[Tex]

It's interesting how the article touches on the way a person can be mentally diseased to the point where one's "inner-identity" is inconsistent with his actual identity, and mutilation is required to achieve what he considers congruence with what he wants and what he is. And how these people are vulnerable to exploitation—as every tranny is.

Quote:

Many people seeking amputations are desperate and vulnerable to exploitation. "I am in a constant state of inner rage," one wannabe wrote to me. "I am willing to take that risk of death to achieve the needed amputation. My life inside is just too hard to continue as is."

Doesn't that describe the trans trend? Talk about a disorder, frame it in an acceptable way, then stylize the mutilation it requires. The "inner rage" will follow, in at least some very at-risk minds.

Only society actively embraces this kind of mutilation and ignores the uncertainty about its origins ("let's say it's a gender identification and not a mental disease!") and the effectiveness of the actual procedure for "curing" the discontent within the afflicted's mind. From the same paragraph as the quote above:

Quote:

The fact is that nobody really understands apotemnophilia. Nobody understands the pathophysiology; nobody knows whether there is an alternative to surgery; and nobody has any reliable data on how well surgery might work.

What this article deals with is the same exact thing we're dealing with now.

Only a fringe group of radicals grabbed this exportable madness, wrapped it in a protective coating of PC ideology, gave it legal momentum under the guise of it being part of a "new civil rights movement," lauded its victims as heroes, and further stylized it in the media. If apotemnophilia was sponsored like the trans trend is, we'd be seeing a girl with no leg instead of a giant guy with more make up than dick on "Orange is the New Black."