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

Remember how Grace bragged that his side was going to win because they were all younger and sexier than those nasty TERFs? Unrelated to that, here are some pictures of the other guests.

There's this autogynephile sleep paralysis demon:

wuestjoanna_sept2019_web__0-2404762123.jpg

This person, whose gender identity is "fat":

Velocci-Beans-2.png

And this person, who despite some unfortunate bone structure, is actually a woman:

Heaney.jpg

Don't worry, she makes up for that fact by devoting her career to assuring crossdressers that feminism is actually for men and not for silly little broads like her.

Two dudes, a fat, and a neurotic handmaiden. How will the venue handle the crowds attracted by this fun bunch?
 
Meanwhile, back in Brooklyn, excitement mounts as the Sept. 14 U.S. launch of Feminism Against Cisness approaches starring Grace Lavery, Beans Velocci, Emma Heaney, and Jonna Wuest at the Lesbian Herstory Archives. Will Joe phone it in or is his airfare covered?
The cringe is on a cosmic level. I wonder when the “lesbian history archives” (whatever the fuck that is, I’ll guess the filing cabinet contents from a bunch of Barnard and SL retirees) decided people that like to stick their penises in women should be part of their 50th anniversary celebration?

Two trannies, Emma and Beans. Truly the galaxy of stars arranging for this hybrid fart huffing event in Brooklyn. But why no POC featured at this historic summit? I guess Joe Lavery babble is more important to lesbian history than anything those silly black women have to say.
 
Granted, she's managed to hang on to her career, her house, her family(?), and her tits, so she's faring better than Mallory at this point, but at least three of those things meet Joe's needs and that's why she hasn't had to damage herself irreparably or be banished. Yet.
I’m not sure it’s that. Mallory had all those things too. Maybe a little too much success for his narcissism to handle (but on the other hand, earning potential). I think Mallory just had something about her - youth, innocence, devoted fans, something else? - that drove Joe to get off on destroying her. That “Yoko” piece, man.
 
She's not even quarantined within a Gender Studies department, either. Imagine being a college student doing a normal degree and potentially having to interact with an assistant professor calling herself "Beans."

She's wasted her entire adult life piling up student loans in the "education" system and still doesn't understand how gametes work:

I'm working on a book, Binary Logic: The Power of Incoherence in American Sex Science (under contract with Duke University Press), about how sex functioned as a scientifically-backed method of sorting bodies in the 19th and 20th centuries because it could contain multitudes. Sex could be defined by all kinds of things—external anatomy, internal anatomy, hormones, metabolic rate, chromosomes, behavior—depending on the research question or social argument at hand, and often worked with several conflicting definitions simultaneously. A key part of those conflicting yet coexisting models of those sex was the fact that sex operated as both a self-evident binary of male and female and a far more complex gradation on the cutting edge of scientific inquiry.

You go, Beans. Keep searching for that "complex gradation"! One day you'll find that spegg!
 
The latest edition of Mallory's substack is supposed to be funny but it's just an illustration of Joe's everyday self-centeredness and inability to give a pube of consideration to another person:

How to win the battle against objects: Fighting your refrigerator (Archive)
One of my worst personal qualities is my tendency to turn minor, everyday inconveniences into a moral showdown with inanimate objects. I just can’t seem to help myself. The other day I opened the door to the refrigerator, and a bottle of hot sauce fell out and broke all over the floor.
Instantly the thought occurred to me: THIS WASN’T MY FAULT. I mean it lit up the inside of my skull like neon. I really hadn’t had enough time to assess whether this was even true, and besides which, there’s really no need to immediately assign fault in an accident like this one. No one had suggested it might have been my fault. But I was prepared for it, in case somebody did. But if you’re looking to spice up your domestic routine, and to find new ways to irritate the people who have to live with you, I recommend dealing with mundane household accidents in the following way:
  1. Find at least two things to blame besides yourself. Ideally one of these things will be a person and the other will be inanimate: a system, a routine, an appliance. That way, if the human scapegoat refuses to accept the blame, you still have something to fall back on that can’t argue with you.
    1. In my situation, I chose my wife Grace, who had improperly loaded the hot sauce diagonally across the rest of the jars on the shelf in the middle of the refrigerator door, thereby creating an unstable logjam, and the plastic shelf itself, which was already partially cracked from overloading.
    2. Importantly, I did not choose myself, although I had previously noticed the crack in the plastic and declined to fix it, as well as the precariously-loaded hot sauce. I merely gave myself credit for noticing the problem in the first place, not blame for failing to fix it sooner. Other people like hearing that you have anticipated a problem before it happened. It makes them feel looked-after.
  2. When the disaster happens, immediately shout “Oh, no” or “Fuck” in your darkest tones, filled with unspoken meaning. Do not follow up. Resist the urge to say “I’m all right” (if indeed you are all right! You probably are covered in hot sauce and nearly dead) or to explain what has just happened. Let a leaden silence fill the air afterwards, so that everybody else will have to get up from whatever they’re doing to find out.
  3. Mournfully announce to your audience your findings: What systems error, or more likely, what individual failure, has nearly killed you? Remember, this is not just “one of those things” that happens to everybody sometimes. This is a crisis of the first order, and a harbinger of far worse things to come.
    1. If you have children or pets, you can try to rachet up your bid for sympathy by saying “Imagine if it had been the baby instead of me!” This lets everyone know that you don’t care a fig for your own well-being — you are simply deeply and uniquely committed to safety! The only one in the house who cares!
  4. At this stage, refuse all offers of help. You have successfully distracted everyone else in the house from whatever they were doing, and demanded immediate attention and sympathy. Now, if they offer to help you clean up, it is very important that you decline. You only wanted to interrupt their work, not try to work together! You have suffered alone, and you will make the repairs alone! Now everyone feels annoyed for having been called away to do nothing, and they have to watch you do additional work, thus earning extra points on the great invisible Chore Wheel that turns about in revolutions of fire in everyone’s mind.
If you follow this blueprint exactly, you can make almost any situation worse in five minutes or less, at no additional cost to you, the consumer.

I even drew a little illustration of the encounter. I’m afraid it didn’t turn out very well in the end. The idea I wanted to communicate was one of being a beautiful hero against the treachery of objects, and spiritually wearing a fox-fur opera cape and top hat.

The fridge is all right. It looks more like a partially-finished apartment building than a refrigerator, but you get the idea pretty well. I learned how to draw cubes from third-grade art class, and I remembered to put the freezer on the bottom and the handle on the right-hand side of the door. The little panel in the middle might look like a window, but it isn’t. It’s just a little electronic display that tells you what the temperature inside the fridge is. I have no quarrel with the panel.
You can tell just by looking, I think, that this isn’t a very good fridge; I think I’ve managed to capture something of its perfidious and perverse nature in the line work. On first glance it appears fairly ordinary — maybe a little narrow, but pretty ordinary nonetheless — but something about the arrangement unsettles the soul.
I mean, you’d know pretty quickly to be on your guard against such a fridge just from looking at this drawing. Just look at it! The fearful symmetry, et cetera.
I’ve drawn myself on the right, nobly and manfully objecting to the refrigerator’s behavior. Not complaining, mind you, and without the slightest hint of a whine, but righteously indignant about the existence of such wickedness. I took a J.C. Leyendecker drawing as my model. You can see for yourself that things didn’t turn out quite right.

I suspect that J.C. Leyendecker has probably had more practice, and was not hampered, as I have been, by having only a Paper Mate Flair medium felt-tip pen to work with. It’s a poor workman as blames his tools, I know, but how else to explain why the shadings of the cheekbone that look so natural on his fellow look like wrinkles on mine?
And I haven’t gotten the size of the top of the head right, either. Anyone can see that. And the ear is all wrong. I’ve filled it with some sort of Masonic sigil, instead of a few delicate little scribbles that nonetheless immediately and accurately communicate the inside of the human ear. Well, you can’t have everything in life.

tl;dr: "The other day I opened the door to the refrigerator, and a bottle of hot sauce fell out and broke all over the floor... my wife Grace...had improperly loaded the hot sauce diagonally across the rest of the jars on the shelf in the middle of the refrigerator door, thereby creating an unstable logjam."

So the fridge is probably crammed to the gills with Joe's foul creations. Joe will never be the one to clean it out and organize it. Instead, he carelessly sets a booby trap by stuffing a bottle of hot sauce crosswise into the door and quickly closing it. It inevitably rolls out and smashes when the next person opens the fridge. And Mallory gets to clean it up. Womp womp.

The first comment:
Screenshot 2024-08-15 175842.png

Amazing.
 
Meanwhile, back in Brooklyn, excitement mounts as the Sept. 14 U.S. launch of Feminism Against Cisness approaches starring Grace Lavery, Beans Velocci, Emma Heaney, and Jonna Wuest at the Lesbian Herstory Archives. Will Joe phone it in or is his airfare covered?
faces.pngdown with cisness.pngtweet.png
What's the purpose of feminism if anyone can just identify out of oppression? Or are these transphobes saying self-ID isn't valid?

She's wasted her entire adult life piling up student loans in the "education" system and still doesn't understand how gametes work:

I'm working on a book, Binary Logic: The Power of Incoherence in American Sex Science (under contract with Duke University Press), about how sex functioned as a scientifically-backed method of sorting bodies in the 19th and 20th centuries because it could contain multitudes. Sex could be defined by all kinds of things—external anatomy, internal anatomy, hormones, metabolic rate, chromosomes, behavior—depending on the research question or social argument at hand, and often worked with several conflicting definitions simultaneously. A key part of those conflicting yet coexisting models of those sex was the fact that sex operated as both a self-evident binary of male and female and a far more complex gradation on the cutting edge of scientific inquiry.
The problem here isn't gametes, it's that she doesn't understand how binaries or logic work. Defining sex by any individual thing of those will result in revealing a binary. If it doesn't, it's not a valid measurement of sex because there are only two possibilities. Sex isn't "self-evident" because it models male and female, it's "self-evident" because this is the only way sex can work. There's absolutely zero logic to explain the manifestation of a third sex, especially since there still has yet to be any identification of one. This places the burden on you to show why the model doesn't work.

Finding "gradation" wouldn't refute the binary, it would refute the proposed hypothesis about the specific thing. This doesn't mean there cannot be gradations, merely that they aren't evidence of sex differences. If I say that I should locate a binary sex difference in something and find a gradation rather than two groupings, this means that's not a sex difference not that sex is now a spectrum of unlimited possibilities. (Especially because a spectrum requires two poles, you dummy you idiot you complete moron.) For example, the gendered brain thing, finding there's no statistically meaningful difference doesn't debunk the sex binary, it debunks the gendered brain theory. She's inverting the logic of the scientific process then declaring it incoherent because she doesn't understand why it had to be a certain way.

Is it possible to refute that sex is a binary? Yes, of course. But this isn't anywhere near the way you would do it. This is just an attack on science for not giving you what you want.

Also, she's starting her history way too late, the 19th century isn't where bodies started being sorted by science.
 
The problem here isn't gametes, it's that she doesn't understand how binaries or logic work.

Adding to this excellent analysis, the sheer crapness of the rhetorical device should be noted. This is (one infers) an attempt to impugn contemporary arguments for the binary nature of sex by impugning their supposed predecessors. It’s a shabby trick and like so much in this area, ignores the cluster definition of sex which allows for deviations from the norm (think a human can be defined as having four limbs, but one born without a limb is still human because of a bunch of other things. Likewise, chromosomes and gametes and physical signs can tell you sex normally, but the lack of one thing is not fatal to classification. Khelif has chromosomes, appearance and (possibly malfunctioning) equipment to produce small gametes. His preferred identity and possible inability to father a child, or bear one, don’t override the majority of his physical characteristics.

But if you’re looking to spice up your domestic routine, and to find new ways to irritate the people who have to live with you, I recommend dealing with mundane household accidents in the following way:

This is not the only way Tard Baby irritates the people who have to live with her. Or indeed those who are not thus blessed.
 
Also, she's starting her history way too late, the 19th century isn't where bodies started being sorted by science.

The right year would be 1732 when Georgina Washington was born at Popes Creek in the colony of Virginia. Just think of it! Herstorian Beans could finally document the real reason Georgina and Martha never had kids. Much proof has been hidden or ignored.
georgina.jpg
Leave the gametes to the fantasists who like to deceive us with microscopes and look at the real world through the macroscope of transtory herstory!
 
Last edited:
Beans is a real deep thinker.

I'm interested in how socially-constructed categories come to be regarded as biological truths.

The fact socially constructed categories were based around immutable biology and survival of the species is given minimal consideration.

Survival was the origin of social constructs.

Troons should all be forced to take 9 credits worth of evolutionary biology and courses on pre-history/ ancient civilizations.
 
Adding points about why gametes are relevant to the discussion and not merely chromosomes (as Joe pondered and high-velocity Beans logorrhea-ized about): Many organisms in nature, not merely animals, produce either small motile gametes or large immotile gametes, sometimes in the same organism. This is how a female plant or male plant is determined: do they produce pollen or pistils? If they have both, that's a hermaphrodite. Mammals generally are never true hermaphrodites (very very rare exceptions where an individual has both a testis and an ovary). Significantly more common (but still quite rare) are mammals with malformed generative organs of one variety or another.

The thing with chromosomes is that sex in some animals isn't necessarily determined by chromosomes. Sea turtles, for example, develop either female or male based on the temperature of the eggs. Notoriously, some clown fish are sequential hermaphrodites where some individuals develop into females after being born male when the previous female dies. Birds and some lizards have Z and W chromosomes which function in an opposite way as the X and Y system; ZZ is male and ZW is female and the ovum determines the offspring's sex, instead of the X/Y system where the sperm carries the sex-determining genes. It gets even weirder too, because nature is cool like that. But in humans, X or Y IS determinant of sex, because that's how it works in our species (and other mammals). The existence of mutations doesn't mean it isn't a valid classification. A very tiny percent of humans have trisomy-13 or XXY and thus 47 chromosomes, but it's still accurate to say humans have 46 chromosomes.

But the level of scientific ignorance among the humanities-oriented academics truly baffles. Did they never learn about mitosis and meiosis? That's grade-school level biology! Sexual reproduction exists because it allows much more rapid evolution. Despite the fascinating variety of sex-determining systems we can find in nature, male and female are still relevant to the discussion because having gametes from both is how sexual reproduction works at the most basic level. The actual mechanics (SRY, paramesonephric ducts, androgen receptors, etc.) are fascinating but ultimately irrelevant to whether sex exists as a binary. If a sperm and egg hadn't fused to become a new human, none of us would be here, end of. It's not some sinister conspiracy to sort "bodies" because hand-wavy colonial cultural narratives, it's because that's HOW IT ALL WORKS.
 
She's not even quarantined within a Gender Studies department, either. Imagine being a college student doing a normal degree and potentially having to interact with an assistant professor calling herself "Beans."

She's wasted her entire adult life piling up student loans in the "education" system and still doesn't understand how gametes work:

I'm working on a book, Binary Logic: The Power of Incoherence in American Sex Science (under contract with Duke University Press), about how sex functioned as a scientifically-backed method of sorting bodies in the 19th and 20th centuries because it could contain multitudes. Sex could be defined by all kinds of things—external anatomy, internal anatomy, hormones, metabolic rate, chromosomes, behavior—depending on the research question or social argument at hand, and often worked with several conflicting definitions simultaneously. A key part of those conflicting yet coexisting models of those sex was the fact that sex operated as both a self-evident binary of male and female and a far more complex gradation on the cutting edge of scientific inquiry.

You go, Beans. Keep searching for that "complex gradation"! One day you'll find that spegg!

College and Universities are the boondoggle/make-work/goldbricking of yore.

String along a bunch of $5,000 words together in a sentence where 50 cent words'll do. Create a schizoid word salad, and BAM! Published in a University Press.
 
Throw alarm clocks if this gem linked below is already on the thread.

Then deal the tarot cards, frens, and tell me if Joe will morph into a shrink before the bells in Berkeley's Sather Tower chime 13.

We've known he claimed to be in a training program for psychoanalysts, took a semester-long sabbatical in 2020 to pursue same, and liked in 2021 to still talk about being in training (h/t @Potatis Salad, KF #78, and @RadicalCentrist, KF #606, 3rd cap). He's talked about being in analysis himself, of course.

But some deets we may not have laughed at before are from the Chronicle of Higher Education, Feb 3, 2022, "Making Grad School Work for Weirdos" link | archive. Excerpt:
My own second [career] choice would have been “psychoanalyst.” I spent the five years of graduate school on the couch five times a week, when I wasn’t so hungover that I had to cancel. Work sometimes came out of the sessions: At one point, I was stuck on a thorny question about my paternity, which led me to get incredibly animated about an offhand remark about Peter Pan that a certain critic made in a then-influential book. Half thinking about the critic, and half feeling my way out of a difficult memory, I generated a whole reading of Peter and Wendy in the middle of the session. Afterward, I ducked into the toilet in the office block and wrote up as much as I could retain onto my laptop. I later delivered a paper based on those notes, and although in retrospect the position I took was a little gauche, it helped me clarify some of the theoretical background of what would become my dissertation.

[Kiwi note: Title of that dissertation was "Empire in a Glass Case: Japanese Beauty, British Culture, and Transnational Aestheticism." A Peter/Wendy angle very relevant to theoretical background in that, obvsly.]

This is a story of privilege, of course, not least because psychoanalysis is so time consuming that almost nobody who can afford to do it has both the time and inclination. Also, the notion that the content of one’s therapy sessions has anything to do with one’s work is surely the mind-set of someone with a very high opinion of herself, who is used to having that opinion affirmed rather than challenged. Still, the experience solidified my sense that one path toward new knowledge is a willingness to affirm the creative, autochthonic impulses of a particular psyche.
Yes, of course, Lala and Dada will pay for Mama's training and licensure plus room and board throughout while he abuses their ever-forgiving trust with online psychoanalytical outbursts ripened in his hotbed of autochthonic impulses.
 
he abuses their ever-forgiving trust with online psychoanalytical outbursts ripened in his hotbed of autochthonic impulses.

Isn't "autochthonic" basically a euphemism for "anal-masturbatory"? with implications of mudplay, at that?

And yes, I bet Joe's into that, but I frankly doubt the world's getting any "new knowledge" from "a particular psyche" by indulging his IRL coom-playing.

I wonder if this was part of his sales pitch to allow his boudoir-style, fetish-lite faculty photos on the Berkley English Department's website?

Edit:
Wait. FIVE YEARS of grad school? For English????? I'm guessing he was more fun drunk, and that's how he got started in academia, he was good at schmoozing while boozing, that's the only way this makes sense. I know Joe claims years of sobriety, and drunks often trade their addictions, and AGP is definitely an addiction. Go back to the bottle, Joe, it's probably better for your kidneys than spironolactone.
 
Last edited:
Wait. FIVE YEARS of grad school? For English????? I'm guessing he was more fun drunk, and that's how he got started in academia, he was good at schmoozing while boozing, that's the only way this makes sense. I know Joe claims years of sobriety, and drunks often trade their addictions, and AGP is definitely an addiction. Go back to the bottle, Joe, it's probably better for your kidneys than spironolactone.
Quick Google tells me 5-6 years for a Ph.D is expected (Missouri, 5 yrs; UVa, 6 yrs; Johns Hopkins, 5 yrs; Michigan, 6 yrs; Cornell, 6 yrs; Vanderbilt, 6 yrs; Columbia, 6 yrs), could be 7 if teaching as well; looks like up to 10 is a common cap.
 
The right year would be 1732 when Georgina Washington was born at Popes Creek in the colony of Virginia. Just think of it! Herstorian Beans could finally document the real reason Georgina and Martha never had kids. Much proof has been hidden or ignored.
View attachment 6313243
Leave the gametes to the fantasists who like to deceive us with microscopes and look at the real world through the macroscope of transtory herstory!
Yes, the ignorant and fascist TERFs of the 19th and 20th Centuries couldn't account for her thirty penises and four testicles with their incoherent "science" so demanded all of American history to be falsified rather than accept the obvious failure of the sex binary.
 
Back