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

[Umaibae]

You can tell she knows it, too, with her "I just don't know why everyone would think this weird thing!" tone and suggestion that her fondness for DvF wrap dresses clearly telegraphed her bisexuality to the world.

True and honest bisexual women would never interpret a Basic Becky/Karen DvF wrap dress as a sign another woman is bisexual. That’s code for “I am straight, and also I like sex in the missionary position.”

 

[ShortPoppy]

"... and transition, whatever else it may be, can hardly escape the condition of brainwashing and those upon whom it does work, would hardly wish it to." -- from theexcerpt of Joe's essay on Twitter

What on earth is he on about? Is he trying to sound like some high priest of some evil gendercult that's stealing everyone's children (then go on to laugh at people who accuse him of such for being so hysterical and bigoted)?
I almost want to read this essay but I'm not sure I'd survive the over-intellectualised purple prose.

 

[Trianon]

"... and transition, whatever else it may be, can hardly escape the condition of brainwashing and those upon whom it does work, would hardly wish it to." -- from theexcerpt of Joe's essay on Twitter

What on earth is he on about? Is he trying to sound like some high priest of some evil gendercult that's stealing everyone's children (then go on to laugh at people who accuse him of such for being so hysterical and bigoted)?
I almost want to read this essay but I'm not sure I'd survive the over-intellectualised purple prose.

That quote was from the Zoom lecture he did. From what I can tell, it's basically about how hypno porn is good trans praxis. And then he'll act shocked that anyone could object!

Here's a link to the George Eliot essay, paywalled. Cited by: ..... zero people.

 

[Boris Blank's glass eye]

That quote was from the Zoom lecture he did. From what I can tell, it's basically about how hypno porn is good trans praxis.

Well, considering how 99% of the terminally online troons are... he isn't wrong. As long as we regard it as a descriptive, rather than normative statement.
His only mistake was admitting it publicly.

 

[Help Me Move This Table]

I know it’s hard for Joe’s brain to fathom that someone who was an ACTUAL literary genius wouldn’t want the kind of accolades and reputation he’s clearly desperate for, and even harder for him to understand how a woman created some of the best writing in his area of expertise (“MILF...but author?” ) — and to try and square that circle (which exists only in his head) with “Axshully — trans!!” is possibly THE most asinine failcope I’ve come across. He’s like a 12-year-old writing a paper on why Santa is real. He’s too myopic to see how pathetic he is.

 

[Canebrake]

Also here's a TERF write-up of Joe's latest talk, tweeted out by him: https://the-lies-they-tell.org/2021/03/27/grace-lavery-discusses-pleasure-and-efficacy-techniques-of-trans-feminist-criticism/

Lavery is being deliberately disingenuous (or doesn't understand Latin well and didn't read most of the book, take your pick). To read tactio cutem in inguine as "a Latin phrase, in fact, to designate the penetration of June's inguinal canals, the transsex practice [...] called 'muffing'" (about 26:50 in the video) is doubly absurd: first because cutis in inguine transparently means 'skin upon the groin', and second because it should be clear even without context that June is not the person being touched in this passage!

There are literally half a dozen transcription errors in the one paragraph; maybe it is plain incompetence.

(The TERF's description of the excerpt as "basically highbrow Fifty Shades of Grey" is, much like her pearl-clutching about hypnotism, equally asinine. If she wants to be disturbed there's plenty of other stuff in the book, but this excerpt is very tame.)

Spoiler: Latin spergery

gratissima tactioni, praesertim labiali et linguali = 'very pleasing to the touch, especially of the lips and of the tongue'
viro = (on an) 'adult male'
caput super abdomene aut femure nudo [sic] adolescentis = (my) 'head on top of the abdomen or bare thigh of an adolescent'
membri virilis ejus erecti = 'of his erect male member'
glandis, gratissima tactioni et digitorum et oris = 'of the glans, very pleasing to the touch, both the fingers' and the mouth's'

 

[Potatis Salad]

Joe has been seething all day because TERFs are pushing back against his attempts to trans George Eliot, which, as I said, is an ongoing mission of his. He does this by defining "trans" in the most elastic possible way so it includes anyone who wants their writing to stand on its own without preconceptions. Eliot was pretty straightforwardly an ahead-of-her-time feminist who had a successful career as an editor and likely wanted to separate her novel writing from her daily life, especially since she had a lot of negative things to say about "women's novels," the 1800s' "chick lit." As Charlotte Bronte did before her, she probably just wanted to get out of the way of the words on the page and see if they would be well-received without worrying that she was being ignored or placated because she was a woman/or that her private life would overshadow the work. There are no cross-dressing episodes or secret letters or anything of the sort that would indicate George Eliot was anything other than a cool-sounding penname.

Joe argues that he is the only true Eliot whisperer who knows what she was really trying to say when she picked a name. No details on whether this makes nemesis Rowling trans as well.

View attachment 2041758View attachment 2041761View attachment 2041852

Joe tries very hard to be breezily witty and cruel, just says a lot of words in a jumble.

View attachment 2041861

I suspect the real reason Joe wants George Eliot as his own is because he cannot truly admire a woman unless he can become her, or turn her into himself.

I think this is a Rhys McKinnon-esque example of a troon academic abandoning his area of expertise and any commitment to academic rigor to launch a separate career in Troon Gadflyism. "George Eliot was trans" is a ridiculous position, but Joe could have made a serious scholarly argument for it. He could have revisited the work of Eliot, her contemporaries, and other scholars who have studied her, and gathered enough material to support a "Transmasculine Subjectivities in Eliot" type of thing. But he didn't want to read. He didn't want to research. That takes a lot of time and effort, and Joe doesn't have a lot of spare time right now because he's busy staring at his moobs in the selfie camera. So he chose to dash off a wild unsupported claim, and when people push back instead of kneeling down to fellate him for it, he melts down with this INSANE (truly, what the fuck?) seethe.

I have no interest in Joe's pre-troon book about Victorian England and Japan, but I'm guessing it's competent academic work. Literally all of his Troon Gadfly shit has been a sloppy, porny, embarrassing mess.

 

[Constellationzero]

Wow, this thread is moving so fast now! Sorry for all the incoming l8:



My mind is still a little blown that Mallory isn't a lesbian. For years, she so clearly and intentionally cultivated her online public persona as a quirky semi-authority on lesbianism and her denial of it is pure gaslighting. You can tell she knows it, too, with her "I just don't know why everyone would think this weird thing!" tone and suggestion that her fondness for DvF wrap dresses clearly telegraphed her bisexuality to the world.

I'm not the kind of lesbian who feels the need to constantly dunk on bisexual women, but I'm doubting now that Mallory is actually into women at all. +1 for autoandrophilia, she's basically a fujo for William Shatner. My remaining sympathy for her -- which was largely based on the massive cognitive dissonance she, as a lesbian, must experience when she tries to convince herself that Joe is a pretty lady -- has evaporated.


+100 for autoandrophilia.


Joe has been obsessed with describing himself as a "dyke MILF" lately, presumably as a way to cope with his molten appearance while further fabricating his "leading lady in a schlocky porno" lesbian persona. (I actually think that Joe is less delusional about his appearance as other MtFs, given that he's described himself as "melted" before. I think that, jowls aside, he mostly likes the way he looks now and thinks that once he gets FFS he's going to go from "hot edgy dyke MILF" --> "SUPER hot edgy femme.")

He fancies himself the titular character from the movie/book Carol who is, sure, MILF-esque, but I'm having a hard time imagining any actual lesbian describe herself as a MILF -- isn't that a pretty straight guy porn fantasy? Also, he so clearly gets off on saying "dyke" as often as he possibly can. It's the sweet taste of forbidden fruit to him, a word I'm sure he longed to say before he transitioned, but for the threat of social censure. Now he can say it all he wants and those fucking dykes can't even give him the hairy eyeball.


One of my favorite things about Joe is his pathological inability to admit he is wrong, ever, even when it would benefit him to do so. Which is a pretty classically male maladaptive trait, imo. Like clockwork, whenever his ego is wounded by, say, Moonlit Piglet on Twitter dot com, his pretense of breezy condescension is immediately replaced with seething impotent rage -- only made better by the fact that Joe has failed to vampirize Mallory's wit (not for lack of trying) and so can only resort to name-calling when intellectually bested.


I know earlier in this thread he complained that his FFS had been rescheduled due to covid, so surely that's one of the surgeries. I don't understand why he's going to get his face done when he can't even be bothered to get laser removal on his beard, but ok.


Whether the George Kaplan sock is Joe's or not (I could see it being Mallory), I love that this is what Joe is choosing to do with his sabbatical -- spending hours raging on Twitter, backstabbing Sady Doyle et al to post Substack screeds about Jesse Singal, and giving nonsense Zoom lectures to a handful of people. Time well spent.

Yeah, NO lesbian describes themselves as a MILF. Dyke is very, very RARELY used. And LOL at the twisted notion that being a "lesbian" lead in a porno is something ANYBODY would see as aspirational or desireable. Holy shit... the point of dating and coupling is trying to find a compatible partner--for life--ideally. But at least for a long term situation. You want someone who's your best, best friend--someone you do everything with--and someone you'd be proud to take to a family gathering.

This guy needs several mgs. of Thorazine and a straight jacket. He can give his college lectures to the dayroom pillars while his peers cogwheel around him or lay fetal position under the benches till chow is called.

This university better get its collective shit together because this guy ain't right. And spergy paragraphs with NO CITATIONS??? Every day this uggo is on their payroll, the school loses credibility. At least Rutgers got its shit together...

 

[homewayhalf]

Epic chimpout by Jos. The academic equivalent of “IT IS MA’AM!”

 

[Potatis Salad]

My fellow cretins, we have long deluded ourselves into the belief that we are here to laugh at Joe. But you know as well as I do that he ignites a deep, smoldering, unnameable, undeniable desire in our loins.


Just admit it, coomers. You want this:


OK, is everyone done jacking off (for now)? Let's continue. Governments are attempting to institute "state control of the endocrine system" (aka declining to pay for unlimited titty skittles).


A small account with 3000 followers tweeted that it's stupid to try to retroactively trans George Eliot. The person did not quote tweet, tag, or refer to Joe by name. He did not interact anywhere on Joe's timeline. I have no idea how Joe even found the tweet, but he showed up to reply to the guy with some pompous seethe:


Apparently that wasn't enough, so Joe decided to drag this poor guy over to his (Joe's) own timeline. He posted a screenshot and a quote tweet, followed by an insulting meme.

Whaaaaat?! Again, this is a random tiny account. If he'd wanted to get Joe's attention or wade into the squabble himself, there are half a dozen ways he could have done that, but he didn't. He just sent out a mildly-worded tweet to his own followers. Joe's unhinged response was, yet again, unbelievably out of proportion.

 

[Constellationzero]

My fellow cretins, we have long deluded ourselves into the belief that we are here to laugh at Joe. But you know as well as I do that he ignites a deep, smoldering, unnameable, undeniable desire in our loins.
View attachment 2043258

Just admit it, coomers. You want this:
View attachment 2043288View attachment 2043292

OK, is everyone done jacking off (for now)? Let's continue. Governments are attempting to institute "state control of the endocrine system" (aka declining to pay for unlimited titty skittles).
View attachment 2043257

A small account with 3000 followers tweeted that it's stupid to try to retroactively trans George Eliot. The person did not subtweet, quote tweet, tag, or refer to Joe by name. He did not interact anywhere on Joe's timeline. I have no idea how Joe even found the tweet, but he showed up to reply to the guy with some pompous seethe:
View attachment 2043270

Apparently that wasn't enough, so Joe decided to drag this poor guy over to his (Joe's) own timeline. He posted a screenshot and a quote tweet, followed by an insulting meme.
View attachment 2043269
Whaaaaat?! Again, this is a random tiny account. There are half a dozen ways he could have tried to get Joe's attention or wade into the squabble himself, but all he did was post a mildly-worded opinion to his own followers. Joe's unhinged response was, yet again, unbelievably out of proportion.

Okay, the chin chan head and tattoos alone are hard deal breakers.

I bet he's cut from the same cloth as Tess Guntster and Corissa.
Some people don't want a person covered in tattoos. Not even one. Not even a small one. Some people don't like ear gages and doofy hair colors. Not even Manic Panic.
And take it from someone who knows all too well. People like this fuck theirselves up Pauly Unstoppable style thinking they're the vanguards of edginess and the smartest asshole in the room...until they approach someone who just. doesn't. want. to. look. at. this.

Suddenly tattoos/ear gages/and blue hair is a RACE. It is an immutable trait and you are a bigot if you don't let the tard scribbled ADF hobo have sex with you or openly shit up your group photos.

And goddamn he is aggressively ugly. Inside and out. A real contender against Russell "The Face" Greer for supreme faggot of the year.

 

[Trianon]

"imagine spending your twilight years getting together with your other stupid friends and refusing to read things"

vs.

"I haven't read it, and I don't intend to"
https://web.archive.org/web/2020112...bstack.com/p/free-speech-activists-are-trying

Joe, I'm supersmart, you are not entitled to be read by me. Only I can define what I read.

 

[OttoWest]

I think we now know why Joe always goes with a closed mouth pout:

 

[messyesty]

Haven't seen this posted yet: absolutely horrific story about John Ortberg (Jr., proud father of Mallory & Johnny) assaulting a teenage girl, posted by Mallory last month but apparently known to her since last summer. (Full summary of the whole saga is maintained by them at Menlo Allegations.) I think someone in the sideshow thread put money on the father being a pedo too when things first started to come out?

 

[Constellationzero]

The five o' clock shadow, pubic hairs on the neck, and greasy (is it Brylcream or poor hygiene?) slicked back hair evocative of a used car salesman or the emcee of a seedy 1970's peep show really clinch that essence of true womanhood.

Eyeroll.

 

[Frances Kiwi Farmer]

I think this is a Rhys McKinnon-esque example of a troon academic abandoning his area of expertise and any commitment to academic rigor to launch a separate career in Troon Gadflyism. "George Eliot was trans" is a ridiculous position, but Joe could have made a serious scholarly argument for it. He could have revisited the work of Eliot, her contemporaries, and other scholars who have studied her, and gathered enough material to support a "Transmasculine Subjectivities in Eliot" type of thing. But he didn't want to read. He didn't want to research. That takes a lot of time and effort, and Joe doesn't have a lot of spare time right now because he's busy staring at his moobs in the selfie camera. So he chose to dash off a wild unsupported claim, and when people push back instead of kneeling down to fellate him for it, he melts down with this INSANE (truly, what the fuck?) seethe.

I have no interest in Joe's pre-troon book about Victorian England and Japan, but I'm guessing it's competent academic work. Literally all of his Troon Gadfly shit has been a sloppy, porny, embarrassing mess.

When I first saw TERF twitter claiming that Joe was saying George Eliot was trans, I assumed that they were being a bit hyperbolic and that, indeed, Joe's paper was along the lines of what you suggest--that Eliot's use of a cross-sex pseudonym and/or subtext in her writing spoke to the "logics of trans-ness" or whatever. Classic "shove my pet interest into another thing I like because the research on this topic is already extensive and I have nothing new to add" Humanities crap. As it turns out, I was giving Joe way too much credit, because his angry tweets made it clear that he is, in fact, literally saying that George Eliot was trans.

Not to ~validate~ those "titty skittles make me a dumb bimbo" creeps, but maybe HRT does make you dumber? Hormonally induced micro-strokes, perhaps? Or maybe I'm just about the state of academia these days and Joe always had the capacity for the level of stupidity he's displaying.

I think we now know why Joe always goes with a closed mouth pout:
View attachment 2043830
View attachment 2043834

Since Joe seemed offended at our use of the Americanized shortened form of his name, I will make this concession: Jos anytime we get a peep of those pearly off-whites.

Haven't seen this posted yet: absolutely horrific story about John Ortberg (Jr., proud father of Mallory & Johnny) assaulting a teenage girl, posted by Mallory last month but apparently known to her since last summer. (Full summary of the whole saga is maintained by them at Menlo Allegations.) I think someone in the sideshow thread put money on the father being a pedo too when things first started to come out?

Thanks for posting, I was curious this new chapter of the Ortberg family pedo saga.

Not to sound callous--especially because I have no doubt that the shit about Mallory's brother is true and the way her family responded to it was grotesque--but after reading that post, I am extremely skeptical about these claims against her dad. Without PLing too hard, I work in a space related to these sorts of domestic issues and if someone came to my workplace with this sort of story--repeated instances of extreme sexual abuse by many different people/authority figures, rendered in a (relatively) clean narrative with vivid and extremely lurid detail (parents ordering their young son to molest the author as part of a child marriage pact while the parents stood by masturbating, for instance), among other things--it would be seen as a huge red flag. I'm not saying it's definitely not real, because I could never say that for certain based on a blog post alone, but it seems very very unlikely to me.

I was wondering why the newer allegations against her father weren't getting nearly as much play by Mallory and Joe, considering that they seemed to be orders of magnitude worse than the stuff about her brother, which was already heinous. I can see why now, I think.

ETA: Obviously the person who wrote that post is highly disturbed and I would not be surprised at all if she has been the victim of CSA, quite possibly related to some of the things written in that post. Maybe even perpetuated by John Ortberg (though there are other reasons, based on my reading of the post, that make me particularly doubtful of that). But I think I can say with near certainty that that post and the "memories" contained within should not be taken at face value.

 

[Trianon]

Haven't seen this posted yet: absolutely horrific story about John Ortberg (Jr., proud father of Mallory & Johnny) assaulting a teenage girl, posted by Mallory last month but apparently known to her since last summer. (Full summary of the whole saga is maintained by them at Menlo Allegations.) I think someone in the sideshow thread put money on the father being a pedo too when things first started to come out?

Yeah, it's rough. I haven't seen outright confirmation of the account, but Menlo Church is definitely not interested in getting to the bottom of it. But unlike the brother, it seems like Mallory got this info secondhand, and the account itself is kind of bizarrely invested in church politics, which makes me hmmmm over some of it.

• Basically the Ortbergs were in the news a few years ago for taking a hard stance against Bill Hybels, a pastor who was accused of sexual harassment. He was a close friend of the family, and they worked together for a long time at Willow Creek Church.
• While the Hybels allegations were rolling out, janelied/Sabaah posted a blog in April 2018 saying that she had been abused by John Ortberg as a teen. The post went unnoticed.
• The Ortbergs had their own scandal from 2019-2020 involving the pedophile brother volunteering with kids at their church, Menlo. Mallory found out right before her wedding, but the info on who the pedophile was did not come out until later in 2020, after the church tried to kind of brush it off.
• Mallory posted the original Sabaah blog post a month ago and drew attention to the otherwise buried allegation against her dad.

After Mallory cut her family off, she made cryptic posts about "the secret of the Ortberg men" and suchlike (these are behind a paywall now, sorry, that's just what I remember) before the full story came out. She saw her dad as not just complicit but actively evil, so the allegations against her dad make those posts make more sense.

But the Sabaah account goes on and on about how Bill Hybels was wrongfully accused, that his main accuser, Nancy Beach, is a liar and narcissist, that she's saying all this about Ortberg now because it's him who's the abuser, not Hybels. So there's a lot going on. The post is so concerned with making sure that the right leaders get in position and the wrong leaders step down that I am taking it with a grain of salt. It may be that Sabaah is telling the truth at points, but there are so many instances where she's trying to control the narrative in a way I can't untangle without knowing these people. As far as I know, Hybels was never cleared of anything.

Wrote most of this before @Frances Kiwi Farmer posted, but yeah, I agree. I think Mallory was in a place where she didn't have trouble believing her dad would do this, and it does make sense of some things, but I haven't heard any follow-up on it at all. It wouldn't shock me if this ends up muddying the waters against all of Mallory's accusations if this turns out to be untrue.

 

[Boris Blank's glass eye]

When I first saw TERF twitter claiming that Joe was saying George Eliot was trans, I assumed that they were being a bit hyperbolic and that, indeed, Joe's paper was along the lines of what you suggest--that Eliot's use of a cross-sex pseudonym and/or subtext in her writing spoke to the "logics of trans-ness" or whatever.

I wonder if Joe had ever heard of George Sand, née Amantine Lucile Aurore Dupin.

Sand was one of the women who wore men's clothing without a permit, justifying them as being less expensive and far sturdier than the typical dress of a noblewoman at the time. In addition to being comfortable, Sand's male attire enabled her to circulate more freely in Paris than most of her female contemporaries, and gave her increased access to venues from which women were often barred, even women of her social standing. Also scandalous was Sand's smoking tobacco in public; neither peerage nor gentry had yet sanctioned the free indulgence of women in such a habit, especially in public (though Franz Liszt's paramour Marie d'Agoult affected this as well, smoking large cigars).

Totally a trans man, amirite?

 

[Potatis Salad]

Joe just cleared everything up. He NEVER said George Eliot was trans. "Unquestionably trans" just doesn't mean "unquestionably trans" in this context, because "unquestionably" does not mean "unquestionably" within academia, which you uneducated plebs would already know if you were familiar with Joe's work.

 

[Constellationzero]

Joe just cleared everything up. He NEVER said George Eliot was trans. "Unquestionably trans" just doesn't mean "unquestionably trans" in this context, because "unquestionably" does not mean "unquestionably" within academia, which you uneducated plebs would already know if you were familiar with Joe's work.
View attachment 2045440

Okay...the university I attended warned people repeatedly in my major (history) not to use the word unquestionably unless we had SEVERAL receipts and could roundly defend our assertations. But that university is in shitty backwoods pigfucker flyover country, so maybe it wouldn't count to the great Dr. Lavery.

And somehow his department head is a-okay with this kind of recklessness in academia? This fuckin' guy...