Counter-Currents
Christine Jorgensen
2,265 words
Amid all the censorious, aneurysm-inducing twaddle about “transphobia” and the nauseating, bootlicking treatment of the gender-dysphoric as cultural gods these days, a thought recently bubbled up that had been embedded deep inside my noggin for decades:
Why does no one hear about Christine Jorgensen anymore?
I asked a handful of friends if they could place the name, and none of them could.
For those unaware, Christine Jorgensen was America’s Superstar Transsexual Darling from the early 1950s until at least the early 1970s, when he (sorry, I’m going to use proper biological pronouns throughout this piece) faded mostly into obscurity as a whole new breed of drag queens and post-op loons started hogging the spotlight.
Born in the Bronx in 1926 as George William Jorgensen and designated as a male because back then people knew the difference between males and females, Jorgensen was a shy, fey, extremely gay-looking boy. At some point later in life after his sex change, he described his former self as a “frail, blond, introverted little boy who ran from fistfights and rough-and-tumble games.” But George Jorgensen’s plumbing was apparently normal enough that he served a stint in the US Army in the 1940s while being stationed at Fort Dix, New Jersey. That’s right: DIX. You can’t make this shit up.
Young George Jorgensen said he felt like a girl, played with girls’ toys, and wanted to wear girls’ clothes. He said that he developed crushes on boys and felt envious of girls. At some point in the late 1940s or early ‘50s, Jorgensen began taking estrogen supplements. He started researching sexual-reassignment surgery, which had existed in one form or another since the 1920s and 1930s, and made up his mind to go to Sweden, which at the time hosted the world’s only doctors who performed such procedures. While in Copenhagen to visit relatives, Jorgensen made the acquaintance of an endocrinologist named Christian Hamburger and decided to name his new “female” self “Christine” in homage to Hamburger. Due to his family ties in Denmark, and aided by the special pleading of a local surgeon, Jorgensen received special permission from the Danish government to embark on a series of surgical procedures that included testicular removal in 1951 and a right bloody good penis-lopping in 1952. Returning to the United States in late 1952, Jorgensen reportedly intended to keep his sex change a secret, but rumor has it that a cousin sold the story to the press for $300 (about $3,500 today) — and a star was born.
“EX-GI BECOMES BLONDE BEAUTY,” roared the New York Daily News headline from December 1, 1952. What astonished me about the subsequent story is that it didn’t treat Jorgensen like a freak. In fact, it actually used feminine pronouns:
George W. Jorgensen Jr., son of a Bronx Carpenter, served in the Army for two years and was given honorable discharge in 1946. Now George is no more. After six operations, Jorgensen’s sex has been changed and today she is a striking woman, working as a photographer in Denmark.
A striking woman. Wow, I expected something far more . . . you know . . . transphobic.
Jorgensen quickly became a cultural phenomenon. The 1953 film Glen or Glenda, which often registers near the top of “Worst Movies of All Time” lists, features a small segment about a transsexual that it claimed was based on Jorgensen’s story, although most of the film dealt with director Ed Wood, Jr’s. real-life predilection for stockings, high heels, and angora sweaters.
In 1954, a calypso singer known as “The Charmer” — who later rebranded as Nation of Islam top banana Louis Farrakhan — recorded a song called “Is She Is or Is She Ain’t” based on Jorgensen’s story. And even though this was Farrakhan, the lyrics merely reflect honest confusion about the whole saga rather than anything resembling condemnation or, Allah forbid, “hate”:
I wonder what gave him the idea and the spark
To leave the country bound for Denmark
He tried to live the life of a man
But that was not in accord with nature’s plan
So he underwent this operation
And came back home to shock the nation
But behind that lipstick, rouge and paint
I got to know, is she is, or is she ain’t?
When I skimmed over newspaper archives about Jorgensen from 1952 to the early 1960s, I was amazed to find the same approach as the initial Daily News article that rocked the world: They used “proper” pronouns, were highly respectful of Jorgensen and his weird journey, and they were sometimes surprisingly flattering. To be fair, my sample size and the time I could afford to spend on research were both limited. I’m sure that someone, somewhere was aghast at the entire spectacle. But here’s what I found:
Ft. Worth Star-Telegram, December 12, 1952:
“She turned up in true femme fatale outfit: tailored black suit, black stockings, black gloves, black hat and black veil. . . . She smiled charmingly for 20 minutes for dozens of pictures. . . . Each time a newspaperman would pop a question on her private life, she gracefully would ignore him with: ‘Now let’s get back to my film.’”
Valley Morning Star (Harlingen, Texas), June 26, 1953:
Headline: “Christine Jorgensen Tells All to Dr. Kinsey”
Main story was about Jorgensen’s meeting with the famed sex researcher, with a side story about how when Jorgensen told a hotel clerk he needed a hotel room, the clerk dutifully made one available for him the moment a cancellation came through.
Chicago Tribune, July 4, 1956:
Subhead: “Ex-Soldier Discusses Night Club Role”
“Christine Jorgensen smiled. It was a pleasant smile. And, her white teeth contrasted admirably with her ‘Bachelor’s Carnation’ lipstick.”
Arizona Daily Star, June 15, 1958:
Headline: “Christine Jorgensen To Make Tucson Debut”
“Christine Jorgensen, literally one of the most discussed figures in the entertainment world in recent years, opens a 10-day engagement Friday at the Tucson Inn’s Bagdad Room.”
The Daily Item (Sunbury, Pennsylvania), September 23, 1958:
“Christine Jorgensen, who was brought up a male and had her sex established as a female six years ago in an operation in Europe, addressed 65 persons at the opening meeting of the Westchester Chapter Muscular Dystrophy Assn. . . .”
El Paso Herald-Post, March 31, 1959:
Headline: “Christine Jorgensen Wants to Get Married”
“The fiance [sic] of Christine Jorgensen hustles off to Chicago today in search of the divorce papers he must submit before he can marry the man-turned-woman.”
Casper (WY) Star Tribune, July 18, 1960:
“6 BIG NIGHTS. . . . See the appearance of this great personality before Hollywood makes a movie of ‘The Life Story of Christine Jorgensen.’”
Fort Lauderdale News, March 10, 1961:
“Whatever transformations medical science performed upon Christine . . . there appears to be little question that the Bronx songstress is today a well adjusted [sic] woman.”
The Daily Herald (Sydney, Australia), July 23, 1961:
Headline: “Christine Jorgensen Looking for a Husband”
“The slim, trim blond, wearing a $6,000 mink coat, flew in from Honolulu for a four weeks’ night club engagement at $1,500 a week.”
Maybe I expected positive press for Jorgensen in New York and Los Angeles back then, but Texas and Wyoming? The only murmurs of “transphobia” that I found involved a 1952 incident where comedian Henny Youngman cracked jokes about Jorgensen that I was sadly unable to find. In response to Youngman’s ribbing, the Minneapolis Star Tribune ran a series of letters to the editor complaining that the fiddle-toting Jewish funnyman had been tasteless and disrespectful. One woman wrote, “I think a person who has the courage to transfer himself, such as she, has a perfect right to be treated as a woman, the same as any other.”
You can buy Jim Goad’s ANSWER Me! here.
The only two instances I could find of people trying to “cancel” Jorgensen involved a 1953 incident in Germany and a 1955 shutdown in Venezuela. In America Jorgensen ran into a few legal speedbumps, such as the time in 1959 that he was prevented from getting married to a man named Howard J. Knox, because even though Jorgensen’s driver’s license listed him as a female, his birth certificate called him a male, and at least back then, you couldn’t retroactively change your birth certificate nor the “deadname” it listed. But here in the hate-filled USA, Jorgensen was mostly allowed to let his freak flag freely fly.
Except for the occasional joke told at his expense, Jorgensen spent the rest of his life as a generally respected nightclub entertainer and widely feted cultural oddity. He was able to make a living as an entertainer. As the 1960s wore on, with all of the resultant transitioning between new definitions of what constituted a “cultural icon” and what was cast into the dustbin of history for being “racist,” “sexist,” and all of the other moronic bugaboos, Jorgensen was mostly treated as a hero and a pioneer until he died of bladder and lung cancer in 1989.
Although I don’t remember the term “drag” ever being used in my youth, it was universally considered a laughing matter — not cruel and mocking laughter, but just generally hilarious — to see men dressed up as women.
At summer camp when I was a Boy Scout and couldn’t have been older than 12, there was a competition where all the different troops served up contestants who walked down a cement poolside runway dressed like girls in bikinis with wigs and lipstick. I remember most of the Scouts thinking that “Luscious Lola” was particularly fetching. And we all recoiled at the idea of homosexuals back then, but guys dressing up as women was universally seen as hilarious.
If people back in America’s supposed Dark Ages thought transvestites were appalling rather than funny, 1959’s Some Like it Hot — where Jack Lemmon and Tony Curtis dress in drag to evade Mafiosi — wouldn’t have been a hit comedy.
If America was the steaming cesspit of transphobia that the modern high priestesses of wokeness allege it was, ABC never would have greenlit the 1980-82 sitcom Bosom Buddies, where Tom Hanks and Peter Scolari star as struggling actors who dress in drag so they can live in a dirt-cheap New York City apartment building that’s open only to women.
Compare what was said about Jorgensen in the mainstream American press back when it was allegedly seething with hatred to the truly dehumanizing and often murderous language you hear from the government, the educational-industrial complex, and the media about “transphobes” these days. On second thought, it’s unfair of me to ask you to compare. There’s no comparison. The anti-“transphobe” rhetoric is galactically more hateful than anything that was said about trannies back then.
Perplexed, befuddled, and clearly out of my pay grade and element in my attempts to figure out what changed over the years and how things got so poisonous regarding the whole Trans Delusion, I contacted a long-time reader of mine. Although we’ve always been congenial and friendly, I’m not sure he qualifies as a “friend” yet, because we never met and I don’t even know what he looks like. Such is the state of parasocial online “relationships” these days. He was the one who tipped me off for last week’s feature about the female-to-male Nashville mass shooter and how the primary fiduciary change over the years, which no one ever seems to spotlight, is that “transitioning” has become a $200-billion industry.
Although he made a living for a long time as a drag performer, this gent is a biological male and identifies as one. He never took hormone therapy and never had sexual-reassignment surgery. In fact, he’s cynical about the whole process of gender self-identification:
I’m a man. No “identifying” about it. A rather loud, emotional, silly, bombastic man, but a man nonetheless.
He laments that an outsider culture in which he once found solace has metastasized into what he calls a mainstream “cult.” He also makes a stark distinction between old-school “trannies” and modern “troons”:
There is a MASSIVE difference between trannies, who called themselves and each other trannies — and “troons,” which are the genderspecial hateblobs being manufactured on campus. It was a mashup of trans and goon. Trannies were ALWAYS showgirls and/or streetwalkers. Eventually settling down (if they survived) with a nice husband in the suburbs. Troons are turds in a corporate toilet. . . . Troons are the Pronoun Cult. Backed by the entire government/medical/corporate establishment. Politicized gendermush. Trannies as I knew them still do exist, but many if not most have been sucked up into the cult. Trannies have a more realistic view of themselves. They know they are men, biologically. They are largely apolitical or would be if they were allowed to be by the cult. I’ve seen some using #TransWomenAreTransWomen on social media. But most would rather just live their lives and meet a nice husband. Trannies pass. Troons don’t. Fuck the Pronoun. Earn an Adjective.
He tells me that most of the trannies he knew were never fond of Christine Jorgensen:
She was instant establishment, and a bit of a “brick” as we used to say. Probably due to some jealousy, maybe. Decades before any of this shit became so hyper-politicized, there was way more gatekeeping amongst the trannies. And the term “crossdresser” was often used to keep it.
This confirms something I’ve thought about for years: I found fags and crossdressers to be much more likable back when they were cultural outsiders. I once joked that I thought that the thrill of being gay involved the possibility of being gay-bashed. But once they started up with all the shrill politicking about gay marriage, disrespectful demands for respect, and viciously sadistic calls for the ritual unpersoning and perpetual ostracism of anyone who dares criticize them, they started reminding me more of gay-bashers.
Same goes for the trannies. It was the fact that they became the establishment — and a far more tyrannically cruel and genuinely hateful establishment than the one they replaced — that made me hate them.
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “Paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
- Third, Paywall members have the ability to edit their comments.
- Fourth, Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
69 comments
This is absolutely fascinating. I had heard of Jorgensen in connection with Ed Wood, but knew nothing of his reception history.
But it should come as no surprise that today’s Trantifa hysterics, like yesterday’s feminists, sell their particular brand of emancipatory snake oil based on a twisted and falsified picture of the past.
“…based on a twisted and falsified picture of the past.”
I recently got into it with a friend of my wife who insisted on referring to the actor Divine as a she. I patiently tried to explain to her that Divine identified himself as a gay man who enjoyed performing as an exaggerated charicature of a woman and he had no desire to be a woman. She could not separate drag queens(or female impersonators as they were once called) from the tranny cult. “And how in the hell would YOU know?” she barked at me. I don’t know, maybe the documentary I have called Divine Trash where he says so. She also didn’t believe me when I told her he was set to be a new semi-regular guest on Married…With Children as Peg’s brother Uncle Otto when he died.
I had tickets to go see the first taping of Divine in Married With Children. But he died only days before.
Damn, that sucks. It’s a shame we never got to see what he would’ve done with his character.
When I lived in the Hotel Chelsea I used to see Glenn Milstead around a lot (that makes sense, don’t it?), seldom if ever dolled up as Divine. Amazingly normal-looking guy. Sort of like John McGiver.
Funny you bring up John McGiver. The first time I saw The Manchurian Candidate I thought that guy looks just like Divine without the make-up.
That’s so funny. I knew him mainly as William Schallert’s boss on The Patty Duke Show. A newspaper editor. Previously William Schallert had been Dobie Gillis’s professor at some lunker college, always talking about Elizabeth Barrett Browning.
McGiver always seemed vaguely English…somebody who couldn’t get a job with Max Beaverbrook so now he was editing the Brooklyn Heights Gazette.
Also briefly was the star of Many Happy Returns, as the boss of a Returns window at Macy’s. Probably an NBC show, as they were usually crappy.
Funny thing about John McGiver is that he was just a standard-issue recent Irish-American, first generation, who got into Regis, Fordham, Columbia, and CUA…yet he always “read” as a kind of pompous English toff.
I remember seeing trad trannies at the bar ten years ago and actually being briefly fooled (til I saw the lurking Adam’s apple). Now that I think about it, they do (did?) seem to have been a completely different breed from this shrieking type of nowadays, so apparently hell bent on disrupting whatever is left of normal life. I imagine the point of contact between the two, though, may be the drag queens at story hour. What’s their relation to the Lia Thomases or the gun-toting Audreys and their defenders? Are they active, designing, turbulent and seditious in the same way? Do their interests converge? Or do they in fact diverge? Is there an internal disagreement among these madmen that can be exploited?
This is both filthy and fascinating, but I expected contempt over acceptance from my grandparents generation. The illusions of the 50s I once romanticized have been shattered.
What you must understand is that she was widely understood to have been an intersex, a sort of hermaphrodite who got something corrected.
This was hinted at in the segment in Glen or Glenda about “Alan/Ann,” who was described as a hermaphrodite.
I searched a little bit about Jorgensen, and the best I could find is that early reports said he was hermaphroditic. But a 2017 New York Daily News article says that “Indeed, in Denmark, surgeons conceded that in fact George Jorgensen Jr. had been neither a hermaphrodite nor a pseudohermaphrodite, merely an extreme queen.”
This academic paper says essentially the same thing: First came reports that Jorgensen was hermaphroditic, then came reports saying the opposite.
Not sure what to believe there.
But today I learned that “true” hermaphrodites can have both XX and XY chromosomes. You learn something every day.
Yeeaah they’re always coming up with new granular criteria. So back in 1952-53 they said, “No, this is NOT a MAN, my friend. Eyeball test! Congratulations Christine!”
Now we’re whining about “chwomosomes” and other untestable shyte nobody understands or can agree on.
I’m pretty sure “they,” meaning the doctors, said something more along the lines of, “This is a MAN! Let’s cut off his balls in 1951 and his dick in 1952! Abracadabra—WOMAN!”
Those “true” hermaphrodites with XX and XY chromosomes are very interesting, not so much because of the hermaphrodite part but because they’re chimeras. Chimeras are like Siamese twins but they’re so finely intertwined that you can’t tell they were two individuals once, until one absorbed the other. Different body parts can come from either of the two individuals, or contain a mix of cells from both.
As an aside, no true human hermaphrodite – in the sense of someone with functional sex organs of both types – has ever been found. Among known cases, of the minuscule number that weren’t completely sterile (only 4 known in medical history?) all were fertile with only one set of sex organs.
You could be a chimera, whose left and right ass cheeks each came from different dudes. Think about it. 😛
Those scoutmasters dressing pre-pubescent boys in bikinis and wigs may very well have been molesters. They usually seek out the more effeminate boys with few friends and maybe a disruptive home life to move in on. When I was 10 or 11, none of us would have put on a bikini or a wig and if someone’s father found out a scoutmaster dressed his kid that way, blood would’ve been shed. In my neighborhood in NY, a man dressed as a woman wouldn’t have made it down the street. Either would a negro.
They could have been set up by molesters, but the whole modern tranny/pedo thing has set in waves of unhinged hysteria on both sides. I don’t remember ever hearing of Scoutmasters molesting kids in Troop 111, Westbrook Park, PA. My Catholic high school was another matter. Of the twenty or so priests that were working there, five have been defrocked for diddling teen boys—but I only heard about that years after the fact.
For Halloween in my staunchly Catholic neighborhood, I dressed as Aunt Jemima, and no one had a problem with it. Certainly no blood was shed. It was extremely common for males to dress as females for yuks back then. I don’t ever remember females dressing as men, which is interesting in contrast.
Men don’t put too much mind into dressing up. No make-up, accessories, etc. Male fashion has always been utilitarian and relatively drab. Not much dress-up to play with and make fun off.
In my high school days (1987-90) there were annual “powder puff” games in which the cheerleaders played football “as boys,” while the boys dressed up as cheerleaders with exaggerated bosoms, makeup, and mannerisms. It was simply absurdly humorous for them, like your summer-camp scenario.
If anyone actually got off on it, it certainly wasn’t shared with the rest of the revelers.
We had powderpuff too. Roughly the same era as you. Our school abolished it after my junior year. Reason was never given. Maybe the school saw into the future.
Maybe so. I’m sure it went away sooner in some places than others. I never participated, but it was just there. And the idea of being offended by it was patently absurd, obviously.
There indeed has been a lot of infiltration of BSA. They got sued to Kingdom Come to force them to change their policies. Ultimately they gave in, but it turned out to be the final nail in their coffin. I wrote about it here:
The Boy Scouts of America is in a death spiral after surrendering to the gay agenda – rainbowalbrecht (wordpress.com)
Further update here after some leftist tried mouthing off to me about it:
OMFG how I love hate mail – rainbowalbrecht (wordpress.com)
Oh, I’m aware of all the Scout rape. I even had a whole section about it in the Rape issue of ANSWER Me! I was only referring to my personal experience, where the molesters seemed to all be clustered in the Catholic seminary and rectory—again, “seminary”? “rectory?” it’s amazing they didn’t have a “testiculary”—instead of in the basement of the Presbyterian church where we had Scout meetings.
I think the main difference back then—we’re talking the 1970s—is that the Scouts hadn’t surrendered to the “gay agenda” while the priests were all “celibate” and heard about all the teenage boys’ lurid fantasies in the confessional. When I think back to being 13 years old in a confession booth and telling some middle-aged man that I had “unclean thoughts,” it all seems just as abusive as anything anyone says about Drag Queen Story Hour. Plus, all the Scout leaders were married and had kids.
“When I think back to being 13 years old in a confession booth and telling some middle-aged man that I had “unclean thoughts,” it all seems just as abusive as anything anyone says about Drag Queen Story Hour. ”
Somebody somewhere online recently pointed out: “Men in dresses telling stories to children. Sounds like going to Mass.”
I don’t know, I knew a few guys whose mothers forced them to be altar boys and I never heard of any diddling. I came from a pretty tough area, though, our fathers were all cops, firemen or construction workers and I think that if a priest had touched a kid, they’d have torn out his throat and buried him deep. Everyone was Catholic, with a handful of Jews, the Presbyterians in NY were all black and no Whale kid was going into their basement. I know you have a special dislike for Catholicism, but pedophiles come from any organization that allows adult males quiet time with kids. Coaches, teachers, rabbis, priests and ministers, your kid’s friend’s weird uncle. We have to all be wary of adult men who hang out with kids.
I know nothing of cross-dressing boy scouts, but in the 1950s in my tiny N.C. hometown my grandfather and all the rest of the men in the Lion’s Club put on an annual “swimsuit” contest. My grandfather, in an antique bathing costume complete with ruffled cap, looked ridiculous, but I suppose that was partly the point. His bewigged friend Bob, on the other hand, could easily have passed. There was nothing especially subversive about it; the local paper ran photographs every year. Then again, we’re eccentric southerners, so maybe all bets are off.
She was a friend of Tiffany Thayer, who mixed with a lot of edgelords when he ran the Fortean Society. So two degrees of separation from George Sylvester Viereck.
Ms. Metroland, this is about as random and off-topic as you can get, but given the stomping grounds you’ve mentioned in your comments and articles, I’ve wondered whether you have any history or dealings with the poet James Merrill?
I realize that he is not a man of the right, but he is one of my favorite poets and has been, for some reason, a subject of curious fascination for me for a long time.
I definitely knew people who knew James Merrill (Sandy McClatchy, Richard Howard), but no, I did not move in those circles myself, for reasons which may be adduced.
Thank you for the reply. Just curious! 😊
Fun Fact: knowing only TT as a name in Charles Fort books, it was quite a while before I realized he was, in fact, a man. I’ve never heard of any male named Tiffany (or Evelyn, for that matter); was it common? Is it a case of that upper class thing for naming a child for the mother’s maiden name (McGeorge Bundy, Kingman Brewster, Edsel Ford)? It sounds like the result of one of those “Choose your porn star alias” tests.
The late John Tiffany was a friend of mine from the old Willis Allison Carto combine. I can easily imagine Tiffany as a given name for the two-last-name set. Tiffany Thayer was a bestselling novelist and occasional actor and screenwriter, in the pre-Code days.
https://counter-currents.com/2015/03/tiffany-thayer-and-the-fortean-fascists-part-1/
Does anyone remember Renee Richards?
Dr. Richards was my nephew’s eye surgeon. (Also Keith Olbermann’s!) Strabismus, she was like the leading specialist.
Funny!! I think his real name was Riskind.
Dick Raskind was captain of the Yale tennis team in the mid-1950s. His coach was still teaching squash in Payne-Whitney when I was there 20 years later. Dick’s older sister, later Josephine von Hippel, was a winner of one of those Westinghouse Science Awards in the 1940s. I’m sorry for all the notoriety these people had to suffer under, but we’re talking about some very bright and capable people who were not pushing any degeneracy, and would undoubtedly balk at the idea.
Johnny Skillman
https://www.nytimes.com/1977/10/22/archives/john-f-skillman-excoach-at-yale.html
Jim do you think there will be a tipping point with all this tranny shit? What could the tipping point even possibly be at this point?
Depends on what you mean by “tipping point.” If it means an event that’s so shocking, America goes into deep throes of shame and self-reflection and changes course…well, last week’s Nashville tranny massacre has already been effectively forgotten.
The only real change will come when someone figures out a way to unclasp the death grip that the media/government/educational complex has when it comes to constructing a narrative.
“The only real change will come when someone figures out a way to unclasp the death grip that the media/government/educational complex has when it comes to constructing a narrative.”
This!
No matter how many everyday Americans disapprove of this or that, seeing mainstream news sources’ approving coverage of detestable things makes all resistance seem futile; of course that’s by design, and why the shout-down/shut-out policy for dissenting voices is one from which they never, willingly, deviate.
There was no “tranny massacre” because the young lady with the 9mm carbine (not an AR-15) was not going through a sexchange and never had been. Was a girl, looked like a girl.
It’s a current phenomenon: unhinged, mad, usually Left-wing and Antifa types latch onto a phony “trans” identity. Why don’t they pretend to be lesbians or gay men or Trappists or something else? Answer: they want to be non-normies, and flaunt it. And being gay or Cistercian won’t do the trick.
Perhaps you’d be correct if one’s dome is forever Krazy Glued to a completely arbitrary 1973-era definition of what a “tranny” is, but by modern (and also entirely abritary) standards, all one needs to do to “transition” is to switch their personal pronouns. Hormone therapy and surgery are not needed. I don’t make the rules; I merely notice them.
By a purely biological definition, there’s no such thing as someone who can literally change their sex. They can get all kinds of zipper-titted operations, an orchiectomy and penectomy (such as George Jorgensen did), and they can inject their bodies with gallons of hormones, but the chromosomes—which for some reason you seem to think are a figment of the imagination rather than something measurable—remain intact. A fake surgical penis or a hollowed-out hole between the legs don’t magically make them men or women.
Sticking to what can actually be quantified rather than arbitrarily going by ever-shifting social constructs, here are the four groups:
1…Men
2…Women
3…Men or women who crossdress
4…The extremely rare cases of true hermaphrodites, who have both XX and XY chromosomes and ambiguous or dueling genitals.
Answer: they want to be non-normies, and flaunt it.
We got another mind-reader here! Crystal-ball argumentation is so easy, especially because one’s allegations can never be proved or disproved.
If you don’t mind me weighing in, I think it will be the upcoming lawsuit bonanza. All the confused kids who get permanently changed from cross-sex hormones, or surgically mutilated, eventually will grow up and realize what was done to them in this politically sponsored mass hysteria. Actually, we’re seeing the tip of the iceberg of this already.
They’ll only wind up redefining the tip of the iceberg as an indentation.
Between the recent trantifa shooting at the Nashville Christian school(and the subsequent excuses and gaslighting from the media and the Alphabet Mafia) bathroom rapes being covered up in Virginia schools and the relentless effort to promote and normalize this shit to grade schoolers, I shudder to think of what it will take for us as a whole to wake up and demand an end to this degenerate lunacy.
And what do you think is going to happen if you “demand” it?
I don’t know Jim. I’m not demanding anything. I’m talking about when a vast majority of society says enough is enough. Will that ever happen? Probably not to the degree that it needs to happen. But it is happening in numerous states so that gives me some optimism. It seems at least as plausible as someone figuring out a way to unclasp the death grip that the media/government/educational complex has when it comes to constructing a narrative, as you suggested and I agree is the greatest obstacle.
Maybe the Christian religious fanatics had a point..
America was over 90% Christian in the 1950s, and they didn’t do a thing about Christine Jorgensen. As outlined in the article, America embraced Christine Jorgensen.
Well aparantly they weren’t Christan enough.. They weren’t fanatics.. If they had been then maybe all this could have been nipped in the bud.
One adult male had an operation in a foreign country and then had a small time freak show act. But no one thought about trying to force this insanity on the masses. Homosexuals in the 50s into the 60s could still be institutionalized, treated and often “cured”. Milton Berle could put on a dress and get a few laughs, but no one could even imagine puberty blockers and genital mutilation surgery for minors. This country was far better when it was 90% Christian and 90% White.
I remember in about 1970, a bunch of us were sitting around, probably having consumed a few joints. John B, the focal point of our little circle of sixties types, said, apropos of nothing, “Let’s go beat up Christine Jorgenson”. Simply a joke, although not much of one.
Do any of you remember when the tiny town of Trinidad, Colorado was the sex-change capital of the US? In the late 60s a local doctor, Stanley Biber, was asked to perform a man to woman transition and said ‘why the hell not I’ll give it a go’ and so began the first of 1000s of these procedures the good, tiny hat wearing doctor would perform. A distant inlaw took the ‘trip to Trinidad’ as it was called.
Jorgensen might be more than the first famouse sex change, might be the first famouse death from it.
I’m no doctor but I’d have to think that cutting things up down there and rerranging them could lead to bladder cancer.
I believe the first death was much earlier, one of the first sex changes under the auspices of Magnus Hirschfeld’s and Arthur Kronfeld’s sex research institute. (The famous picture of Nazis burning books is their collection going up in smoke.) The surgeon transplanted a uterus, and not long after, the patient died of tissue rejection.
Yep, that would be Lili Elbe, born Einar Wegener, whose body died in 1931 after saying “Nope!” to an interloping uterus.
In the 1970s, whenever punk pioneers Wayne County & the Electric Chairs played at the Roxy (in London) I made sure to be there. Wayne (now Jayne) always dressed in women’s clothes, which we simply accepted as a novel variation on punk’s “transgressive” ethos; cocking a snook at the establishment.
And in working-class pubs, drag queens always had their fans. (That was before they showed up at our children’s schools!)
The latest crop of trans-sexual/gender types are tiresome bores.
Never seen this film, but I will always remember the lurid VHS cover from my misspent youthful video store haunting days:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_Me_Die_a_Woman
I’m impressed to hear that modern attitudes have improved for once.
Maybe I have led a sheltered life but Christine Jorgensen was the only tranny (as opposed to transvestite cross dressing) that I have ever heard of up until Bruce Jenner. Now, trannys are everywhere it seems. Tucker talks about them almost every night.
Two other movies which are quite good, I think, are “White Christmas” where Danny Kaye and Bing Crosby dress as women and “The Bridge on the River Kwai” where the POWs dress as women on the night before the bridge is completed. In both cases the men dressed as women are considered quite funny to the onlookers.
Trannies back then were just harmless freaks and curiosities. America in particular has always enjoyed a good sideshow. Troons today are all part of what I call the Shoggoth as per H. P. Lovecraft. The amorphous seething hateful idiotic black blob that rebels against, and ultimately destroys, the erudite but weaker race that created them. It’s in their nature to be destructive. They slot right in alongside all the other rejects of society, racial or sexual, and are positioned as vanguards against the white race and its culture. But this is not the natural role for either the trannies or the racial minorities, theres force out there that “puts them up to it.”
This is hysterical raving.
As opposed to pissy whinging?
You are correct. In the past, they were sideshow freaks. Now that all of America has become a sideshow, they’re headlining the carnival.
Very well written article. It was actually fascinating (I thought it would not be).
But let’s get some perspective. The Ethnostate will almost certainly be Hard Right. The whole LGBTQ parade will very likely be deeply frowned upon, if not outright criminalized. Indeed, that may well be a non-negotiable demand that the WN elements directing the Ethnostate’s realization will have to concede to the masses of white Christians whose presence will be necessary so as to achieve a viable population size. Otherwise, the WNs may find themselves post-System collapse living in a multiracial, but very conservative, confessional state. To win the apartheid, but necessarily ideologically Right-fusionist, Ethnostate, the WNs, IOWs, will have to meet the Christianists half-way (or more than that, given there are and will be more of them than us). As we naturally will refuse to budge on racial composition, don’t think the Christianists won’t refuse to budge on LGBTQ (and probably abortion) suppression. Race and Religion are the twin foundations of civilization, and if we are to win what we want, we will have to give them what they want. And what they will want is a haven for (functionally racially advantageous) family values, and away from the Sexual Revolution in all its sordidness.
Many commenters here seem to think you can combine white separatism with a kind of personal, lifestyle libertarianism (as well as European style social democracy). In theory, I guess you could; in practice, it ain’t gonna happen. The white men who will be strong enough actually to get the Ethnostate up and running are going to be “hard men” types. They will be reinforced by vast cadres of super-normies (like me) who feel increasingly alienated and disgusted by our surroundings precisely because we are normies, and so are willing to brook a little revolutionary instability in order to return to what we view as normality. Non-leftist intellectuals tend by nature to be more open, curious, tolerant, skeptical, etc, and I suspect that characterizes many at CC. The irony is that the actual Ethnostate that will likely arise may be a much more closedminded place than the one they envision.
I really enjoy reading Jim Goad’s articles and I prefer even more when he speaks. I gave up on this article, not because Jim has written it (anyone could have and I’d have still stopped short) I just wont indulge in some middle aged man’s fetish – which is what transgenderism is. The examples we see are majority men with cocks passing themselves off as woman and expecting the world to acknowledge the lie. Some people have literally went nuts in accepting this bullshit. Look forward to the next ‘Worst Week Yet’.
There’s nothing fascinating about this article as one writer commented. It’s perverted,sick sh*t. Just like the freak who “changed” his sex.
All sorts of bizarre sign posts, such as the appearance of far-right “genderspecial hateblobs” and female to male child murderers, lead me to believe we’re soon reaching critical mass for this deranged movement. The fallout from sucking so many deranged people in will involve a lot of suffering. Great article.
Great article. The world of past decades was never the oppressive hate-scape the powers that believe they be try to portray it as. This is nicely demonstrated in the film JAZZ ON A SUMMERS DAY. A concert documentary of the 1958 Newport Jazz Festival.
I’ve seen Jorgensen’s NY Daily News headline floated a lot in leftist spaces, primarily to tell off folks who claim transgenderism is new (they may have mixed up “last 5-10 years” as when the trends kicked off, not their complete history). Alternatively I have seen this story said to be a sign that many post-war Americans saw sex change as a positive medical development, that “transphobia” (especially in newsmedia) is far more modern. How did it get that way?
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment