That Trans Thread

[The Valkyrie]

Can you show any evidence of this happening? Like, people specifically insisting that something as trivial as liking dolls over trucks is enough of a reason to throw a kid’s gender into question?

Because it seems like you read Johnny The Walrus and spent enough time hitting your head on the toilet that you actually thought “Yeah, that’s totally a reasonable reflection of reality.”

And, seriously, if I wanted to make a cinematic reference just to impress, is your cultural database so bereft that you think one of Kevin Smith’s worse films would count as impressive?

Your challenge for evidence is noted and appreciated—it is always refreshing when interlocutors invite rigor rather than retreat to insults. Regarding the claim that “liking dolls over trucks” is sometimes treated as sufficient cause for questioning a child’s gender, one might direct you to a veritable library of clinical guidelines, activist literature, and media reports.

For instance, the widely referenced Gender Affirmative Model endorsed by organizations such as the American Psychological Association encourages affirmation of a child’s expressed gender identity with minimal exploration, often based on behaviors or preferences that diverge from traditional gender norms. The now infamous “gender clinics” routinely assess children exhibiting gender nonconforming behavior—doll preference included—sometimes leading to social transition or medical interventions.

A particularly salient example is the “Ashley Treatment” controversy and the debates surrounding early social transition, where parental and professional interventions follow perceived gender nonconformity rather than any intrinsic dysphoria. The BBC’s “Transgender Kids” documentary further illustrates the phenomenon.

As for Johnny the Walrus—a satirical parable, yes—but satire often targets a recognizable reality to provoke thought. Dismissing it outright on the basis of toilet-related headaches might be more revealing about one’s rhetorical flair than the substance of the argument.

Regarding your cinematic jab, one must concede that Kevin Smith’s oeuvre is… divisive. Yet, invoking “Tusk” was less about cinematic praise and more about capturing a certain cultural zeitgeist—an evocative metaphor for fever-dream logic, if you will.

Shall we now proceed with civility and evidence, or is another performance imminent?

I can request evidence and insult.

We're all multi-talented here.