"You're Denying My Very Existence"

The histrionics of mushy identities

“Let us destroy the ‘kulaks’ as a class.” Soviet propaganda poster. (Wikipedia)

During a recent Tonic Discussion I mixed up Marx’s idea, “existence defines consciousness.” To set the record straight, here’s the note I wrote about it in the relevant part of Political Ponerology (p. 279):

In A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy (1859), Marx wrote: “it is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but, on the contrary, their social existence that determines their consciousness.” Sowell writes: “If the mechanistic conception of materialism is applied, and human beings viewed as mere raw material to be shaped and moulded, then a totalitarian kind of thought control is implied, based on the inconsistent assumption that there are those who have so transcended bad environmental influences that they can undertake this superhuman task” (Marxism, p. 33). Marx, like the eighteenth-century materialists, “found crime to be [solely] a product of social conditions” (p. 38). On Stalin, Applebaum writes: “Stalin’s famous suspicion of genetics derived precisely from his conviction that propaganda and communist education could alter the human character, permanently” (Iron Curtain, p. 153).

Basically, the reason humans are so bad is “society” (an idea that goes back at least to Rousseau). We are who we are solely because of the material (social, class) conditions in which we find ourselves. A gender Marxist might say that this is what gender roles are: social creations. That’s it. Biology is a social creation, too, after all.

But, somewhat contradictorily, those with an enlightened class consciousness manage to escape this seemingly omnipresent prison of social determinism. Then, presumably, their material non-class conditions can shape their consciousness into authentic revolutionaries. Similarly, when you escape the socially prescribed gender roles, you are then presumably free to be shaped by your now genderless conditions.¹ So now an adult man previously shackled by the socially constructed male gender identity can take on the equally socially constructed caricature of a teenage girl, for instance.

I don’t think you’d be wrong to call the Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries the first trans people. They were trans-social.

I write this to introduce a couple ideas prompted by

Josh Slocum

’s interview with Stephanie Winn. (I was listening to a backlog of Disaffected while frying up bacon for breakfast, so there might have been some influence from another recent episode too. You’ll have to just listen to them all in order to know for sure.)

First idea: the malleable saintly class. One of the key features of Hitler’s and Stalin’s pathocracies was the idea of the malleable enemy. Pick a class, any class. Hell, pick an adjective or slightly sinister-sounding noun, and that’s all you needed. If production fell below quota you might find yourself unwittingly adopting the new identity of “member of a foreign conspiracy of factory saboteurs”—the secret police had their quotas too. The authorities then literally had the ability to deny your right to exist: by putting a bullet through your brainstem.

Nowadays we also have malleable saints. Simply by adopting a malleable gender identity, you too can become one. And anyone pointing out that this is all a bit silly is literally “denying your existence,” and therefore bad. Since this response is a literal thought-stopper (and intentionally so), let me try to convey its ludicrousness with an absurd and slightly offensive example.

Imagine teenagers start following a TikTok fad where they write the word “s**t” on their foreheads in indelible ink. Call it the “s**thead challenge.” Of course, some parents of questionable child-rearing skills will enthusiastically affirm this newly adopted moniker for their offspring. “I’ve always known you were a s**thead, son!” These parents may even encourage them to get the word tattooed, to really affirm the new identity and make it permanent. But just as naturally, most parents will be put off, at the very least. Some will even deny their children this fundamental right of self-expression. “No daughter of mine will be a s**thead!” Or they may take a more compassionate approach. “You are not a s**thead, son, and I won’t let you demean yourself in this way.”

But these parents just don’t get it. The s**theads’ very existence is apparently so threatening to them that these ignorant parents deny their s**thead kids’ very right to exist. S**theads is all they are, after all. If they can’t be s**theads, they can’t be anything else. The material conditions of the ink on forehead are what determine their s**thead consciousness. No ink, no s**t.

Back to reality—or that strange imitation that passes for it today… Whereas the malleable enemy identity provides easily moveable goalposts for tyrants, the malleable saintly identity is just as useful. Psychopathic rapists (bona fide s**theads) know this on an instinctual level. They’re today’s heroes.

The really sick thing is that it’s the tyrants who win in both cases.

Which brings me to the second idea: suicide priming. As Josh and Stephanie discussed, the idea that trans-sterilizations and -mutilations are necessary in order to prevent suicide is dubious to begin with. But there may even be something even more sinister going on here.

Here’s the thing about suicides: they tend to cluster. I first learned about this when reading Strange Contagion: Inside the Surprising Science of Infectious Behaviors and Viral Emotions and What They Tell Us About Ourselves by Lee Daniel Kravetz. Suicide clusters are an example of social contagion. The more media reporting on a teenage suicide, the bigger the cluster will be.

How much of the trans suicide phenomenon (to whatever extent it may or may not be real) is a result of the ubiquitous commentary about trans suicide? It is there in every discussion, to the point that it is basically an essential feature of the disorder. Given that the trans identity is basically a group and social media contagion to begin with—which is why you’ll find entire friend groups going trans—this possibility should be taken very seriously. Trans without the suicide risk is like goth without the sullenness.

I’d go so far as to say it is part of the new catechism. It needs to be true. And by that logic, every actual suicide or suicide threat confirms the definition, thus justifying the push for “gender-affirming care” as the best possible solution. As cruel as it sounds, the activists need suicides (or threats) in order to justify their otherwise unpalatable solutions. As the emotionally manipulate threat goes, “Would you rather have a living son, or a dead daughter?”

Here’s what they say about the “suicide myth” over at transgendertrend.com:

In conclusion, although the statistics for suicide attempts have been exaggerated, this is a psychologically highly vulnerable population. A young person with mental health problems needs psychotherapeutic support and a young person who is feeling suicidal needs urgent psychiatric care. Much more research is needed into different care pathways for young people with gender dysphoria.

In this clinical area it is especially important to understand the possible underlying causative factors in suicidal ideation and provide appropriate therapeutic treatment, as the alternative (puberty blockers) carries a risk of exacerbating depressive symptoms. Depression is listed as a common or very common adverse effect for the drug Triptorelin (the form of blocker used by the Tavistock).

Every suicide is a terrible tragedy and we must be extremely careful in any message we send to young people on this subject. The Samaritans guidance states that we should avoid speculation about any one ‘trigger’ for suicide and that we need to exercise caution in repeating suicide statistics. Transgender Trend would like to see this advice followed more carefully in the case of young people struggling with gender identity issues.

What do you think the effect is of telling a “psychologically highly vulnerable” young person something like, “there’s a good chance you will commit suicide if your parents don’t affirm your trans identity,” and then showing them statistics to “prove” it? That’s a tragic nightmare just waiting to happen.

1. Though I would argue a case can be made that this is where social conditions affect gender identity the strongest.