Lifted from the comments, via Mr Muldoon, a rather coy omission:

Roxanne Tickle has won her discrimination case against the social media app ‘Giggle for Girls’, which blocked her from joining on the basis of being male. This is a step forward in ensuring transgender women are not discriminated against on the basis of their gender identity. pic.twitter.com/552Qq6r2KJ

— Amnesty International (@amnesty) August 23, 2024

A less pretentious, and rather more frank, account of the above can be found here. Note that Mr Tickle – Roxy Tickle – was enabled in his mission by the University of New South Wales, via a $50,000 grant, and that his methods of persuasion included equating insufficiently compliant women with the Ku Klux Klan, and making phone calls to the site’s owner at her home.

When not suing women who would rather not participate in his fantasies of sudden-onset womanhood, Mr Tickle spends his time sharing Instagram photographs of his underwear and neck hair, and cartoon sex toys.

Readers are invited to imagine the mindset of Amnesty International and their fellow enthusiasts of transgression. A mindset in which you have to pointedly not share an obviously relevant piece of information in order to maintain the pretence of righteousness:

Or, “If we let them see the reality of the situation, they won’t comply. So we mustn’t let them see the reality of the situation.”

Imagine that’s your thought process, consciously or otherwise.

A more honest and realistic report might say, “Weirdly vindictive cross-dressing man launches three-year-long harassment campaign against women who object to the imposition of his compulsions – namely, making women and girls uncomfortable for his own gratification.”

Or, “Weirdly vindictive cross-dressing men who exult in violating the normal boundaries of women and girls are an obvious danger, and should be regarded accordingly.”

Something along those lines.

Update, via the comments,

Mags asks,

Once registered, it is an oddly common phenomenon.

Pst314 adds,

Well, the blunting of normal, quite rational discernment does seem to be the goal. As Ms Grover put it,

Further to The Blurting, a footnote of sorts:

“My Fox News dad makes everything political” https://t.co/JxaZvPwrSg

— wanye (@wanyeburkett) August 15, 2024

Please update your files and lifestyles accordingly.

Update, via the comments:

The above, it seems to me, is not so much a declaration of values as a psychological profile.

As Rafi says in reply,

Not having to deal with such people does have a cash value. If in order to use a communal laser cutter, you first have to “strive to uphold” the notion that sex differences are unrelated to biology, that “meritocracy is a joke,” and that, despite all available evidence, “nonbinary people” somehow aren’t aggravating poseurs… Then, well, buying your own laser cutter seems a much better option.

After all, this life is finite and best not wasted on proximity to wankers.

Oh, and some of that super important intersectionality.

From transgender Reddit, a new niche woe. Specifically,

And more specifically,

We’re all learning things today.

Again, learning things.

Ooh. So close.

In subsequent replies, the similarly traumatising terms gock and bussy are also pondered, along with girldick and female penis. And yes, these will be on Friday’s test.

Other commenters suggest a policy of coyness on the subject:

The terrible wrongness of terminological appropriation crops up, as do thoughts as to which terms are most affirming of a gentleman’s state of ladylikeness. Another contributor, a “genderfluid he/she/they,” insists that, as one would obviously defer to a person’s pronouns, one should likewise defer to that person’s preferred terms for their genitals. Because discussing the other person’s genitals is a thing that happens, apparently.

Those unschooled in the world of transgender penis discourse will find much to chew on.

Via Eliza Mondegreen.

Also, open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

In somewhat-surreal-modernity news:

Sensitive readers may wish to look away now:

Traumatic scenes of the desecration taking place can be found below:

A group of five to six kids just starting doing donuts and creating skid marks on the Pride Mural. Right in front of me as we’re reporting on three people getting arrested for doing the same thing last night.@KHQLocalNews pic.twitter.com/FMXGAg77fx

— Adam Schwager (@schwagerTV) June 6, 2024

The situation is of course terribly fraught and further complications have been uncovered by our tireless media professionals:

After allegedly causing “widespread damage” – again, see photo, above – three suspects have been arrested and charged with first-degree malicious mischief, a class-B felony:

Clearly, feelings run high.

Though it occurs to me that the pretentious weeping currently underway could have been avoided by not painting one’s weird religious symbols on the chuffing road at a busy intersection. As if that were a perfectly normal thing to do, and in no way a potential irritant or an invitation to mischief.

And then, inevitably, the sly conflation:

At which point, readers may wonder whether the children’s scootering, and the wider disaffection for the increasingly cluttered and kaleidoscopic Pride flag, may have less to do with “homophobia,” as claimed, and rather more to do with a symbol that is now associated with creepy, compelled unrealism, fantasy pronouns, and the steering of children towards experimental drugging and surgical mutilation. The kinds of things that many people, including many gay people, might find a little contentious, or alienating, or morally repugnant.

That the repeatedly ‘enhanced’ Pride flag now represents a range of things to which a great many people, including gay people, might conceivably take exception – or find obnoxious, indeed degenerate – is apparently unthinkable. Or at least unsayable. And so, with the deploying of the word “homophobia,” gay people are being used as a rhetorical shield against objections to, for instance, pornography in schools, the ideological grooming and sexualisation of children, and cross-dressing men in women’s intimate spaces.

Among other things.

However, pretentious howling is very much in fashion, and so,

I’m guessing the wear and tear caused by normal foot traffic will be monitored closely. Dog walkers will doubtless be urged to avoid the sacred space at all costs, lest the unthinkable occur.

And is therefore much more special than you:

That’s it, I’m joining Westboro pic.twitter.com/3CFGnrKDyJ

— Katie Herzog (@kittypurrzog) June 5, 2024

In this hour-long podcast, Hannah McElhinney, above, and her equally self-preoccupied associate Rudy Jean Rigg – “teacher and creative” – can be heard blathering at length – and sometimes seemingly at random – about “queer temporality” and “how LGBTQ+ people experience time differently to straight and/or cisgender people.”

Though conscience compels me to warn you, it’s an hour you won’t get back. Indeed, the sheer arse-chafing tedium of it is difficult to put into words.

Among the deep wisdom on offer, this:

This is the rhetorical pattern for much of what follows. There’s no shortage of self-reference, and paying attention to one’s queerness, and much airing of niche woes – the endless agonies of being a “creator,” a “creative,” and an “influencer.” And of course the terrible burden of being so much more complicated and interesting than all those other people. The ones who experience time in a humdrum, heteronormative way.

The whole thing – which I endured, heroically – calls to mind some kind of therapy session for the terminally tedious and inadequate.

We also learn,

So. Much to chew on.

Or choke on, should you happen to be a physicist.

When not experiencing time differently – and showering the credulous with tales to “validate” and “inspire” – Ms McElhinney and her fellow Bringers Of Arcane Knowledge feel a need to,

So, clearly, the rumblings on offer are entirely free of conformity or modish pretension of any kind.

Via Katie Herzog.

The subject of pretentious timekeeping has cropped up here before.