Wednesday, February 04, 2015

The Narses Exception

Does undergoing a sex change operation constitute being true to one's self? Or does it evince an extreme inability to know and then accept thyself? What a conundrum these questions do pose.

My answers are no and yes, respectively. A sex change--self-mutilation, really--is an abomination, and an abomination that, prior to modern medical techniques, was only relegated to slaves, miscreants, and zealous ascetics. It's not something psychologically stable people voluntarily undergo.

Presumably the normalization of homosexuality would end the bizarre desire for the practice. A gay man no longer has any ostensible need to assume the anatomical visage of a woman to attract the attention of other men--there's an enormous market that caters to gay men and to lesbians and rather than being a mark of shame, flaunting one's homosexuality has now become a venerable badge of honor in the West.

If the desire can be chalked up to wanting to increase the range of potential male suitors from the ~3% of the population that is homosexual to the 97% that is heterosexual, well, in addition to being repugnantly devious, that also seems doomed to failure. Heterosexual men have an evolutionarily well-tuned ability to hone in on body proportions and detect when things are awry, with vanishing sexual interest an almost unavoidable consequence.


Thagomizer said...

I'm surprised you didn't mention J Michael Bailey's work:

Sailer talked about it a few times.

August said...

And then there are those who are straight, but fixate on changing their gender. Some of it must be narcissistic- sort of forcing one's will on the universe. Just think about their fascist insistence that we use the pronouns they want, rather than the pronouns that seem appropriate to us.
Eric Raymond has pointed out that, as a therapy, giving them what they want doesn't work:

JayMan said...

I think we can safely say transsexuals are very different animals from garden-variety gay men.

DissidentRight said...

Absent some design specification/designer intention against which to compare "deviants", it doesn't make much sense to object to them or their behavior. Maybe a shovel wasn't designed to bash in skulls, but if it works it works. Like convergent evolution.

At least we can say that some X% of people polled find the mutilators repulsive (or whatever), which might provide clues for better social policies/conventions, but things could really go either way. It certainly doesn't tell us anything about "right or "wrong".

Dan said...

Good points. It is impossible to be as attractive presenting a fake gender as one can be in one's actual gender.

Plastic surgery before and after pictures are supposed to show improvement.

This young woman was thoroughly pretty, with a lot of character showing through:

And now she's one unattractive lady:

She just looks like a clown dressed up in a suit with the swollen face and the short body, especially next to her elegant mom. So then she goes for the lardy white trash look, which is slightly more passable as a man but not what anybody wants to look at.

Audacious Epigone said...


I actually do remember the reference but never delved into the details. Greg Cochran's remarks that Jayman alluded to are enough for me to think there's nothing but "Darwinian madness" here.


Great illustration of the minority imposing its will on the majority.