The madness gripping the country by the neck and shaking hard continues to cause national convulsions over the unexpected death of professional racist Charlie Kirk. The Trump regime promises to make this their Reichstag fire, their fig leaf over the national embarrassment that is the end of democracy. How strange and ominous it is that throughout this whole ordeal, this whole ridiculous production put on to convince the American public that the only way they'll be safe is if they let the president do whatever he wants, transgender people have appeared as a regular topic on the lips of regime functionaries, in the headlines of career propagandists, and even emanating forth from Donald Trump's upper anus.
What have trans people to do with the belated death of an ignominious jackass? Well, precisely nothing. It is just that this man's death was, in the view of our fascist overlords, a bad thing; and when bad things happen, they must necessarily be connected in some way to transgender people, so as to encourage people to regard us with suspicion and hostility and to blame us for everything that makes them unhappy. For years, they have accused every infamous killer of being transgender, just as a matter of course. In fact, as soon as I heard about the shooting --- well, as soon as I finished celebrating --- I commented that I was looking forward to finding out how the killer was a trans marxist. "Trans people are murderers" is just a brick in the foundations of the fantasy parallel reality approximately half the country now inhabits.
I have no idea who was the first person to suggest blaming trans people --- surely there were hundreds immediately upon receipt of the news --- but the first to popularize the notion was by my recollection some idiot cop who said that markings on the bullets indicated "trans ideology". Already it had been noted that the former Starfleet captain was answering a transphobic question before he was shot; now, the announcement about the bullets cemented in place trans people's unwitting relevance to the story. It didn't matter that the announcement was false and the bullet messages had nothing to do with trans people: trans people had been successfully shoehorned in, which is always the goal.
Later, it was announced that the suspect lived with his trans girlfriend (in much more demeaning terms). Aside from automatically blaming her and putting her through all the things the internet likes to do to trans women, her existence sealed the deal on the narrative: he killed Kirk because of his trans girlfriend. Either she made him do it, or some shadowy "trans ideology" that she represented.
Now, it's a perfectly cogent explanation for the crime that the killer was upset about Kirk's penchant for transphobic hate speech, but it seems like a strange conclusion to leap to, and it's one that was arrived at prior to any actual evidence --- not that the existence of a trans person in someone's vicinity amounts to much as evidence. Stranger still is the way the story is discussed, as though "transgender ideology" is a meaningful motive in itself; no context is provided about Kirk's opposition to trans people's human rights. The picture that emerges is this: Charlie Kirk said something innocuous, and it offended someone so bad he killed him, thanks to transgender ideology.
This theme is emphasized repeatedly by reference to the 1st Amendment and free speech, things we are assured Charlie Kirk "championed" (all evidence to the contrary ignored). The guy spoke, so he certainly made use of free speech; is that all it takes to champion something? You just use it? This was all incredibly confusing until I made the connection: again, it's trans people. It's always trans people. See, the dumb half of the country has been brainwashed to believe that trans people are the polar opposite of free speech. They have been told that trans people are akin to a political party whose platform consists entirely of controlling what they say.
I'm tired of writing now.
