Due to the influx of people talking about people who have proclaimed themselves to be incels, the various views held by MGTOWs, PUAs, and others in the manosphere, I would like to state a few things and clear up some misconceptions. While this is mostly aimed as cis men, the statements and rules apply for EVERY HUMAN BEING!

First up:

No one owes you sex. I don’t care if you believe you need to ejaculate or you’ll die, that doesn’t mean someone owes you sex. If it’s really that bad, take matters into your own hand(s). This applies to cis people, trans people, enbys, and well….everyone. No one owes anyone else sex.

Now for the whole “friendzone” thing:

  • It doesn’t exist, stop blaming it for why you’re not getting a girlfriend or a sexual partner.
  • Being nice to someone =/= getting sex.
  • A person being polite to you =/= wanting to have sex with you.
  • If you’re only interested in being with someone because you want to have sex with them or to be romantically involved with them, BE UP FRONT ABOUT IT. It’s not the other person’s fault for thinking you just wanted to be their friend if you’re not up front with your motives.

On to some anatomy education!:

  • Vulvas do not turn into “roast beef” due to sex, they don’t get “torn up”, become floppy, or have a sudden change in the labia minora (inner lips) and labia majora (outer lips).
  • The vulva is what you’re thinking about when you think of the lips (labia).
  • The vagina is internal, if you can see someone’s vagina “hanging out”, they need to see a doctor because that’s a prolapse.
  • The more sex or pelvic floor exercises someone does, the “tighter” they can make their vaginal muscles.
  • Learn what vaginal tenting is and it’s connection with “looseness”.
  • The vagina doesn’t get “stretched out” or made “loose” with sex, if you knew anything about how that area worked you’d know that.
  • The hymen isn’t something to be “broken” and is not a sign of virginity.

Moving on to the sexy times!:

  • Having a bigger penis =/= women and trans men enjoying sex more.
  • If you want your partner to enjoy sex, pay attention to their cues and responses.
  • Communicate with your partner before, during, and after sex.
  • If they say they’re not enjoying something, or you’re not enjoying something, speak up.
  • Sex should be enjoyable, and communication helps ensure that with your partner.
  • Most women and trans men do not orgasm from penetrative stimulation alone, they’re not broken, this is how the body works. Their main center for stimulation (like the head of your dick) is the clit.
  • Make friends with it, you’ll thank me later for that tip.
  • No one is a “sex god” their first time having sex.
  • Everyone, no matter how much porn they watch or how many times they “practice” with masturbation, will look silly their first few to several times having sex.
  • Be willing to take time to explore, learn, and communicate.

Up next, some common myths being spread around:

  • There is no “wall” that people hit at an arbitrary age. Stop claiming that women are the ones to hit this so called “wall” while men either never do or hit it so late in life it’s moot. If you’re convinced that a person is “used up” by a certain point, you need to go back to school and learn how bodies work. Yes, muscles can get weaker with age, doesn’t mean people get used up though.
  • Sexual Market Value is not real, and if you’re viewing people by a perceived value in regards to sex, you’re really missing out. It’s fine to have preferences, but the people you’re “grading” are human beings, not objects or property to be assigned a value.


Virginity is a bullshit concept used to put “worth” on certain people and shame others.
There is no shame in being a “virgin” out of high school, or even into your 20s, 30s, and so on. Stop listening to people telling you your only worth is through sex!

Now for dealing with people turning you down:

  • If someone doesn’t want to have sex with you, that’s not an instant “you’re a bad person”, they just don’t want to have sex.
    If you continue to harass that person or coerce them into sex…you’re not a good person.
  • If someone wants to be friends with you and they are of the sex/gender you are attracted to, don’t assume that time spent with them will turn into them wanting to fuck you. Stop with this “friendzone” shit and stop placing people in the “fuckzone”.
  • No one owes you sex!

A little side note that is very important:

If you have no desire to have sex, then don’t feel ashamed! Asexual people exist! Don’t let people tell you that you’re less of a person just because you personally don’t want to have sex or don’t have any sexual attraction to people.

To the #incels specifically:

Appearance, dick size, and height don’t matter so much as your actions and how you treat people. Some of the best sex I ever had was with an obese man who had a 2″ dick. The reason was he took the time to make sure I was enjoying myself as well as him. Many of you who have shown your faces are more than conventionally attractive, it’s your actions and behavior that turn you ugly and make people not want you. Feeling that you are owed sex, and that anyone who turns you down is doing it specifically to spite you, only adds to your issues. People say no to sex, people have preferences, referring to women as below human beings or as things like femoids doesn’t help your case.

But above all…





If you made it this far and actually want to learn about the vulva, vagina, labia, and the rest, read up on the 10 more common myths and educate yourself.

Breaking Down Point 8 of “Gender Ideology Harms Children”

For those just joining us, please read the following links to catch yourself up:


Point 1

Point 2

Point 3

Point 4

Point 5

Point 6

Point 7

Well folks, we’ve made it to the end of this hot mess that is being peddled as actual science. It looks like they’ve saved the most reprehensible point for last. As always I have done my best to use sources and citations that are accessible to all as opposed to those behind pay walls. Due to this, it does make things more difficult as many of the studies I have used in my own research for college classes that back up my points are behind those pay walls and inaccessible to most people.

Conditioning children into believing that a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse. 

Except as I’ve covered in all of the other points, no one is conditioning children into believing this. On top of that there is proof showing that allowing a child to figure out their gender on their own as opposed to enforcing the gender they were assigned at birth is better for their mental and overall health. While as I have stated before the study into gender on the side of natural science (and in many ways social science as well) is still in its proverbial infancy, this doesn’t mean we’re not seeing what is actually going on.

The discussions going on today are on the topic of raising a child who is gender expansive (when a person’s identity or behavior is broader than the commonly held definitions of gender and gender expression in one or more aspects of their life) as opposed to enforcing the narrower guidelines of gender that we expect within society. If you would like more information on gender expansive children and gender neutral or affirming parenting practices, check out the links here, here, here, here, and here.

We have already seen that to even be diagnosed as having gender dysphoria as a child one has to meet several criteria as well as be symptomatic for over six months. We have also seen that the majority of children who are diagnosed with gender dysphoria do in fact grow out of it as they figure out who they are, but there is still a large percentage of children who do not grow out of it.

Due to the strict enforcement of gender within the majority of society, there have been difficulties finding large enough sample sizes to meet the requirements of being a “good study”, but of the studies that have been done, we have seen several interesting points.

By allowing a child to explore and figure out who they are in a nurturing environment free of judgement, we see fewer instances of mental health issues associated with the child being gender expansive or even transgender. (For more reading check out here, here, and here)

Endorsing gender discordance as normal via public education and legal policies will confuse children and parents,

I have yet to meet a child who is “confused” due to having supportive parents or who have parents who are well educated on the topics of gender. What I have seen are children who hide who they are due to fear that they will not be accepted due to either their community or families viewing the discourse about gender as abnormal or “bad.” Education is necessary when it comes to complex topics such as gender, and unfortunately much of what we used to know about gender and gender identity was destroyed back during WWII (Further reading on the destruction of the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft here, here, herehere, here, here, here).

While the term transgender did first appear in print around 1965 in American English, transgender people have existed for far longer than that and across the globe in many different forms. Many of the cultures that recognized multiple genders or that were accepting of people we today would consider transgender were either wiped out or forced to conform to the views and status quo of those who came after them, such as the British and French colonizers as they moved about the world, but in the case of the US, you can read more about it here.

So unlike the story the ACP is trying to frame, gender is not something that is new to us, it is that it is coming back into light after being pushed under the proverbial rug that is “new.” While transgender people and non-binary people will never be the “majority” of the population, they are just as normal and common as a redheaded person or someone with green eyes.

leading more children to present to “gender clinics” where they will be given puberty-blocking drugs.

Again, CHILDREN are not given drugs of any form, they are observed and watched. Adolescents are the ones who MIGHT be put on puberty blockers if their doctor and therapist believe that would be the best course of action for the patient. Also a child can’t just walk into a “gender clinic” and ask for puberty blockers, nor can an adolescent. The dispensing of puberty blockers requires not only a doctor, but also the person has to meet the qualifications of gender dysphoria. If they are transgender but don’t have dysphoria, they won’t be going in for medical assistance of that sort. I’ve already discussed this several times.

This, in turn, virtually ensures that they will “choose” a lifetime of carcinogenic and otherwise toxic cross-sex hormones, and likely consider unnecessary surgical mutilation of their healthy body parts as young adults.

This is just scare mongering and hand wringing using points I’ve already debunked. On top of that, would one consider a preemptive mastectomy to be “unnecessary surgical mutilation”? What about a breast reduction for someone who is dealing with overly large breasts and it is affecting their health? Those breasts were perfectly healthy body parts, so what is the criteria for a legitimate medical procedure and an “unnecessary surgical mutilation” for these people?

Trans people don’t “choose” to be trans, they are trans. Providing education, reducing the stigma, and normalizing things such as pronoun usage, acceptance, and visibility will not suddenly make children become transgender. It will however allow those who are transgender to feel safe enough to get the medical help they might need.

The ACP has added another piece to their article titled “The bottom line” but it is nothing but a rehashing of their already debunked, incorrect, and flat out false claims, so I will not be covering it outside of this one line:

For this reason, the College maintains it is abusive to promote this ideology, first and foremost for the well-being of the gender dysphoric children themselves, and secondly, for all of their non-gender-discordant peers, many of whom will subsequently question their own gender identity, and face violations of their right to bodily privacy and safety.

Pushing false information and debunked medical “science” to further an agenda that has been shown to lead to higher rates of suicide and self harm in trans youth is abusive. Denying someone’s actual identity is abusive. Allowing a child to figure out who they are in a safe, controlled, and loving environment is the complete opposite of abusive.

A child who is gender expansive and open about who they are will not suddenly turn their other friends transgender, nor will it make them “question” their own gender identity. To claim this is the same as claiming that you can get HIV by holding hands with someone who is HIV+, as in it is an outright lie. If the child does question, then that is because they were already unsure and they feel safe enough to try to figure it out.

And I don’t even know where to begin on the whole “face violations of their right to bodily privacy and safety”, that came completely out of left field and was just…wtf?

Breaking Down Point 7 of “Gender Ideology Harms Children”

For those just joining us, please read the following links to catch yourself up:


Point 1

Point 2

Point 3

Point 4

Point 5

Point 6

Rates of suicide are twenty times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBQT – affirming countries.

Now, this on it’s own sounds pretty damning, doesn’t it?  They even cite a study that has been used over and over again to justify things such as the following:

  1. The study shows that “trans medical care = suicide” so therefore it’s bad! (We will come back to this in a bit)
  2. After transition, “Male to Female” transsexuals retain male-pattern criminality, including crimes against women. (Yep, they’re trying to claim that transwomen are criminals and rapists)

So, how do we go about this?  Well first off, let’s take a look at where the ACP is getting their little sound byte point?

A 2011 study at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden produced the most illuminating results yet regarding the transgendered [sic], evidence that should give advocates pause. The long-term study—up to 30 years—followed 324 people who had sex-reassignment surgery. The study revealed that beginning about 10 years after having the surgery, the transgendered [sic] began to experience increasing mental difficulties. Most shockingly, their suicide mortality rose almost 20-fold above the comparable nontransgender population. This disturbing result has as yet no explanation but probably reflects the growing sense of isolation reported by the aging transgendered [sic] after surgery. The high suicide rate certainly challenges the surgery prescription.  –Dr. Paul McHugh

While I am loathe to cite something from Gender Identity Watch (a known TERF hate/doxing group run by lawyer Cathy Brennan), it is the only place where I can find the entire article.  The clip that I have posted above has been provided by the Transadvocate, who I will be citing during this article.  The Transadvocate has actually reached out to the head person in the study cited by Dr. McHugh, and a lot of clarification apparently has been needed.  For starters, the myth that Dr. McHugh has been spreading is just that, a myth. It was debunked by Dr. Dan Karasic and his entire response has been graciously reposted here.

One thing I would like to point out before we continue is that Dr. Paul McHugh has been one of the leading anti-LGBT activists in the public eye for quite some time now.  He’s the former chief psychologist for Johns Hopkins hospital and is often used as an authority figure when it comes to LGBT activities. However, there’s a bit of an issue.

In fact, it’s a rather large issue.  One that could possibly be pointed to as a major setback in our understanding of gender.

Back in the 1970s, after ONE study, Dr. McHugh shut down the Gender Identity Clinic at Johns Hopkins.  The study suggested that some trans people continued to suffer from adjustment challenges after surgery, something that has since been proven to be inaccurate.  As science has progressed we have seen that many of the old studies that people used to use to justify things such as racial segregation, homophobia, and sexual discrimination being debunked and put away only to be used for historical purposes.  We are now seeing the same with many of the studies that had been done regarding those who are transgender. To continue to base your bias and beliefs on a subject that has been debunked and proven incorrect is simply ignorant and shows a lack of integrity.

What compassionate and reasonable person would condemn young children to this fate knowing that after puberty as many as 88% of girls and 98% of boys will eventually accept reality and achieve a state of mental and physical health?

Ugh….we covered this already.  Deceptive statistics and percentages do not a good argument make.  See point 5 if you wish to read up again on this.

For further reading on the problems with the Swedish study, I would suggest checking out the links below, including the study itself.  Like many of the other studies the ACP uses, it doesn’t say what they claim it says….

Thinking about the Swedish Study

-Continue on to point 8-

Breaking Down Point 6 of “Gender Ideology Harms Children”

For those just joining us, please read the following links to catch yourself up:


Point 1

Point 2

Point 3

Point 4

Point 5

Children who use puberty blockers to impersonate the opposite sex will require cross-sex hormones in late adolescence.

Seriously, why am I even having to explain this?

  1. Trans people are NOT impersonating the opposite sex.  A trans person is someone who’s gender does not match their physical sex.
  2. Any person with two brain cells to fire knows that due to the fact that a trans person normally doesn’t produce the hormones required by their gender due to their sex, HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy) is recommended and often times used.
  4. CHILDREN are not using puberty blockers.  Adolescents (which is an entirely different category in the DSM V and in medical guidelines) take puberty blockers.  We already discussed this….

Repeat after me, “Sex is not gender and gender is not sex.”  It’s absurd that we’re still having to say this at point six!

Cross-sex hormones (testosterone and estrogen) are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke and cancer.

Once again, the ACP is attempting to conflate sex and gender in an attempt to confuse people and to push the narrative that one cannot change their genetics so therefore they cannot successfully transition so that their gender and their physical body match as much as possible.

Like with puberty blockers (which I covered in point number four of this breakdown) no doctor with any sort of ethics would prescribe medications of any sort without letting the patient know of the risks beforehand.  I would also like to remind everyone that hormone replacement therapy (HRT) or cross-sex hormone therapy is not done on children. The general age for HRT to begin is around 16 years of age, and even then it is done on a case by case basis based on the mental, emotional, and psychological preparedness of the individual.

Like with medications such as birth control, psych medication, and many others, the doctor is required to inform the patient of both the benefits AND the risks when discussing medications.

And now….on to their citations….

Olson-Kennedy, J and Forcier, M. “Overview of the management of gender nonconformity in children and adolescents.” UpToDate November 4, 2015. Accessed 3.20.16 from


Outside of the overview and introduction, everything else is behind a subscriber wall.  HOWEVER, if we are looking at the information available to those of us who do not have access to all of the data, it appears that the citation the ACP used is well…going against their narrative.

Moore, E., Wisniewski, & Dobs, A. “Endocrine treatment of transsexual people: A review of treatment regimens, outcomes, and adverse effects.” The Journal of Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2003; 88(9), pp3467-3473.


Well good news is that this one at least isn’t behind a pay wall.  The bad news (for the ACP) is that it doesn’t fit their narrative except for pointing out that trans people will need HRT if they are to transition.  Swing and a miss once again!

FDA Drug Safety Communication issued for Testosterone products accessed 3.20.16:

….I have no clue why they cited this.  It doesn’t say anything to match their narrative nor does it even have anything to do with the point they are trying to make.  Wait, wait, I spoke too soon! The information to supposedly support their narrative is all down in the “related information” section!

Never mind, spoke too soon again.  The information is nothing more than what any ethical doctor would already discuss to a patient who would be taking testosterone (cismen and transmen).  Not only that, but none of the information is relating to transmen!

On to the last citation before my brain implodes.

World Health Organization Classification of Estrogen as a Class I Carcinogen:

Wow!  I can’t believe they would classify estrogen as a class 1 carcinogen!  Holy crap!


Now that I’m actually reading the statement, it doesn’t way any of that!

In fact, they didn’t even cite this correctly!

The actual title for their citation is “Carcinogenicity of combined hormonal contraceptives and combined menopausal treatment” and the link doesn’t even discuss what they are claiming.  I can’t believe (yes I can) that the ACP would flat out lie to its readers just to try to push a narrative!

As loathe as I am to use Sheldon Cooper for something, this picture pretty much sums up how I felt after going through their citations and finding out they were either flat out lying, or just trying to sound official.


-Continue on to point 7-

Breaking Down Point 5 of “Gender Ideology Harms Children”

For those just joining us, please read the following links to catch yourself up:


Point 1

Point 2

Point 3

Point 4

Gender Dysphoria is shortened to GD for convenience.

According to the DSM-V, as many as 98% of gender confused boys and 88% of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.

First of all, the children are not “gender confused”.  That term is used when people want to play down the effects and symptoms of GD.  Same goes for “eventually accept”. Trans people have accepted their biological sex, there’s no discussion that one.  Trans people know they will never be able to change their biological sex (chromosomes), and we’ve been over this multiple times.  It’s insane that it’s still part of the discussion. And as for the statement that these children accept it after passing “naturally” through puberty is incorrect, but more on that later.  For now, let’s look at those numbers shall we? Forgive me for being blunt, but those numbers look rather…fishy to me. Thankfully the ACP has provided their explanation on how they got to their numbers!  Ready to see some really devious and rather disingenuous math?

Regarding Point 5:  “Where does the DSM-V list rates of resolution for Gender Dysphoria?”

On page 455 of the DSM-V under “Gender Dysphoria without a disorder of sex development” it states: Rates of persistence of gender dysphoria from childhood into adolescence or adulthood vary. In natal males, persistence has ranged from 2.2% to 30%. In natal females, persistence has ranged from 12% to 50%.”  Simple math allows one to calculate that for natal boys: resolution occurs in as many as 100% – 2.2% = 97.8% (approx. 98% of gender-confused boys)  Similarly, for natal girls: resolution occurs in as many as 100% – 12% = 88% gender-confused girls.

Now, I’m not going to make you go out and purchase the DSM V because that thing is expensive.  I know, I bought it. So let’s fact check some of this stuff, shall we? And while we’re at it, let’s see what the guidelines and suggestions are for children with GD.


As you can see by the screen shot of the DSM V, there are some pretty specific requirements for the child to meet before he or she can even be considered to have GD.  The child has to show signs for at least six months, or have the condition to the point that there is significant distress or impairment in almost all important areas of functioning.  A boy who likes to play with Barbie dolls is not going to get diagnosed with GD unless the doctor is a doctor with extremely low ethical standards. This is why we don’t see all children being diagnosed as having GD, just a small percentage of them.  On top of all of this, these conditions do not include adolescents or people who have hit puberty yet. There is an entirely different set of criteria that need to be met for adolescents and for adults.

So, on to the next point.

Do some children grow out of or adapt to the point that they no longer qualify as having GD?

While some children will grow out of their GD, there are specific reasons behind the numbers of kids who don’t continue to have GD once they reach adolescent.  Key point here, these are children who don’t continue once they reach the stage of adolescent, not “naturally passing through puberty”. Remember when I said the ACP is really good about using words to twist the truth to fit their message?  

Because expression of gender dysphoria varies with age, there are separate criteria sets for children versus adolescents and adults. Criteria for children are defined in a more con- crete, behavioral manner than those for adolescents and adults. Many of the core criteria draw on well-documented behavioral gender differences between typically developing boys and girls. Young children are less likely than older children, adolescents, and adults to express extreme and persistent anatomic dysphoria.


A very young child may show signs of distress (e.g., intense crying) only when parents tell the child that he or she is “really” not a member of the other gender but only “desires” to be. Distress may not be manifest in social environments supportive of the child’s desire to live in the role of the other gender and may emerge only if the desire is interfered with.

So as we can see, the criteria for children is different than those for adults or adolescents.  In most cases, the criteria for GD in children focuses more on the behavior over instead of physical forms of GD.  So keeping that in mind, let’s look at those numbers that the ACP are using to show that only a teeny tiny percentage of children with GD continue having GD on through adulthood.  The DSM V specifies that the percentages that are listed are specifically listed under, Gender dysphoria without a disorder of sex development.

So first, let’s look at the numbers for natal males (Xy chromosome)

In natal males, persistence has ranged from 2.2% to 30%

The ACP took the smallest number, 2.2% and subtracted it from 100% to get their number of children “growing out” of their GD.  Instead of being honest and saying that the range of “growing out” of GD ranges from 70% to 97.8%, they instead said:

…as many as 98% of gender confused boys…

Are we noticing that by playing the statistics game the ACP is able to make it look like almost 100% of natal boys “grow out” of their GD?  By wording it with posting on the topmost percentage and essentially hoping that people wouldn’t fact check them, they can make it look like it’s the parents that are trying to claim that the child has GD and not the child actually having GD.

Reading further on, we see the following about the children who “grew out” of their GD:

For natal male children whose gender dysphoria does not persist, the majority are androphilic (sexually attracted to males) and often self-identify as gay or homosexual (ranging from 63% to 100%).

Hold on a second, didn’t the ACP say something about homosexuality? (Here, here, here)  So they’re OK with the kids being gay, so long as they aren’t trans?  This is all quite confusing.

Now let’s look at the natal females. (XX chromosome)

In natal females, persistence has ranged from 12% to 50%.

So up to 50% of natal females who as children have GD will continue on to have GD up through adolescence to adulthood.  Doesn’t saying “up to 50%” sound much more positive than as many as 88% of natal females were merely gender confused and grew out of their GD.

Shall we take a look at the sexuality for these natal females that “grew out” of their GD?  Just to have a bit of fun?

In natal female children whose gender dysphoria does not persist, the percentage who are gynephilic (sexually attracted to females) and self-identify as lesbian is lower (ranging from 32% to 50%).

So…from 32% to 50% of natal females identify as lesbian?

So let’s look at the final point I would like to make about this whole debacle of bad math, muddying the waters with using specific words and phrases to twist the truth, and what happens to the children who “grow out” of having GD?

The ACP seems to rather have these children grow up to be gay or lesbian than to have the child have GD.

If you would like to read through the DSM V for yourself and come to your own conclusions, you can download it or view it from this website.  The section regarding GD begins on page 452 and covers child, adolescent, and adult GD.

-Continue on to point 6-