Grace Lavery / Joseph Lavery & Daniel M. Lavery / Mallory Ortberg - "Straight with extra steps" couple trooning out to avoid "dwindling into mere heterosexuality"

If the knowledge that other people not affirming your beliefs constantly "harms" you and is violence against you, then what's a little violence back against them in self-defense?

This was actually something I was thinking about the other day in relation to the whole Oscars debacle, when it occurred to me that it's highly salient to the tranny movement as well. I think it's related to the inherent disconnect generated when intrinsically socially powerful/privileged people attempt to don the mantle of oppression, because it's very reflective of the kind of complacent assumption of your own safety that's only really possible for such people. Despite the latter's constant proclamations to the contrary, neither Hollywood types nor trannies have ever really been in a life-or-death struggle for their very survival, or even really experienced consequences for their actions. Actual, systematically disadvantaged groups make no such assumptions, because they are perpetually aware of their own tenuous position and vulnerability. As such, they only really tend to get violent when the stakes are really, really high, and violence is likely whether they act first or not.

If you undertake to unilaterally decide that someone else's words are sufficient justification for your violence - even if it's just slapping another man open-handed like an offended Victorian spinster a la Will Smith - you are playing a very dangerous game, because that most definitely justifies their escalating the violence in response to yours. You're opening a Pandora's box that you are unlikely to be able to close, and you're too privileged and stupid to see it, because you've never really been the subject of violence before.

It's very much a "...and then Hitler was elected to power, for no reason at all" kind of thing. You're the one instigating a chain reaction of escalation that is just as likely to destroy you as your opponent, even moreso if you're the limp-wristed foppish type like Joe who would likely lose a physical altercation with a Bronx-area Latina mother of 7 at the corner store. If Will Smith had tried what he did on a truck driver at an average Midwest Cracker Barrel instead of in a room full of Hollywood glitterati, he'd likely be in a coma right now.
 
This was actually something I was thinking about the other day in relation to the whole Oscars debacle, when it occurred to me that it's highly salient to the tranny movement as well. I think it's related to the inherent disconnect generated when intrinsically socially powerful/privileged people attempt to don the mantle of oppression, because it's very reflective of the kind of complacent assumption of your own safety that's only really possible for such people. Despite the latter's constant proclamations to the contrary, neither Hollywood types nor trannies have ever really been in a life-or-death struggle for their very survival, or even really experienced consequences for their actions. Actual, systematically disadvantaged groups make no such assumptions, because they are perpetually aware of their own tenuous position and vulnerability. As such, they only really tend to get violent when the stakes are really, really high, and violence is likely whether they act first or not.

If you undertake to unilaterally decide that someone else's words are sufficient justification for your violence - even if it's just slapping another man open-handed like an offended Victorian spinster a la Will Smith - you are playing a very dangerous game, because that most definitely justifies their escalating the violence in response to yours. You're opening a Pandora's box that you are unlikely to be able to close, and you're too privileged and stupid to see it, because you've never really been the subject of violence before.

It's very much a "...and then Hitler was elected to power, for no reason at all" kind of thing. You're the one instigating a chain reaction of escalation that is just as likely to destroy you as your opponent, even moreso if you're the limp-wristed foppish type like Joe who would likely lose a physical altercation with a Bronx-area Latina mother of 7 at the corner store. If Will Smith had tried what he did on a truck driver at an average Midwest Cracker Barrel instead of in a room full of Hollywood glitterati, he'd likely be in a coma right now.
Right, as I mentioned in Rhys thread last week they're providing ideological and moral justification for the widespread use of actual violence against dissenting views because they're under yet another delusion that it will only ever be them to have the power to wield this weapon. They don't oppose this use of violence as long as it's used for "good ends" like slapping Chris Rock or killing TERFs because they refuse to consider this escalation since misgendering is equally violence. Rhys and Joe and so many others of this type think they can just keep the plates spinning while walking a fine line to keep the violence entirely under their control forever.

It's funny that they stick to this as they boldly stand up to Putin (and his ally J.K. Rowling) on Twitter when he's claiming he was forced to start the war to protect against the threat of Ukrainian Nazis. I'm sure that it's just a total coincidence that years of "punch a Nazi" rhetoric in response to things like Trump and Brexit came before propaganda targeting the West claimed to be just punching Nazis, something they see differently when Putin's claiming to have been cancelled. I don't mean to sperg about Putin or anything but I find it endlessly amusing that a regime they claim to dread and see under every bed is using the same reasoning and logic and they don't see how it could befall and turn back on them regarding their local political enemies they consider to be wanting to do (or already doing) a troon genocide. Just go on dismissing it as hypothetical and also dismissing the prominent example of it happening currently as well I guess.

They'd rather tear it all down in the hopes it will benefit them in the end rather than even deign to understand the necessity of things like freedom of speech and the rule of law protecting the scoundrels most of all. Just have the good guys only do good things, duh!
 
Where has Joe gone on Instagram? Suspended, jacked it in or skulking about incognito under a new profile?

Interestingly, and probably not coincidentally, a lot of UK women (and others presumably) are a bit pissed that he has welched on the bet to pay $100 to anyone who wagered that he'd pull out of the Joyce and Bindel debates. They can't get in touch with him via Twitter or Berkeley so have probably been bombarding his Gram. Does such shitty yellowbellied behaviour surprise anyone, it doesn't me.
 

More of Jo's sex pictures emerge in the British press, let's hope his mum doesn't see them.

"The males will use their huge bulks to smash into one-another, employing their sharp teeth to rip at the throats and face of the other males."
 
Where has Joe gone on Instagram? Suspended, jacked it in or skulking about incognito under a new profile?

Interestingly, and probably not coincidentally, a lot of UK women (and others presumably) are a bit pissed that he has welched on the bet to pay $100 to anyone who wagered that he'd pull out of the Joyce and Bindel debates. They can't get in touch with him via Twitter or Berkeley so have probably been bombarding his Gram. Does such shitty yellowbellied behaviour surprise anyone, it doesn't me.
I think most people forgot that in order to "wager," you had to give money to his charity of choice, which I doubt many people did.

Joe apparently got his BBC interview on "Woman's Hour," filmed via laptop at a comically long table, where Joe has scrawled "Fuck the Haters" on a piece of paper for the Gram. Mallory sits as far away as possible.

Untitled-3 - Copy (31).jpgUntitled-1 - Copy (61).jpgUntitled-2 - Copy (40).jpg

Thursday?
 
I went to the Grace Lavery event at Edinburgh University last night.

I’m going to use names and pronouns that people choose for themselves because I’m not stupid.

I was taking surreptitious notes on my phone, which I then filled in as soon as possible afterwards before memories faded. All quotations are approximate.

There were two security guards? - people in red Ed Uni jackets. They mostly wandered around in front of the door of the lecture room while attendees went in. One of them later sat by the fire escape door, in case we needed to escape from a fire.

I’d assumed this event was organised by the English Literature department, but it seems to have been a joint event between the uni’s Staff Pride Network and Lighthouse Books, which is a nearby radical bookshop.

About 60 people in the audience. Not as many vibrant hair choices as I would have expected - one bright pink, one clownish orange (appropriate, given the clown metaphors in Grace’s memoir), one man-bun, and one person with a full beard and a gorgeous flowing set of locks. Lots of people wore their university staff cards on rainbow lanyards. A mix of ages - it wasn’t just students; plenty of people my mum would refer to as ‘mature’.

Pre-set music: something funky I walked out humming. Wish I knew what it was.

Grace originally wore a grey wrap thing, but took it off before the event properly started, and was then in a black t-shirt, baggy black trousers, and very pink trainers. Felt like the arm tattoos were being showcased. In general, Grace looked and sounded like a genial bloke who had longish hair.

Danny mostly sat off to the side with a friend of theirs named Cliff. Wore a striped button-down shirt. Has a dad bod. Heard him speaking briefly before the event started, and he didn’t sound particularly masculine, though I don’t know what his original speaking voice was like.

Brief intro from a pride network member, and then over to a Lighthouse Books person who introduced herself as Lindsey and her pronouns were she/her. Let us just say that Lindsey was not originally called she/her.

Grace didn’t write the biography that’s on her book; her editor did. And she doesn’t know whether her editor deliberately capitalised ‘Muppet’ as an homage to Jim Henson or something.

Grace is ambivalent about the word ‘transition’. Feels that recovery memoirs and transition memoirs (her book is both) are usually boring. ‘Everything was complicated and then it got simple.’ She wants new and creative ways of telling the story that are not straightforward.

Told a story that she’s only told to this particular audience on her book tour - one time when she was in Edinburgh, after drinking all night, she was at the McDonald’s on Princes Street around 6am and stole what she thought was a box of breakfast hash browns. She legged it back to the flat she was staying in, intending to cook all these hash browns for her flatmates, only to discover she’d actually stolen a box of Happy Meal toys - and the worst possible kind, stupid Purple Ronnie plastic things. [It’s a stupid cartoon character you can buy on greeting cards and plastic tat.] “This is a nightmare. I can’t cook them, how do I get rid of them?” Spent three hours (presumably whilst hungover) getting rid of the toys by putting them in small amounts in different public bins, rather than just dumping the lot of them all at once.

Grace was easygoing and comfortable with the audience. Somehow got onto a tangent about Philadelphia, where she lived for five years, and was swapping ‘where did you live’ questions with an audience member who was from there. You can absolutely tell she’s a university lecturer, from the way she can talk at length about literature off the cuff, and throw out phrases like ‘Trans women’s bodies have become a site of contention’. Honestly, from what I heard, I suspect she’s a good lecturer, if you like the sort of thing she lectures about.

She mentions goblins - maybe in the excerpt she’s reading? - and goes on a brief tangent about how she and Danny and their friend Cliff went to the Edinburgh Dungeons (touristy place, immersive experience into the darker side of life in historical Scotland, with similar ones in York and London, good place for acting students to work in so they wear historical costume and scream bloody murder on command 18 times a day for tourists who mostly don’t speak English), and said ‘oooh, goblets’ in ye olde gift shoppe, and somehow that turned into a catchphrase of ‘oooh, goblins’.

Gave a reading from the book which was a riff on…Mars Attacks? Species? Some movie where a blond sexy alien woman appears on earth. She notes that every part of the book is different, so whatever part she reads, the audience will think all the book is like that.

The whiteboard at the front of the room had a URL where you could submit questions for Grace, but this was never referred to and no one’s questions were answered, except for three people: two who were pre-selected, one of whom was the current trans and non-binary rep for the pride network, the other the person with the beard and to-die-for hair, and a third person at the very end who was randomly chosen and asked some BORING question about the book will inform Grace’s academic work. What a waste.

Oscar Wilde is a genius who never wrote a good book.

Says she wouldn’t have written this book before she got tenure. She’s going for a full professorship this year on the basis of her second academic publication, not this memoir. Her teaching load is three classes a year. She also has a generous research account (for which she thanks former California governor Jerry? Brown). She loves her colleagues, but spends less time in the faculty lounge these days, and more time in committee meetings with queer people (? - did not write down why this is so).

She recorded Women’s Hour today and it will be aired on Thursday. She was asked (more than once?) during the recording ‘do you think a woman can have a penis?’ (Several people in the audience LITERALLY GASPED IN HORROR.) Grace rejected the entire premise and was then asked ‘can you understand why someone else would take a different view?’ which she felt was…I don’t think she used the phrase ‘trick question’ but that’s how she seems to have interpreted it, since answering either yes or no would have been conceding something.

Referred to death threats, and the photographs of her and her husband having sex being sent to her boss and her mum. (This received murmurs of horror.)

She claims being kicked off Twitter was a good thing and stated outright that she hopes the queen dies. Some laughter and applause at that.

Acknowledged her tendency towards self-aggrandisement more than once; tied this to being an alcoholic and drug addict. Cited Danny and Cliff as ‘way smarter than me’.

‘I was terrified to come to the UK to do this tour.’ Afraid she’d be confronted by people who were carrying placards that showed the sex photos (!!!). BUT! She has in fact met only one GC person, a sweet old lady in Manchester who wrote her a note saying she was afraid she couldn’t use the word ‘woman’ anymore.

She says there’s less aggression (towards queer people) on the streets of Edinburgh than in Brooklyn.

Why is the world as depicted on social media so different from real life? Aha, the answer is that the GC viewpoint dominates the centre-left media! Some crack at Hadley Freeman (Guardian columnist). ‘It’s a columnist thing’, Grace concludes.

She openly said that if there were any LGB Alliance people in the room, they were welcome, and please ask questions. (I pause in my transcription to laugh at this.)

‘Maybe they care less about me than they did before they got me kicked off Twitter.’ (I now pause to wonder why people genuinely believe it was the big bad GCs who caused Grace’s Twitter account to be suspended and not, say, the fact that she made a statement that was against Twitter’s rules and was thus subject to the enforcement of those rules. I suppose victimhood at the hands of GCs is required.)

She used to walk 20 miles a day, back when she lived in Oakland, and did a lot of her writing on her phone during those walks. ‘I don’t do that [walking 20 miles a day] anymore’, she says, smacking her large stomach.

Applause for her mum’s love of Comic Sans.

She refers to JK Rowling, I did not note the context, as the ‘hometown queen’ and then some would-be wag in the audience cries, ‘How many queens do you wish would die?’ But NO, Grace does NOT want JKR to DIE; she wants JKR to give away all her money to homeless trans kids.

Ends by asking why Edinburgh smells so beautiful. (Er, we have good air quality, and there are some parts of the city that smell like breweries.)
 
She was asked (more than once?) during the recording ‘do you think a woman can have a penis?’ (Several people in the audience LITERALLY GASPED IN HORROR.) Grace rejected the entire premise and was then asked ‘can you understand why someone else would take a different view?’ which she felt was…I don’t think she used the phrase ‘trick question’ but that’s how she seems to have interpreted it, since answering either yes or no would have been conceding something.
Lmao I love that he did this. That's the one question that boomers need to have answered, because it's the core of the bathroom/changeroom debate, and dodging it on camera just says it all.
 
Caption says: "So lucky to have the chance to hear Grace Lavery speak about her writing, her life, and to create this instant priceless heirloom for Dahlia."

dahliaautograph.PNG

Instagram indicates this person is a father and Dahlia is a three-year-old girl:
dahlia.PNG
Bro, Please Miss is an incoherent but incredibly graphic piece of trash, why are you working SO HARD (creating a still life with a box of crayons for the 'Gram?!?!) to connect this book to your toddler? To get attention from Joe? For Instagram asspats? Just why?!

To be clear I don't think this is creepy or dangerous of the guy, just completely pathetic and inappropriate.
 
Caption says: "So lucky to have the chance to hear Grace Lavery speak about her writing, her life, and to create this instant priceless heirloom for Dahlia."

View attachment 3147809

Instagram indicates this person is a father and Dahlia is a three-year-old girl:
View attachment 3147810
Bro, Please Miss is an incoherent but incredibly graphic piece of trash, why are you working SO HARD (creating a still life with a box of crayons for the 'Gram?!?!) to connect this book to your toddler? To get attention from Joe? For Instagram asspats? Just why?!

To be clear I don't think this is creepy or dangerous of the guy, just completely pathetic and inappropriate.

If my father ever produced some shit like this, having had it signed for me when I was three years old - in fact, there mere thought that my three year old self had even occurred to him while reading this misogynist garbage would suffice - I would literally disown him.

And personally, I do think any father who'd have this signed for his toddler daughter is a creep. Odds are HIGH, and this is just... gross.
 
This was actually something I was thinking about the other day in relation to the whole Oscars debacle, when it occurred to me that it's highly salient to the tranny movement as well. I think it's related to the inherent disconnect generated when intrinsically socially powerful/privileged people attempt to don the mantle of oppression, because it's very reflective of the kind of complacent assumption of your own safety that's only really possible for such people. Despite the latter's constant proclamations to the contrary, neither Hollywood types nor trannies have ever really been in a life-or-death struggle for their very survival, or even really experienced consequences for their actions. Actual, systematically disadvantaged groups make no such assumptions, because they are perpetually aware of their own tenuous position and vulnerability. As such, they only really tend to get violent when the stakes are really, really high, and violence is likely whether they act first or not.

If you undertake to unilaterally decide that someone else's words are sufficient justification for your violence - even if it's just slapping another man open-handed like an offended Victorian spinster a la Will Smith - you are playing a very dangerous game, because that most definitely justifies their escalating the violence in response to yours. You're opening a Pandora's box that you are unlikely to be able to close, and you're too privileged and stupid to see it, because you've never really been the subject of violence before.
Yeah, the modern gender movement is what you get when you give the moral blank check of minority oppression to a "minority" that is in fact the most privileged demographic on Earth (white, mostly middle-class heterosexual males, and to a lesser extent white, mostly middle-class heterosexual females). They don't have any of the learned behavior of actually oppressed minorities that might tell them "wait a minute, maybe we are in danger from the majority if we continue down this particular path, so we should tone it down a little". They just keep pushing and pushing, because they have no lived experience (hah) or cultural memory of actual pushback.

Don't agree with the Will Smith comparison though because that shit was awesome and also I would consider Chris Rock to be more of a potentially dangerous opponent than the average American at a Cracker Barrel. What are they going to do, sit on you?
 
Wonderland foster child:
Species? Some movie where a blond sexy alien woman appears on earth.
Could be either Species or Under The Skin

Wonderland foster child:
Why is the world as depicted on social media so different from real life? Aha, the answer is that the GC viewpoint dominates the centre-left media! Some crack at Hadley Freeman (Guardian columnist). ‘It’s a columnist thing’, Grace concludes.
"The debate over Trans Rights is being dominated by a small, ideologically extreme minority that has disproportionate influence over the media: TERFs." I see Joe is as self-aware as ever.
 
"The debate over Trans Rights is being dominated by a small, ideologically extreme minority that has disproportionate influence over the media: TERFs." I see Joe is as self-aware as ever.

The capacity of troons to be so unself-aware as to venture into the territory of complete, IMAX-level projection is something that truly never ceases to astound me. I feel like if something that perfidious ever came out of my mouth I would actually be able to taste it.
 
I can't reply to Wonderland foster child above, but they've put the whole event on line


I've sat through 20 minutes in the background at 2x speed, and it's all incoherent even when he reads from his own book. He's very animated, but Sooty and Sweep make more sense. And I don't think anyone's buying it. His agent admits that noone wants even the signed copies. As of posting, a mere 80 people have watched the video.

untitled1.jpg


And if you don't want to waste your time, someone's done a write up here https://the-lies-they-tell.org/2022/04/02/talking-penis-with-grace-lavery/
 
Last edited:
The Woman's Hour podcast is up. I don't have time to listen to the whole thing right now but Joe's opening salvos are so idiotic and dishonest I wanted to post them here. The following quote is slightly out of order for clarity but everything in quotation marks is a direct quote.

Joe: "The question 'Can a woman have a penis?' strikes me as a deliberately misleading construction" because "it implies that there is a woman who is asking permission to have a penis? Rather than that the category 'woman' includes a subcategory of people who have penises, or can include that subclass."
Deliberately misleading?? So terfs are trying to trick their interlocutors into thinking they mean women beggin' for dick instead of troons? Nice try, but nitpicking a tiny (non)issue of phrasing does not detract from the substance of the question. Or, should I say nice tries, because he attempts this argument three times. The eyerolls from the BBC presenter are practically audible.

Joe: "What we're really talking about is, do we think that the word 'woman' designates a particular class of biological being, or do we think that it's a political category whose meaning can change over time? I think reasonable people can have different perspectives on that question, but historically speaking, the people who have taken the [former] position have tended to be on the side of patriarchy, and those who have claimed that it is a political category that is deployed to oppress a class of people have been feminists."
"HISTORICALLY SPEAKING," Joe, the question of whether men are women has not been a fucking question. Such an asshole.

And Mallory is doing just fine, thanks.
imgladmymomdied.PNG
 
Last edited:
Deliberately misleading?? So terfs are trying to trick their interlocutors into thinking they mean women beggin' for dick instead of troons? Nice try, but nitpicking a tiny (non)issue of phrasing does not detract from the substance of the question. Or, should I say nice tries, because he attempts this argument three times. The eyerolls from the BBC presenter are practically audible.
[...]
"HISTORICALLY SPEAKING," Joe, the question of whether men are women has not been a fucking question. Such an asshole.
PoMo word games, exactly as expected from this kind of retarded intellectuel. He's a slimy fucker and debating him is completely meaningless - he'd either pull the "BUT I WAS PRETENDING TO BE RETARDED" card or deliberately misinterpret the arguments presented to him in a completely bass-ackwards way. Maybe both at the same time.

Yet he proved to be a little bitch boy and chickened out from the two debates that were set up for him in the most convenient way possible. I find both his face and general demeanor extremely punchable.
 
From everything I’ve read about the book (but not the book) it seems like it’s undoing was a complete lack of effort or interest from Joe. Polishing memoir turds is part of being a publisher—but if the main author insists on clowns and penis jokes and typing on a phone at a certain point you go with what you’ve got. I assume Joe thought he could half-ass his memoir and rely on terves outrage and selfies likes to boost sales.
 
Back