That Trans Thread

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Who in the fuck are these doctrinaire ideologues and do they even exist outside of Matt Walsh’s Tusk-inspired fever dreams? Because, in the real world, when people claim an “ontological mismatch,” it tends to be over matters deeper than just an interest in trucks over tiaras. That’d just be mere gender nonconformity, which most people who support gender transition tend to be okay with.

Splendid—rhetorical histrionics wrapped in expletives. Always a reassuring sign that reasoned discourse is about to take a sabbatical. You ask who these “doctrinaire ideologues” are, as though the notion were a myth conjured in the depths of Matt Walsh’s "Tusk-inspired fever dreams" (an oddly cinematic reference, by the way—one presumes it was meant to impress rather than clarify).

But to your question: do they exist? Well, yes—manifestly so. They write op-eds, draft school curricula, sit on diversity panels, and craft TikToks with the solemnity of theologians. They are the ones who tell us that a child’s fleeting discomfort warrants puberty blockers, that gender is simultaneously a social construct and immutable, and that questioning any of this is literal violence.

As for the distinction you attempt—between “gender nonconformity” and “ontological mismatch”—it is noted. Yet I would gently observe that, in practice, this distinction is frequently elided by the very activists you insist don’t exist. A boy who likes dolls is often met not with celebration for his nonconformity, but with solemn suggestion that he may in fact be a girl—affirmed, of course, lest anyone be accused of transphobia.

So no, dear interlocutor, this isn’t a straw man. It’s the movement’s own language, codified in policy, echoed in classrooms, and enforced—ironically—with doctrinaire zeal.

But do feel free to keep insisting it’s all a fever dream. Denial, after all, is the most persistent form of ideological hygiene.

Oh, go play with your dolly.

Boru