Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

While you are enjoying the Super Bowl, the commercials, the food, and all of the pomp and circumstance, there is a genocide going on. Not in some foreign country, but rather our own shores.

Leftists, especially those of the LGBTQ1A+GWBJIBBAJABBA community, have been warning us of a trans genocide going on. Sounds pretty serious, doesn’t it? Certainly, if there’s a genocide against members of the trans community, we have to do something!

And I have chosen to write about it.

trans genocide

What the Left thinks it means – trans people being subjected to everything from discrimination to violence

What it really means – a term that conflates non-genocide with genocide for PR purposes

The first thing we need to do, aside from keeping our eyes from rolling because we’re talking about this general subject again, is define what a genocide is. Our good friends at Dictionary.com define it thus:

the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group

That makes trans genocide sound very serious. The problem? The numbers don’t match up to the rhetoric. According to a group that tracked violence against trans people from October 2022 to September 2023, there were 320 deaths. Compared to the 2.6 million trans people in America, the aforementioned deaths came out to a staggering 0.00012308% of the trans population. And when you consider other mitigating factors (race, whether they were sex workers, where the killing occurred), it gets harder to point to a definitive movement to eliminate trans people.

That’s when the Left changed the definition of “genocide” to include non-genocidy actions, like alleged marginalization and mean words. So, it’s not just the actual killing of trans people that counts, but anything they can perceive to be kinda sorta possibly a call for violence. And as we all know, trans people are known to be demure and serious, like Dylan Mulvaney.

For the Leftists reading this, that was sarcasm.

The reason for the expanded desecration…I mean definition is simple: to make as many people victims as possible. And it whips up enough hysteria to get people with TikTok-level attention spans upset and demanding action. And who gets to swoop in and show they care dammit? The Left! Funny how that works out, isn’t it?

What’s not so funny is the lack of action by Leftists to address the situation. Sure, they make a fuss to “raise awareness” of the issue, but that’s like a taking a squirt gun to a five alarm fire: it’s something, but it might as well be nothing. You know, like most of Puddin’ Head Joe’s policies?

But the trans activists are okay with nothing getting done because they don’t care about results as much as they care about being the center of attention. A demographic breakdown of the trans community last year found over half of them are under 35 years old. Now, that in and of itself isn’t particularly damning, until you consider the number of narcissists in that age group. With the advent of social media and the desire of young people to be seen, many young people thrive on being attention whores.

Including trans people.

Further complicating matters is the fact men tend to be more overt with their egos than females. Even if you’re a 6’9″ 389 pound former linebacker from the Midwest who goes by Camille and dresses like Scarlett Johansson cosplaying as the Hulk, the ego is still there and will always be there. Throw in the flamboyance that comes with high visibility trans people and you have a glittery yet toxic cocktail.

So what does this have to do with trans genocide? Turns out quite a bit due to, surprise surprise, ego. What’s better way to gain sympathy (i.e. attention) than to be the victim of something heinous? And with the Left willing to give them as much attention as possible and as much leeway to showcase and promote their lifestyle, it’s a match made in Hell packaged as a heavenly union.

This, of course, creates a copycat effect. Even if the worst thing a trans person encounters is being misgendered, it has the potential to turn him/her into victim, which can inspire others to look for offense in the tiniest of forms. And remember, you can only take offense. It doesn’t just exist in the world in free range cage free conditions. And if it did, it would be way overpriced at Whole Foods.

Let me make something crystal clear here. I don’t advocate for violence against anyone for any reason. Well, except if you cut me off in traffic. Then it’s on!

Seriously, though, no one should be targeted for violence because of their lifestyles. Yes, I know trans rights and transphobia are real things, but they’re not worth killing each other over. And they’re certainly not worth lying about to garner attention.

If the trans community wants me to believe there’s a trans genocide out there, I’m going to have to see evidence that can’t be explained away by other factors. It’s a bit like the COVID 19 death counts where the people who died with COVID were counted as deaths because of COVID. There is a distinction that makes all the difference.

Even if we accept the 320 number provided earlier as solely because the victims were trans, it’s not indicative of a trend or even a TikTok fad. Under the strictest (and most accurate) definition of the term, an actual genocide would involve many more deaths than 300+.

That’s why conflating genocide with what’s happening in the trans community is utterly damaging to the community itself. By inflating the numbers and watering down the definition to the point getting a trans person’s drink order wrong is “proof,” you gain victims, but lose credibility. Call it the Trans Boy Who Cried Wolf, if you will.

I would also take these folks more seriously if they spoke out against trans activists attacking other trans people who don’t agree with them. I mean, if trans genocide includes harsh words and death threats, wouldn’t those trans activists be engaging in…trans genocide? And what about the harsh words against former trans people who are detransitioning? More trans genocide, perhaps?

Hey, I don’t make the rules, folks. I just point them out to people unclear on what they are.

Ultimately, I want the same thing I want from any controversial topic: a rational discussion where the facts are laid out, no matter how ugly they are for one side or the other. With the kind of hysteria surrounding trans genocide, I’m afraid that’s not going to happen anytime soon. It’s okay, though. I can wait.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to get back into my cryogenic chamber and wake up in another 200 years. See you soon!

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Remember the good old days when men were men, women were women, and nobody used science to prove otherwise? Well, as anyone who can lived through COVID-19 and is being honest about it can tell you, science has gotten a lot more political and a lot less like science.

Amid all the major stories over the past week (apparently a former President got indicted on the “buy one grand jury, get another one free” program), there was one that caught my eye because of its ties to one of the major controversies of the day. This comes from Johns Hopkins University, or more specifically their Diversity and Inclusion branch. In a recently-found glossary of terms, women aren’t women anymore; they’re, and I’m not making this up, “non-men.”

Welcome to the era of female erasure. And welcome to this week’s Lexicon entry!

female erasure

What the Left thinks it means – an overblown and unfounded reaction to recognizing trans women as real women

What it really means – another example of Leftist misogyny, this time disguised as support for trans rights

For the purposes of full disclosure, I am a man. In a lot of people’s minds, that automatically invalidates my opinions on women’s issues and opens me up to criticisms of “manplaining.” Well, half of my chromosomes came from a woman, so at the very least half of my opinions are worth considering. Plus, I’m so in touch with my feminine side, I’m suing myself for sexual harassment.

Having said all that, I recognize the importance women have on human history and the strides they’ve made to be seen as equals to men by at least a majority of Americans. And for a lot of years, Leftists seemed on board with that, and for the purposes of fundraising and politics, they still are. And since women make up over half of Americans as of 2021, that’s a pretty good reason not to piss them off.

Enter trans right activists. Within the past couple of years, they’ve advanced the idea that men who transition into women are actual women and anyone who says differently (i.e. someone who stayed awake in biology class) is a bigot who hates trans people. And with that, women became a subjective term instead of a scientifically established certainty that even kindergarteners could explain.

And for those who are wondering? Still two genders. I’ll break in with updates as warranted.

Meanwhile back at the main point, Leftists have found a way to both court and offend women by insisting a man who says he’s a woman is no different than a woman who has been a woman all her life. Aside from the biological differences, I can attest from being married to a woman for 10 years now men and women do not have the same experiences. Contrary to what trans women tell you, they don’t get periods or menstrual cramps, which means they don’t know what it’s like to go through it for the first time and all the emotional and hormonal elements that come along with it. To suggest otherwise is like an Amy Schumer joke: stolen. Oh, and bad.

For proof of this, we can look no further than the poster child of modern trans women, Dylan Mulvaney. Due to a year-long publicity stunt called “365 Days of Girlhood”, Mulvaney got a lot of positive attention, which given his past antics to gain attention, is exactly what he/she wanted. Content Warning: do not watch these videos if you’re easily offended by over-the-top acting, easily influenced by social media, or generally skeeved out by Dylan.

At this point, I have to clarify something. Although Mulvaney goes by she/her pronouns, I don’t think she/her is actually trans. Case in point: “normalize the bulge.” Women can have bulges, just not where their dicks would be if they had them in the first place. And as of this writing, Mulvaney has yet to fully transition, which means his normalized bulge is still a dick and balls. Hence, I use his/her and him/her to describe the insanity that is Dylan Mulvaney.

If Mulvaney were the only person doing this, we could write it off as an anomaly. (Come to think of it, we still can, but that’s beside the point.) Unfortunately for women, he/she isn’t. Trans women are finding new footholds in women’s spaces, ranging from competitive sports to combat sports, even to beauty salons catering to women’s genital waxing and to changing rooms. At this point, it’s no longer about acceptance. Trans women are trying to insert themselves (if you’ll pardon the double entendre) into spaces reserved for biological women and expecting women to knuckle under.

You know, just like abusive men?

This is another fundamental difference between men and women that the trans community doesn’t want us to know: men are more aggressive than women generally. Granted, you aren’t likely to get throttled to a pulp by a Leftist man in skinny jeans and a man bun, but the potential is still there. Combine this with the differences in musculature between the genders (checking…still 2), and you have an individual who has the tools and the mentality to physically assault women. And Leftists want these folks to be in the presence of their potential victims because reasons?

Maybe Ben Shapiro has opinions on this.

And make no mistake, it’s trans women (i.e. men) who are forcing the issue with the help of their Leftist enablers. With each trans woman who enters the female space, a little bit of the female experience gets erased and replaced with someone who has yet to truly experience it. In other words, the Left is replacing women with biological men and showing favoritism towards the latter.

Say, isn’t there a term for something like that? Mis…something or other? I’m sure some Leftist will fill in the blanks for me.

To add more sodium chloride to the wound, Leftists deny any of this is going on, in spite of Leftist women calling it out. And how do many Leftists respond? By calling them Nazis. In fact, any woman who doesn’t agree with biological men taking over women’s spots gets treated the same way. Just ask J. K. Rowling, who has been the epitome of evil for Leftists because she…dared to say trans women weren’t actually women. And who has been consistent in not backing down to the trans mob?

J. K. Fucking Rowling.

Although it’s disheartening to see how few women are standing up to the Left in their attempts to slowly eliminate female accomplishments, I see that tide turning. With more women of all political stripes speaking up, it gets harder for Leftists to discount female erasure. Oh, they will, make no mistake. But you can only call someone a Nazi so many times before he or she tells you to go fuck yourself.

But don’t fret, trans women. Most of you have the equipment to do just that.

And this just in…still two genders!







Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Given the events of the past week, I will apologize for this piece not being as funny as my usual fare (which, as some readers can attest, may not be that big of a difference), but we’re delving into something really big and serious.

And, yes, I’m talking about trans people. Again. But this time the stakes have gotten a lot higher.

I’m talking about the Trans Day of Vengeance which was scheduled for April 1st. Put simply, it’s a day when trans people and their allies vow to continue to fight for trans rights in the light of recent bills making their ways through state legislatures addressing “gender affirming care” for teenagers and younger among other more controversial topics.

After the recent shooting in Nashville, though, it’s time everyone takes a deep breath and step away from their feelings for a moment to dig into this event in greater detail.

Trans Day of Vengeance

What the Left thinks it means – an event to recognize and fight for trans rights

What it really means – a really bad look for the trans right movement

I’ve made my feelings known on the trans issue previously, but I’ll restate it briefly since it does become relevant later. I don’t care if you’re trans. Just don’t be a dickhead and treat others with the respect you want in return. That’s pretty much how I treat anyone, now that you mention it.

So, having said that, the Nashville shooter was a dick, and being trans doesn’t change that fact. Even if the shooter self-identified as a good person, I would say killing 6 people sticks a pin in that identification. And, even if the school was a flaming pile of dog shit to the shooter, that doesn’t excuse the act. Most disagreements, I’ve found, can be addressed without heading for the gun safe.

So, what does this have to do with the Trans Day of Vengeance? Well, it’s a little thing the kids today like to call optics. What do you think of when vengeance is mentioned? If you’re like me (and if you are, seek help), there aren’t many positive connotations that come to mind. Not all of them violent, I grant you, but definitely not a “let’s sit down and discuss our differences over tea” vibe.

The poster for the event reinforces the negative connotations with the statement “Stop Trans Genocide.” Maybe it’s me, but I don’t think there’s actual trans genocide going on, unless you want to conflate the bills being suggested/pass as genocide. But more to the point, how exactly do you stop a genocide? Marching? Social media? A well-crafted hashtag?

Nope. You typically stop it with violence.

And when you consider some of the people backing Trans Day of Vengeance are advocating taking up arms…well, it’s not gonna end well. Given the all-or-nothing nature the more vocal trans people and allies have taken, anyone who doesn’t agree 1000% is liable to wind up in the figurative and possibly literal crossfire.

Including your humble correspondent.

Here’s the part many people on the Left and the Right don’t get. You can agree with a person or idea and still offer legitimate criticism with the intent of creating the best possible outcome. And, let me tell ya, the Trans Day of Vengeance ain’t gonna cut it. Not only are you going to turn off potential allies who are on the fence because of the current environment, but you’re looking like violent assholes in the process. No matter what your intent may be, the phrasing used make it sound like you’re about to go all John Wick on anyone who doesn’t celebrate Dylan Mulvaney 365 days of being a girl.

As entertaining as that might be, it doesn’t help the end goal. If anything, you prove your critics right and give them a reason to attack you right back. Consider me your computer asking “Are you sure you want to do this?” before doing something monumentally fucking stupid.

Walk this back for a moment before answering. This idea is a step you can’t take back easily if you regret it down the line. Once you cross that line, you’re stuck with the consequences. Yes, there are assholes out there who will hurt or kill you for being fabulous. There will always be those kinds of people out there. But you do not need to become them to protect yourselves. Understand them, yes. Turn them into martyrs for their self-righteous cause? Fuck to the no.

And while we’re here on the understanding tip, maybe try to understand why these laws are being proposed in the first place. If your answer is “Because Republicans,” oooooh, sor-ray. That’s incorrect. The source of the outrage is…members of the trans community acting inappropriately around minors. As inclusive as your community is, there need to be some quality standards before letting some people in because there are some freaks out there using drag as a cover for their illicit activities. The longer the trans community sits on their well-manicured hands without kicking out the bad apples, the more likely it looks like you support their activities, which drives the anti-trans folks which fires up the pro-trans folks and the downward spiral into chaos, violence, and another Madea movie.

If you want to support trans rights, do it, but find a friendlier means of outreach. Vague references to potential violence and built-in justification for it under the guise of a genocide that isn’t happening aren’t the way to do it. Try reaching out a hand, preferably one without a weapon in it, and look to make friends with those who disagree with you. If they slap your hand away, so be it. Eventually, you’ll find someone who will shake your hand. Violence doesn’t make that happen, kids.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

To put it mildly, this past week on Capitol Hill was more explosive than a Chipotle restaurant on the Hindenburg. Our favorite member of the Squad, the Socialist Socialite, went on the warpath attacking popular online figure LibsofTikTok for…sharing videos that Leftists upload themselves that ultimately make them look like amoral fuckknuckles. Well, the Socialist Socialite accused LibsofTikTok of inspiring bomb threats at the Boston Children’s Hospital for performing gender affirming surgery on teenagers as young as 15.

The concept of gender affirming surgery is a relatively new one, but it’s one the Left has been trying to protect under any and all circumstances. And since we don’t have a Chinese balloon to hold our attention this week, we might as well discuss it.

gender affirming surgery

What the Left thinks it means – necessary surgery for trans people to feel more like the gender they feel they are

What it really means – Leftists preying on young people being stupid

Being a teenager is rough. Not only are you dealing with hormonal changes with the frequency of a bad news day for Hunter Biden, but you’re caught between being a child and an adult. You’re still very impressionable, but you’re also gaining new responsibilities and expectations that come with maturity. Even under the best of circumstances, being a teenager is Ground Zero for fuck-ups.

Now, imagine being confused about your gender on top of all that. All you want to do is fit in, and being trans is still seen as alternative. As a society, we’re still getting used to the idea of the transgender community, so Mom and Dad may not be able to help you like they might be able to help you with your homework (provided it’s not “New Math”).

It is in this wasteland of physical and emotional distress that the Left operates. And by “operates” I mean “referring impressionable young people to doctors to get operations.” The Left offers not only the environment, but also the simple cure: if you don’t feel like you’re in the right body, it’s okay! Just change clothes and we will support you every step of the way! And if that doesn’t work, there’s surgery so you can look like you feel! It’s perfect!

Except…it’s not.

Gender affirming surgery is a nicer way of saying gender reassignment surgery. Instead of giving potential patients the feeling this surgery is serious and requires a lot of thoughts about the pros and cons, gender affirming surgery sounds lighter, breezier, a lot less taxing on the patient. In other words, the change of one word has taken all the gravitas out of the decision and makes it seem like trying out a new hairdo.

But unlike the hairdo, when the professional starts cutting, your genitals don’t grow back. That shit is permanent. If you regret your decision a few years later, there is no addadictomy that will get your penis back. Ditto with the labia. Once the doctor turns your love canal into a dick, you’re stuck with that decision for the rest of your life.

And remember, kids, Leftists are okay with letting teenagers make this kind of decision. The same teenagers who are going through one of the roughest stretches of life any person has to endure while feeling like they’re alone. How do I know this?

No, I’m not trans, but I was a teenager once. Granted, it was back in the days when we would look at cave drawings to get our local news, but I do remember how I was back then. And I was a fuck-up. It took me several years to “grow” into my body from a mental and emotional perspective, and throwing on a very adult decision on me at that time would have crushed me.

That’s the main issue I have with the Left’s push for gender affirming surgery: it’s not being taken as seriously as it needs to be. But the Left doesn’t care. They see the issue as a way to gain money and power over vulnerable people by offering solutions that have more strings attached than a tampon factory.

Or as Leftists call it, Tuesday.

But here’s where shit really goes sideways. Leftists have a…well, confusing approach to gender. As it turns out, they have as many positions on gender as they have genders, which is to say a metric fuckton. Here are a few of them.

– Gender is a social construct.

– Sex is a biological designation, while gender is more psychological/emotional,

– Gender is assigned at birth.

– Gender is developed over time.

– Sex and gender are different.

– Gender is a spectrum.

Granted, these positions have evolved over time, but I would be remiss if I didn’t point out the contradictions and Marquis de Sade-level of tortured thinking involved here. For now, let’s focus on that last one because it has a direct relationship to gender affirmation.

Some members of the medical community laid out 16 genders in 2022. Others have gone as high as 72, while still others put the number at 81. Go to some online forums (the source of all great thought), and you’re liable to find multiple variations on the same theme, only a lot less grounded in science or, well, reality.

Meanwhile, most of us believe there are…let me check my notes here…two fucking genders. No more, no less. Two. And before the Leftists try to confuse the issue, let me ask a simple question.

If gender is a spectrum, how come the gender affirmation surgery is currently either male-to-female or female-to-male?

This is because God, nature, science, William Shatner, or whatever authority you believe/worship/tolerate have already figured that shit out. Even if you believe sex and gender are different, there are only two choices on the menu, chocolate or vanilla, chicken or fish, Godzilla or Mothra. Leftists can’t bullshit their way out of the simple fact there are only two genders being affirmed with the surgery they say is necessary for trans people to feel like they belong.

But they can bullshit people into thinking they actually care about trans people. What they actually care about is creating more trans people who the Left can use to their ends without improving the trans community one iota. And why is that? Because it’s a lot easier to stoke fear than it is to fix stuff.

Look, I don’t care if an adult gets gender affirming surgery because it’s none of my business. Just don’t be an asshole about it. Now, the operative word in that first sentence is “adult.” If you’re not old enough to vote in an election, you’re too young to elect to get this surgery. In fact, research suggests the human brain doesn’t fully mature until age 25 (please check local listings for brain maturity ages in your area). By then, you have a better idea of who you are as a person, usually because you’ve graduated school or served in the military and have had to make a living.

So, why should we permit gender affirming surgery for someone well below the age when we get our shit together? The short answer is we shouldn’t. The longer answer is we shouldn’t because it’s a recipe for disaster. Leftists are willing to create more victims to advance their own agenda. Even if the patient is emotionally mature at 15, it doesn’t mean he or she has the wherewithal to know whether they’re actually trans or just trying to fit in by dressing up with clothes from a Boy George or Tilda Swinton garage sale.

The Left has one thing right about trans people, though. Trans people, and teenagers in general, need to feel loved and accepted for who they are. Even if you think it odd, there is still a human being underneath, someone who could use a shoulder to cry on or a supportive word. Don’t shut them out because their vision of the world doesn’t match yours. This is how we can make real positive change in this country.

And you don’t have to lop off a dick or pair of tits to do it!

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Normally, I wouldn’t go to gun-grabber and utter dumbass David Hogg for information on what time it was, let alone anything else, but this week he gave me a topic I wanted to research in greater detail. In the aftermath of a shooting at Club Q, a gay bar in Colorado Springs, Hogg took to Twitter to complain about stochastic terrorism.

Although the Left has been using this phrase for a few months, they haven’t really defined, except to say it’s violence inspired by those evil right wingers. You know, the ones who said it was okay to loot, burn down buildings, and build oddly-named autonomous zones on city streets…oh, wait…

Since the Left isn’t going to give us an in-depth definition, I guess it’s up to me. Otherwise, you’d just be stuck with the Mastodon piece

I did this week.

stochastic terrorism

What the Left thinks it means – politically-motivated violence designed to harass and hurt Democrats and left-leaning individuals and inspired by conservative leaders and media figures

What it really means – a combination of two words designed to make Leftists sound smart without them actually being smart

Since I’m a word guy, I want to split the term into its component parts as a means to try to understand the totality. Let’s not forget the Left loves to play with language and combine words that don’t go together that well, like climate justice, democratic socialism, and Leftist intellectual.

The word stochastic is a 25 cent word that adds an intellectual heft to the phrase by virtue of sounding impressive. Thanks to our good friends at Dictionary.com, we have the following definition:

of or relating to a process involving a randomly determined sequence of observations each of which is considered as a sample of one element from a probability distribution.

Yeah, I don’t get it either.

After a bit more research (and a bit of common sense), it occurred to me the heart of the word involves probability or random variables. Keep this in mind for a little later because it’s going to become important.

Once again, our good friends at Dictionary.com provide a solid definition of terrorism, but I want to focus on the primary definition:

the unlawful use of violence or threats to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or government, with the goal of furthering political, social, or ideological objectives

The key word here is “unlawful.” Of course, I’m curious to find an example of a lawful use of violence or threats for coercive purposes, but that’s research for another time. The point here is terrorism is, by definition, illegal, as is inciting violent or criminal actions. Just ask Charlie Manson. Oh, wait, he’s dead.

So, when we put the parts of stochastic terrorism together, we get…a confusing mess. At best, we might be able to simplify the term to mean violence or threats involving probability. And that’s reaaaaaaaaallllllllly being generous to the Left here.

Then, I see how the Left applies the term, and that generosity goes the way of Keith Olbermann’s broadcast career. The way they use it is grossly inaccurate and intellectually dishonest. In other words, the way they usually use language. Relating to the Club Q shooting, Leftists blamed Republicans, Tucker Carlson, Lauren Boebert, Matt Walsh, MAGA Republicans, LibsofTikTok, and I’m sure anybody to the right of Joseph Stalin by now. They’ve also started laying the groundwork for the idea the past year or so of “anti-trans rhetoric” is responsible for the Club Q shooting.

First, a bit of backstory the Left keeps “forgetting” to include in their rush to damnation…I mean judgment. What the Left is calling “anti-trans rhetoric” is a response to what LibsofTikTok has been posting showing…what pro-trans teachers, medical facilities, and events have been posting themselves. Now, I’m not talking posts about trans adults, mind you. I’m talking about pro-trans rhetoric and events aimed at children.

When the aforementioned Republicans/conservatives responded to what these pro-trans PR reps with power willingly posted on their own social media, these reactions got spun from “we have no problems with trans adults, but leave the kids out of this” to “ARGLEBARGLEREPUBLICANSWANTTOKILLALLTRANSPEOPLE!” And that’s just Cenk Uygur!

And it’s through this spin that the Left’s stochastic terrorism’s hat gets hung. Unfortunately for them, it’s also where the hat falls down, lands in a pile of shit, gets puked on by pledges trying to get into a fraternity, lit on fire, thrown into a toxic waste dump (no, not Twitter), and allowed to evolve into the new Senator-Elect of Pennsylvania. Or shipped to New Jersey.

Remember what I said about what stochastic meant? Well…it doesn’t exactly apply here, using the Left’s own logic and the actual definition of the word. What the Left is doing is drawing direct lines between the Right’s rhetoric and the Club Q shooting. Now, if something is based on probability, that would require at least some level of uncertainty, a chance the final result might not happen in spite of the calculations. By targeting the aforementioned Republicans/conservatives directly, that takes away the uncertainty, which undercuts the stochasticity of the situation.

See? Told you it would be important.

Then, there’s the terrorism angle to consider. Remember, terrorism is an unlawful act. If trans people truly feel threatened by what right wing pundits and online accounts are saying, where are the reports to authorities? To my knowledge, none of the people who claim Republicans/conservatives are engaged in stochastic terrorism have filed charges, sought legal counsel, or taken any of the necessary steps to protect themselves within the law.

Now, why would that be? I’m just some old white guy in Iowa, but something tells me the trans people and their supporters know they can’t meet the legal requirements to get an investigation started. At least, without the police or federal agents laughing hysterically for 10 straight minutes over what amounts to hurt fee-fees over social media self-owns.

And to be honest, the lack of legal action is the smart play here, especially considering filing a false police report is pretty much a big no-no. Plus, it opens up a lot of problems for Leftists like Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, the Socialist Socialite, and plenty more whose rhetoric comes a lot closer to stochastic terrorism than anything Tucker Carlson has said. But if Froggy wants to jump, I say jump. Fuck all of the around and find all of the out.

Before, I close this out, I feel I need to make something crystal clear. Not all trans people and their allies are in favor of what some members of their community are doing in the name of trans visibility. In our efforts to root out the bad actors, we need to ensure we’re not catching the good ones in the “OK Groomer” net. If we don’t, we’re going to wind up doing more damage in the long run and play into the Left’s narrative about us.

In the meantime, call out the Left’s bullshit by asking for receipts. Demand they show us what Tucker Carlson or LibsofTikTok said or did that rose to the level of terrorism. Or if you really want to embarrass them, ask them to define stochastic. Make sure to have your phone or web browser handy to show them the actual definition.

And tell them David Hogg sent ya.




Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

With all of the heavy subjects this week, I decided to inject a bit of actual comedy into this week’s Lexicon. (Finally!) British comedian and now-infrequent awards show how Ricky Gervais has a new special on Netflix that has garnered a lot of attention from Leftists…for all the “wrong” reasons. Leftists attacked Gervais for making jokes about trans people and mentioned one of their favorite new defenses against comedy, “punching down.”

I watched the special because I was curious (and I think Gervais is genuinely funny) and I can confirm he didn’t punch any children or midgets. Then, I thought about it and realized Leftists mean something completely different. No less stupid, but different.

punching down

What the Left thinks it means – when a privileged person mocks or hurts a less-privileged person

What it really means – Leftists choosing which sacred cows aren’t to be made fun of

In a statement what will surprise no one, Leftists have an inflated sense of self-worth, especially in the area of comedy. In recent years, they’ve managed to change comedy from telling jokes to making social statements where jokes may or may not be used. And more often than not, they don’t (unless they steal jokes like Amy Schumer). With a good number of comedians aligning with the Left, Leftists think they are the only truly funny people out there.

Which brings us to the new rules they’ve adopted and expect all other comedians to follow. One of these rules is not to punch down, meaning not to joke about people less fortunate or powerful than you are. On the surface, it makes sense in a weird way. We don’t want to intentionally hurt people who may lack the ability to come back on equal footing because we’re at least trying to look like good people.

The problem is, as Steve Martin so eloquently put it on one of his albums, comedy is not pretty. A lot of comedy involves some element of pain, discomfort, or disruption. That’s why the Marquis de Sade was the hottest stand-up comedian of his day. (True story…I guess.) Even jokes that involve questioning the reason a chicken crosses a road require one party’s life to be interrupted to try to answer said question. And don’t get me started on the perverse nature of knock-knock jokes!

The Left’s demands to punch up instead of punch down shows how little they actually know about comedy. Comedy is the great equalizer because everyone can be the butt of a joke. Elon Musk, a homeless person, it doesn’t matter. To set up an arbitrary limit on who can be joked about is to remove that equality and limit the potential comedic targets. That limits the jokes that can be told. After a while, you will run out of jokes that pass Leftist muster, which leads to the jokes becoming stale and predictable like an episode of “Two and a Half Men.”

But then there’s the comedic conundrum that is “Will & Grace.” This is one of the Left’s favorite sitcoms because of its inclusion and representation of gay characters. I watched a couple of episodes back during its original run and came away wondering why it was such a beloved show on the Left. The comedy, such as it was, seemed obsessed with the gay lifestyle instead of, you know, being funny. And when one of the secondary foils of the show is an over-the-top exaggeration of a gay man and his humor revolves solely around him being gay, I guess I fail to see how this is positive and funny. But apparently it didn’t punch down, so yay, I guess?

On the flip side, there’s “Married With Children.” Throughout its run, the show offended everyone at some point (except for sick freaks like me, apparently) and kept punching up, down, sideways, and all around. Even as controversy raged, there were no fucks given and they continued to be equal opportunity offenders. The same can be said for “South Park,” “Beavis and Butthead,” and a handful of other successful shows. Why did these shows survive and flourish?

Because they understood what was funny and didn’t try to limit the jokes to avoid offending people without senses of humor.

The whole concept of punching up or punching down is absurd, and not in a humorous way. Comedy does have the ability to open minds and change opinions. If it weren’t for comedians like George Carlin and Dennis Miller, I wouldn’t be the man I am today, for better or worse. But the best lessons come from times when you learn without even knowing it because you were having too much fun. Granted, I wouldn’t want to try to learn nuclear physics by watching “Wheel of Fortune” but the point remains the same. We don’t need to be beat over the head with a message to get it.

That’s where Leftist comedy always fails. Well, that and the fact they’re rarely intentionally funny. For Leftists, the message is everything, so it becomes the focal point of any comedy at the expense of any actual comedy. It’s the difference between Dave Chappelle and Hannah Gadsby. Chappelle’s comedy has a message (one that Leftists love to distort for the purposes of getting outraged) while Gadsby’s comedy is only about the message Even when Chappelle bombs, he still has a process to either rework it into something better or dump the bit altogether. Gadsby doesn’t have that option. Plus, you wouldn’t know if she bombed because the sound of crickets in the audience drowns out any laughter.

The funny (strange, not haha) about the concept of not punching down is how fragile the Left thinks some groups are. Granted, these are the same morons who tell us “jokes are violence” and “words are violence,” but this is beyond even that level of what-the-actual-fuck-ism. If someone telling a joke at your expense or at the expense of your group identity causes you emotional or psychic damage, it may not be because the joke is mean-spirited; it may be because you have deeper issues than someone telling a joke, and you’re going to need someone more specialized than Patch Adams to address them.

Going a step further, Leftists feel that every minority group is oppressed and only they can speak for the oppressed. This is especially true of white Leftists, I’ve found. They have savior complexes that would put Superman to shame. But in doing so, they’ve stolen the groups’ voice and used it for their own selfish purposes: to make them look better. That’s a gut punch down, if you ask me!

Then, there’s the other major problem, that being not all members of the group may feel the same way or take offense. There have been a number of gay and trans people openly supporting Gervais’ special, saying it was funny and…non-offensive! How will Leftists respond? The way they always do: ignoring or belittling the people who disagree with them. Now, if words are violence and Leftists mock gay and trans people who liked the Gervais special, wouldn’t that be a hate crime? You make the call!

Either way, it’s not worth the time to worry about whether a comedian is punching up or down because all it does is limit comedy to the point of banality. Laugh at what you want, don’t laugh at what you don’t, and remember to keep a healthy perspective. Even when a comedian hits a group you identify with, it’s not personal, and you have to admit even Republicans and conservatives do things worthy of being mocked openly. I do it, but when the Left keeps serving up mock-worthy topics like punching up, it’s hard to pass up!

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

To put it mildly, things are bad. And I’m not talking your garden variety finger-cut-while-cutting-lemons kind of bad. I’m talking wiping-your-eyes-while-cutting-habanero-peppers-and-balancing-above-a- pit-of-razor-sharp-knives-during-a-live-Yoko-Ono-concert bad. And yet, we find the stupidest shit to bitch about.

Enter Dave Chappelle. His recent comedy special “The Closer” garnered both positive and negative reviews. Namely, the people who watched it with the understanding that comedy is supposed to be funny loved it, and the reviewers who read the Cliff’s Notes version of the special written by the Unfunny People Against Comedians Union and hated it.

Welcome to Stupid Stuff to Complain About-Ville. Population…too many.

Part of the controversy surrounds Chappelle’s observation there are two genders. And we’re still having this debate in 2021. Regardless, members of the trans community objected to the special, claiming it was transphobic. But, as you might expect, there’s a whole lot to unpack here.

transphobia

What the Left thinks it means – any irrational hatred or fear of transexuals

What it really means – an overused catch-all term for anything the Left doesn’t like when it comes to transexuals

To make sure I was speaking intelligently about the subject matter, I watched “The Closer” in its entirety. (The things I do for you readers…) I have to say it was enjoyable on several levels, not the least of which being its brutal honesty. Everything from COVID-19 to race to, yes, transexuals with no sacred cows spared, just like much of Chappelle’s body of work to date.

So, when trans people and their supporters started to complain about his comedy being transphobic, my first question was, “Have you watched any of his comedy before?” As I’ve confirmed by watching “The Closer” and comparing it to the criticisms, the answer is no. But when has a lack of knowledge prevented the Left from speaking?

Although there are plenty of jokes about the trans community, they aren’t what I would consider jokes at their expense. If anything, “The Closer” is about inclusion by making everyone a possible target for mockery. And for people who throw around the word “context” to excuse their stupid shit, it’s amazing how little Leftists actually understand and apply it appropriately.

And with “The Closer,” actual context matters. If you are looking solely at the targets of the jokes, you come away thinking Chappelle is a transphobe. This position is augmented by the Leftist notion that jokes can be hurtful, along with silence and speaking for that matter. In other words, anything you say or don’t say will be used against you in the court of Leftist popular opinion.

Which is one of the points Chappelle made in this special, and one the Leftists crying “transphobe” continue to miss.
A significant portion of “The Closer” is devoted to the trans community going after Chappelle based on what one inaccurate information source said about him. In encounter after encounter, trans people and their supporters didn’t bother to consider anything but that one source as gospel. If anyone would have a Paul Bunyon-sized axe to grind with the trans community afterwards, it would be Chappelle. However, he flipped the script on his critics by showing an amount of grace they lack.

This is exemplified in the final segment of the show. Chappelle tells the story about a white trans woman who wanted to be a comedian and the first time she opened for Chappelle. Let’s just say it didn’t go well, but in the process Chappelle made a personal connection with the woman and helped her hone her craft. After the first round of “Dave Chappelle is transphobic” comments, Chappelle’s friend took to social media and defended him. Six days later, she committed suicide due to the bullying she received.
From whom, you might ask? Well, it wasn’t MAGA hat wearing Trump supporters. It was…the trans community itself.

Didn’t see that coming, did you?

Actually, if you have paid attention to the trans community, it’s not that hard to believe. I’m reminded of an old saying, “Get off my lawn!” Then, after I’ve realized that saying isn’t applicable, I’m reminded of a different saying, “The personal is political.” Anything that affects us on a personal level can be, and often is, used for political ends. And in this case, trans issues have become political issues, mainly because the Left wants to make them so.

And that’s where I feel the trans community goes off the rails like Joseph Hazelwood working for Amtrak. As personal as the issue is to you, there is a lot of work to do to turn these issues from narrowly political to more universal. And you’re freaking out the natives with the way some members of the trans community act. Furthermore, you’re not helping bridge the tolerance gap by throwing around “transphobia” when it is more of a lack of understanding. Yes, there are some actual people who hate the transgendered, but they’re rarer than the way Dracula likes his meat. (I would have said steaks instead of meat, but we know how he feels about them.)

The point is a lot of the oppression the trans community feels right now is self-inflicted, but the Left doesn’t care about making trans people a welcome part of society. Just the opposite. Leftists need there to be constant strife so their own ends are met. And if you’re still fuzzy about it, here’s the short version: the Left is using the trans community and will continue to do so until it’s no longer beneficial to do so. You know who didn’t do that?

Dave Chappelle.

The worst he did was to poke fun at members of the trans community for acting like judgmental assholes because, well, they were acting like judgmental assholes. If you’re pissed about that, you need to get some perspective. Contrary to Leftist opinion, words are not violence and “The Closer” is some damn good comedy from a master in his craft. And because of the aforementioned judgmental assholes, Dave Chappelle won’t be doing comedy until they realize he’s on their side.

If Mr. Chappelle is reading this, if you wanted to wait this out, I would suggest investing in cryogenic equipment because the trans community attacking you don’t seem to be all that keen on self-awareness.