Pedomorphisis and the Abortive Language of Transgenderism


One of the interesting things about any faith-based subculture is the specific cultic language invented to express the identity and shared experiences of adherents. In the case of transgenderism that language is marked by infantilization and use of linguistic rules not reflected in the wider English speaking culture. (I use English here because it is my native language, but would love to hear if transgenderist language is more functional in other languages). These tendencies adopted by transgenderists manifest in various ways.

One example is the terms assigned by adherents to the process of medical and surgical body modification used to disguise oneself as a member of the opposite sex. This process is labeled euphemistically as “transitioning”: the process of changing oneself into something different. Undoing the process: “de-transitioning” or “re-transitioning”. No other series of human body modifications, (even the most radical of medical or surgical procedures) claims to change the person into “something different”, or into a different person. The subtext of this linguistic choice is: A) Superficial appearance and hormonal balance comprise a distinct state of being, and  B) that state of being, when adopted by a user, renders them “other”, a change into a literal different entity. But what is truly being changed into something different through this process? A male becomes a male taking estrogen who has disguised his secondary sex characteristics into a visual approximation of female. The language assigned by transgenderists to the medical/surgical/social adoption of superficial sexed appearance is part of the cultic language that supports the fantasies of the transgenderist subculture, and has no correlation to any other medical/surgical procedure, simply because no other regimen purports to change the nature of a subject.

Another linguistic anomaly of transgenderism is the dogged insistence that there be no noun used to describe one who is transgendered. Oh and that reminds me: Transgender is a word that ignores basic rules of the English language. As such it is inherently dysfunctional. There is no such thing as a “transgender person” in the English language, as there is no such thing as a “left-hand person” or a “divorce person”. There are those who can be described as a “left-handed person” or a “divorced person” however. The insistence of transgenderists that the English language adopt words which ignore all rules of the English language is yet another revealing choice by which transgenderists attempt to operate in a fantasy realm outside of language itself, and demand we all join them non-consensually in abandoning common shared language and supporting their adopted reality. But back to the noun problem.

There can be Italians. Gays. Paraplegics. Lawyers. Jews. Lesbians. But according to the adopted linguistics of transgenderists there can be no noun to refer to them, unlike any other descriptive category of human. There can be no “Transgenders” because: A) The word itself is outside the common rules of language, and B.) Transgenderists (presumably) find their own condition to be so inherently outside of human experience that they insist we tack on “human” or “person” to any discriptor, in order to make clear we are discussing a human trait. As in: “Transgender(ed) Person”. The subtext is that transgender is NOT a human trait, unless care is taken to insure that it is. “Italian person” “Lawyer person” etc can be linguistically correct, but no one tries to deny that these words also have noun forms. In some cultures it may be impolite to refer to an individual as the noun form of a descriptor “A Jew”, “A Black”, “A Gay” because these nouns are used to refer to a characteristic or concept, not an individual in their totality. But no one insists that the noun forms of those words don’t exist and can’t be properly used when referring to groups that share a characteristic. You can talk about “asthmatics”, you can talk about “a neighbor”. But you cannot talk about a “transgender” both because the term itself is linguistically flawed, and because transgenderists insist that no noun form should ever be used for the characteristic they share. Out of linguistic necessity the public adopted “Tranny” as the noun form, but transgender(ed) activists have decried its usage.

Other curiosities of the language of transgenderism include the infantilization and pedomorphism implied by the language they use to describe (and obfuscate) the body mods they adopt, and the language they use to describe their experiences of them. “Top surgery” and “Bottom surgery” are good examples. One would presume transgenderists have divided the human body into upper and lower halves, regions of terrain for body modification as it were, but that is not what they mean. They use “top” and “bottom” to refer specifically to breasts and genitals, much as a child might refer to their genitals as “privates” or “down dere”.  Top surgery does not refer to “above the waist” or to facial feminization surgery, tracheal shave, laryngoplasty, etc. It refers to breasts. Mastectomy. Breast implants. It refers to breast surgery, in the most infantile way imaginable. “Bottom surgery” must refer to any transgenderist body mod on the lower half of the body, right? Hip implants, liposuction, gluteal implants? Nope. It’s a euphemism for genital surgery. Hysterectomy. Vaginectomy. Bilateral oophorectomy. Metoidioplasty. Phalloplasty. Scrotoplasty. Penectomy. Orchiectomy. ColoVaginoplasty. Etc.  Transgenderists use the term “Lower Dysphoria” to define their dissatisfaction with their natural genitals, not discomfort with their thighs or feet. Another infantile genital euphemism specific to transgenderism.

Transgenderists describe ingesting opposite sex hormones as “Transgender(ed) Puberty”. Middle-aged males describe themselves as “a twelve year old girl”, depending on how long they have been taking female hormones, and middle-aged Female “transitioners” describe themselves as teenage boys. Sometimes a direct timeline from the date of starting hormones is used, with a transgenderist stating “I’m a two year old”, referring to themselves as infants from the time of their “rebirth” into the “other” status of their inhabited gender fantasy.

Why have transgenderists adopted language that is inherently “broken”? Why the insistence that the concept of transgenderism should never be referred to in noun form? Why the infantile jargon referring to breasts and genitals? Why the pedo-pubescent self-descriptors? Why the language enshrining surgical “otherness” and surgical transsubstantiation?

It’s all a variation of the fantasy-supporting language of faith-based subcultural identities. Variations particular to the fantasy being constructed and maintained by those using the language. From Robert Lifton’s Eight Conditions of Thought Reform:

Loading the Language

The language of the totalist environment is characterized by the thought-terminating cliché. The most far-reaching and complex of human problems are compressed into brief, highly reductive, definitive-sounding phrases, easily memorized and easily expressed.

The cult invents a new vocabulary, giving well-known words special new meanings, making them into trite clichés. The clichés become “ultimate terms”, either “god terms”, representative of ultimate good, or “devil terms”, representative of ultimate evil. Totalist language, then, is repetitiously centered on all-encompassing jargon, prematurely abstract, highly categorical, relentlessly judging, and to anyone but its most devoted advocate, deadly dull: the language of non-thought.

Controlling words helps to control people’s thoughts.

The group uses black-or-white thinking and thought-terminating clichés.

The special words constrict rather than expand human understanding.

Non-members cannot simply comprehend what cult members are talking about.

The public is not naïve enough to believe that medical science is able to actually change one’s sex. Those ideas are left back in the fifties when the concept was first introduced, and when governments first began issuing fictional legal sex markers on advice of the clueless medical establishment. And everyone knows the concept is false. No science has ever supported the claim that gender roles are anything but culturally created. The very language of transgenderism fails in its efforts to be adopted by the wider culture. It has failure built into it. A house of linguistic cards built on top of a mirage. It reveals more about the fantasy life of transgenderists than it facilitates communication of the concepts it claims to define.

0 thoughts on “Pedomorphisis and the Abortive Language of Transgenderism

  1. The insistence of transgenderists that the English language adopt words which ignore all rules of the English language is yet another revealing choice by which transgenderists attempt to operate in a fantasy realm outside of language itself, and demand we all join them non-consensually in abandoning common shared language and supporting their adopted reality.
    If I weren’t already post-menopausal, I reckon our periods would sync up about now. I just wrote about similar, getting back to basics and deconstructing “gender” and its various uses. Yours is way better though! I am going to add a link to it.

      1. It pales into insignificance compared to yours, so don’t set your hopes too high.
        Although, to be fair, I did set it out as a primer, and wanted to start at the ground up.

  2. Great, great post, lots to think about.
    Quick contribution, a start on a list of thought-terminating clichés the transcultists always trot out:
    – A person is whatever he/she thinks he/she is.
    – Sex and gender are the same thing
    – Radfems are gender essentialists
    – Anyone with critique of the trans cult is phobic
    – Biological sex is a continuum and includes dozens of varieties
    – Science has proven that here are female brains and male brains
    – “Woman” and “man” mean whatever we want them to mean; we have a right to use language however we want
    – Individual choice is sacred and cannot be questioned
    Your tropes post probably has a whole lot more of ’em.

    1. A person is whatever he/she thinks he/she is.
      LOL, one of my favourites.
      I might “think” I am a lizard, even though I don’t look like a lizard, don’t eat like a lizard or anything a lizard eats, don’t copulate like a lizard, and I am a warm-blooded mammal. The verb “is” is being used rather fast and loose in the above.
      we have a right to use language however we want
      ‘you’ can, but no-one outside your fantasy world will understand you.

  3. Excellent post, I’ve wondered about the infantilism in the trans community for a while. It makes sense, a transsexual must pass through a regression to the time before they were sexed (when we were embryos technically?), before coming out of the other side as another sex. Since this can’t ever happen, a sex change being a biological impossibility (for now at least), the starting infantilism is never overcome. They are perpetually stuck in an egocentric 2-year-old mentality.
    (I hope what I’ve just said makes sense)

    1. (if the time before technical birth is maybe a little too regressive, you can consider puberty as well. The degree of infantilism depends on the individual, MTFs being more infantilistic on average since girls are always supposed to be more immature)

    2. Middle-aged males describe themselves as “a twelve year old girl”, depending on how long they have been taking female hormones, and middle-aged Female “transitioners” describe themselves as teenage boys.
      I guess it is supposed to make the whole thing more mystical. It just comes off as being really immature.
      Oh, and the funfem supporters of trans, never ever pick them up on using or referring to themselves as “girls”. That right there is basic feminism-101 stuff that funfems should know about. Adults aren’t “girls”, adult women aren’t “girls” … and if they followed that logic just a bit further they would see that adult males taking female hormones aren’t “girls” either. Jeezus I am wondering if the funfems know any basic feminism at all. Really I am.

  4. i always read some BDSM into the top/bottom thing. theres probably something there, since trans/sex-poz/BDSM overlap so often, but i like your explanation of infantalizing better. its just creepy isnt it? and especially transwomen seem so interested in “reclaiming girlhood”, as grown-ass men, its just so…well its infantalizing. heh. and fetishizing and pedophilic too. good call.

      1. Interesting coincidence: I almost used the term “autopedophilia” in regards to D.C. Simpson (who is also trans) in a recent post.
        BTW, forced feminization and infantilism fetishes overlap very frequently. Doesn’t surprise me in the least.

      2. D C Simpson explained! (and JDR as well)
        My god, that comic about the blue dog girl was HORRENDOUS. And the fact he sexually roleplayed as an underage (animal) girl, well, disgusting and offensive to actual girls.

  5. On the subject of thought-terminating trans cliches, here’s one that really boggles the mind: “Trans people challenge the binary gender system.” Orwellian doublespeak at its best. In a similar vein, there is “I am socially transgressive because I am trans”. No, you’re not transgressive at all. You’re buying into the existing social system in an obvious and fundamental way.

    1. And if you disagree, they always say, “You need to educate yourself” and rattle off the same, tired, old list of books every time. I’ve read all of ’em, and they just don’t hold water. But in transworld, logical thinkers need not apply.

      1. Oh. my. god. yes. The “go educate yourself” thought-stopper.
        And they want to stop not just thoughts, but shut women up entirely about our own experiences because theirs are so very, very, very special and magical. And special. Don’t forget special. It takes whole libraries to explain just HOW special. And we should have to read every single volume heralding their specialness. And STFU.

      2. Agreed. When I started my blog, among the insults I received from those kind, totally non-hateful FTMs, the one I always found most Orwellian was to “educate myself”. Yeah, I was doing it, a pity it didn’t coincide with your cultspeak.

  6. As I think about this post, ideas are swimming around in my head. Today I’m thinking about infantilization, and isn’t it just so telling that we’re talking about men and women who want to become men.
    Boys are trained from a very, very young age and throughout their formative years that they will be treated as babies the rest of their lives. They are taught that some woman will take care of their every need – someone will cook for them, clean up after them, wipe their butts (literally, then figuratively), make their beds and pick up their dirty clothes, put up with their moods, meet their every bodily need (which eventually become sexual), and generally place them at the center of the universe. The vast majority are straight men who expect to be treated that way their entire lives. They and their caretakers like to pretend that that isn’t so, but if you aren’t around it for a while, then go watch any het relationship, it stands out like a giant red Baboon butt. (No offense to Baboons or their butts intended.)
    They crave attention (we all like some of it, some time, but for them it’s their life blood, they are energy vampires) and demand it in a million small and large ways. And they expect to get it, period. And if they don’t, watch out, because they will attack anyone not catering to them who is supposed to be catering to them. They have been taught to exercise no control over these feelings – instead they are trained and rewarded into an ever-increasing dependency on it. Instead of being trained and required to recognize and meet their own needs without help from anyone else, through this process they are infantilized. (I saw an article today that said parents are much more likely to welcome their sons back home to live than they are their daughters.)
    Who does this sound like? Men who have taken this to the nth degree. “I’m uncomfortable in my body – wahhhhh, YOU fix it mommy!!! You HAVE to fix it! I’m UNHAPPY wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!! Do SOMETHING!!!!” And it all gets tangled up with their sexual wants and personality disorder (which probably makes it that much harder for them to find anyone who will take care of them just so) and inability to take care of themselves and their lack of self-awareness and maturity, and finally, their unrepentant childishness. For women growing up right now there are black and white choices; it’s no wonder that some women study how boys and men are treated and decide to take that choice.

    1. So true. A quote from that article you mentioned:
      “The study found twice as many mums admit to getting wrapped around their sons little fingers and admit that they spoil them more than their daughters.
      Sons are also more likely to have their dinner cooked for them every night, have their washing and ironing done and be driven by mum or dad when needed.”

    2. And the incredible toxic selfishness and narcissism. The cold-blooded pursuit of the paraphillic object- they would stomp on a blind man to get what they want. I was just looking at an article written today for the associated press by lisa leff and published on huffington post about large corporations trending to provide medical insurance coverage for cosmetic surgery for the transgendered. A guy wrote in the comments about his father, who could not be approved for cataract repair until he went completely blind in that eye. Here is the LITERAL QUOTE of the transgenderist who replied to him:
      “OkieIntellectual : Is blindness in one eye going to put you at a significantly higher risk of suicide or being a victim of a violent hate crime? I think not.”
      I commented: ” Is a healthy body that appears male going to cause blindness in one eye, loss of peripheral vision, loss of all depth perception (no more driving), excruciating headaches, loss of income and disability?” But of course they rejected my comment. This transgenderist would stomp all over the back of a blind old man to get the “gender suit” he wants to wear. And where are the studies proving this transgenderist suicide trope? There are none. I must know a hundred transgenderists and I don’t know a single one who has attempted suicide. According to surveys of transgendersists, 25% of them have attempted suicide. Well where are they? They should be littering the streets at that rate. Or at least the emergency rooms. But they aren’t. It’s all made up- a fucking lie to get what they want. These guys don’t kill themselves. They hold off on “transitioning” until they get tenure, or a pension, or a retirement fund. Until the kids are off to college. If they are so concerned about their own, why don’t they collect suicide statistics from care providers and law enforcement agencies to help them lobby for their rights? Because they don’t exist. It’s a lie, and they know it. It’s a big ole cryin’ baby foot-stompin’ “I’m gonna KILLLLLLLLLL MAHSELF if you don’t give me what I wantttt” lie.

      1. That comment made me think what I think every time I see their ugly garbage in public: “Just keep overplaying your hands you creepy fucks.”
        Was your comment rejected or is it just in moderation? Huffpo can take a long time to put up comments. Outrageous if yours is rejected entirely; they have no trouble allowing every kind of sickening comment on the story about Rosie breaking up with her girlfriend. But say something mean AND true about SCAMmers, no we can’t have that.

      2. omg, that trans response was outrageous.
        There are also older women waiting for hip replacement surgery, who have to wait for years. A serious mobility issue.
        But the gender-suiters?
        Pandered to their every whim.
        (I like the term gender-suiters, so appropriate)

      3. I believe some of the trans suicides are real…usually, the ones done AFTER transition.
        And that article about plastic surgery, IT PISSES ME OFF TO NO END! HOW DARE THEY COMPARE THEIR (mental) CONDITION TO AN ACTUAL, PHYSICAL SOURCE OF PAIN OR DISABILITY, like a disaligned hip or blind eye?

    3. I agree. The difference of treatment between me and my cousin was staggering. He’ll be a baby forever, wheter coddled by his mom or by his (hypothetical for now) wife…His family is also rich, so one more reason for him to grow up as a spoiled brat.
      And that’s why the best trans character I’ve ever seen is Pokey/Porky from Mother 3, a narcissistic, sociopathic, capitalistic eternal child (literally).

  7. Transcorporification: “[T]he process of medical and surgical body modification used to disguise oneself as a member of the opposite sex.”
    Transcorporasis: the state of the transgendered body during that process (which never ends).

    1. lol that’s a pretty fancy special snowflake word. What about “construction” as in “undergoing gender construction”, “transgender construction process”? Hmm.. still thinking…

    1. Ah, interesting The Scum should actually phrase it that way, because in effect, they are saying that trans (M2T) are NOT women, they are other than women, or women-copies.
      Transactivists themselves pretend they want to be regarded ‘just like (FAAB) women’, but they don’t, they want special snowflake status of womanhood.

    1. Isn’t the second puberty thing just a direct rip-off from ‘born again christianity’ or something?
      It just does not sound that original in concept.
      Creepy, but not original.

      1. Ooh, that -is- creepy. But not surprising. I’d love to see the statistics of how many trans people grew up in (and retained elements of) a religious, if not fundamentalist, background.
        I’ve always thought the “second puberty” was just a result of the sudden influx of artificially induced hormones, another definite sign that the whole concept of “trans” is not natural and actually quite bad for a person — I’m pretty sure people aren’t supposed to undergo two puberties, especially not a second one during midlife (when many MtTs make the transition).

      2. Oh yeah, FABLibber, everyone knows trans is a cure for gayness or lesbianism.
        (Except when it allows some dude to call himself a “lesbian”, or some woman with extreme self-hatred to call herself a “gay man.”)

    2. There’s something inherently dishonest about the whole idea. Puberty is the physical transition from childhood to adulthood, not adulthood to adulthood with altered secondary sexual characteristics.
      More than one trans activist has talked about how totally fucking awesome it is to go through an artificial quasi-puberty instead of dealing with the normal effects of getting older. Especially — oh the horror! — MENOPAUSE. (I’m not going to fluff anyone’s web presence by naming names, but you can probably guess the name of at least one pornsick FTM who’s discussed this in public.) Of course, this only delays their experience of aging, which they then get to go through with wonky hormone levels.

      1. They’re all as ageist as gay men.
        And all that genderqueer crap as they age? Let me just say, I once had a friend tell me, things that are charming and cute when you’re 20 are just pathetic when you’re 40. They won’t have many allies then.
        What are all these knobs gonna do when they get thrown out of the counter-culture because they’re ick, old?

  8. Druids can’t be reborn, cows. They always were ;P
    (and yeah, I’m roleplaying now, but teh warplay is for realz)

  9. This is totally brilliant, GallusMag! Thanks for breaking-it-down. There is, indeed, so much to think about in regard to the language of transgenderism and the demand that everyone adopt it unconditionally, or be unconditionally branded a BIGOT.

      1. tranify, LOL
        tranification, LOL
        I see that M2T and F2T has quickly gained standard usage on radfem blogs. Very fast adoption of the terms!

  10. Kerriste! Are they so naive to think they can take those carcinogenic chemicals all their lives? That those implants aren’t going to bite them in the ass sooner than later? It’s going to be one hugely expensive and whiney old age these men are going to have, because even though they will have their male career cadillac health insurance, the cos are going to rear up and refuse them. It’s going to be a tsunami that makes real menopause look like a fluffy kitten experience.

  11. Pity. For all the good points made, the critisisms I’ve come across on radfem blogs frequently seem messed up. It’s like anything which challenges your cause is inherently wrong no matter what the evidence. – Still, in light of recent science that’s perhaps just the nature of anyone with strong beliefs in anything at all. They don’t like to have those beliefs challenged.
    That goes for us trannies too. We don’t like people challenging our fundamental beliefs. But that of course, leads to a problem, because to my understanding, trannies aren’t rational, but neither are most radical feminists, as far as I’ve been able to see.
    So, it’s sacred, irrational beliefs VS sacred irrational beliefs. – Is it any wonder this never gets anywhere useful?
    But, to say something relevant to the article itself, why is tranny offensive? For much the same reason ‘nigger’ is offensive. It has little to do with linguistics or the meaning of the word, and everything to do with how the word has been used historically.
    As to transitioning, notice that your logic about it being impossible to become something else by changing physical traits is taken for granted when talking about people. (Eg. A man resembling a woman is still a man.), yet in most contexts the reverse is true; Form defines what something is. It’s history does not. A wooden table isn’t a tree. A car isn’t a lump of metal and rubber, a plate isn’t a lump of clay.
    For that matter, a butterfly isn’t a catterpillar, neither is an adult a child just because they used to be one.
    What this illustrates is that rationality isn’t an absolute. What is rational from one person’s perspective is irrational from that of another, and this is mainly shaped by inherent biases.
    But, to accept a position that goes against your subconcious thought process causes a lot of cognitive dissonance.
    Just don’t presume your ‘rational’ position is true, and the people you’re criticising are irrational loonies. Because usually nobody is being rational.
    Rational thought pretty much doesn’t exist; It’s just a convenient explanation made after the fact for the magical thought processes we all have.
    When I look at these kind of critiques, while there are certainly valid points, what mostly comes across is a degree of arrogance and contempt, and a general inability or unwillingness to consider the flaws in your own position.
    Still, on many of these kind of blogs this is then coupled with a degree of orwellian censorship that makes anyone that dares critique the critique pretty much either deleted, edited, or challenged in ways that frame the criticism as being invalid by virtue of who is saying it.
    Still, I by this point I’ve given up trying to discuss this matter seriously with feminists, because it soon becomes apparent that as much as you like to be critical of others, I don’t see much evidence of you taking anything that doesn’t support your own position even remotely seriously.
    Which means of course, it’s not a debate, just critique that should be silently accepted?
    Well, I don’t know about this blog in particular, but I have a sneaking suspicion this’ll get deleted. Which of course makes me wonder why I even bother…
    Suffice to say, politics is not a subject I have much patience with considering what kind of behaviour it elicits from people…

    1. You’ve “given up trying” to discuss “this matter” “seriously” with feminists? More like you’ve been banned from every blog on the internet.
      Don’t come into MY space and preach to me, motherfucker. Who asked you for your stupid fucking opinion? “Ohhhhhhhh there isssss no such thhhhing as objective realityyyyyyyyyy there issss only myyy dickkkkkk….”
      You’re right about one thing though. Any further comments from you will be deleted. Maybe someday you’ll figure out why. Hint: It’s not me, it’s you.
      P.S. Thanks for subscribing, self-absorbed naval-gazing dickbrain.

  12. Very interesting and informative, thanks!
    I can’t even begin to force myself to type “trans woman” without the quotes because I simply do not believe that a male can transition into a female.
    I’d sooner believe in a “trans cat” or a “trans tree”.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 512 MB.
You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other.
Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded.