviour – behaviour warranting eviction – has “stigma” attached to it. Which, of course, it should.

As Egino adds in the comments,

Adding further costs and complications to the process of evicting problem tenants seems likely to result in higher rents and a contraction of supply. And then there’s the claim – baldly asserted and seemingly unchallenged – that “housing is a human right.” A claim that, if enacted, would entail the compelled labour of others. For which, I believe we have a word.

When claims of this kind are made, there’s a recurring reluctance to complete the train of thought, to acknowledge certain, fairly basic, practical and moral details. Instead, we often get something not unlike a child’s shopping list, in which little thought is given to what costs might be involved.

And so, we arrive at the very modern impulse to frame almost any kind of personal shortcoming, including moral shortcomings, as some state of blessed victimhood. In which, normal consequences for delinquent behaviour become violence, something to denounce and inhibit. With the result that the functional and law-abiding are faced with ever more obligations to indulge that dysfunction, and ever more difficulty defending their own interests.

Inevitably, in the subsequent replies, we learn that Ms Pressley has an extensive property portfolio of her own, including several residential rental properties, from which she earns around a quarter of a million dollars a year. Readers may wonder how Ms Pressley might feel if her tenants decided that “housing is a human right” and that “eviction is violence” and therefore abusive and illegitimate, and so, hey, screw paying the rent, despite our promises.

And that $250,000 a year is only outstanding rent and so, by Ms Pressley’s moral calculus, of no importance.

Via Pst314.