I disagree with the pun that Transexuals are the Tranissaries of woke capital. The Janissaries were an elite core of slaves (the precise relationship is really important in the study of the Ottomans, Islam, and Near Eastern society, but can largely be smoothed over here) from diverse, largely Christian backgrounds. Taken from their homes (sometimes peacefully or “peacefully” as part of the devsirme system, sometimes as war booty brought to Anatolia by pirates), these boys were put into a tight-knight religious and idealogical mannerbund. They were given arms, training, a cause, and a leader, the Sultan (and later, Caliph). They were shock-troopers, sent across the empire, putting down insurrections made up of men whom they had no ties to. They were also rigidly loyal to a fault (at first in truth, later only in state propaganda) and highly organized. Later, they were managers, bureaucrats, administrators, even merchants in the vast system that was the Ottoman State. They are a classic case of Asabiyah.
The Tranny… Isn’t any of that. Frankly, that’s closer to something Antifa could be than Trannies, and even that’s stretching it. Trannies are troops of cultural shock, to be sure, but most Americans will never meet a Tranny (It’s entirely possible to go your entire life without meeting ANYONE of a “deviant sexuality”, given that the LGBTBBQ is something like 5% of the US population). For the most part, they’re just another Globohomo Point-Deer-Make-Horse. The Tranny, as I will explain, is the modern Gallus.
In all matters of organization an institution can ultimately trace themselves to key founders. These founders have goals, and seek to achieve them via some means. The problem is that eventually, any endeavor of scale becomes too unwieldy for just one man or a group of driven men to undertake. “Normies” must be introduced. There are, as per Samo Burja1 , two ways to go about this: Delegation, and bureaucracy. Delegation is simply giving someone else the ability to act on your power and authority to complete a task. Delegation has the problem of creating a free agent who can possibly compete with you, or disagree with you. Bureaucracies are a means of creating a “human machine”, a mechanism by which you can get orderly and repeated results from certain inputs every single time (theoretically). The question, then, is who staffs the bureaucracies?
Everyone who would be reading this is (or at least should be) aware of the trifunctional hypothesis of Indo-European societies: Warriors, craftsmen, priests, known by their Indian names as Kshatriya, Vaisya, and Brahmin. I will make a second category of Brahmin, “pseudo-Brahmin”, which are made up of people who are not from an Indo-European society but roughly fulfill the same role as Brahmin. Confucian Scholar-Bureaucrats, and Ulema/Rabbis are two examples of Pseudo-Brahmin.
Brahmin are, above all else, very concerned with holding the right opinions. They are usually quite intellectual (that does not mean that they are intelligent!), and tend to be in professions that do not make physical things unless they absolutely have to be. Individuals are marked by level of education, and usually distinguish themselves by some form of hierarchy based on how educated they are. This is distinct from Kshatriya hierarchies, wherein ranking is based on power, authority, and ultimately how much influence you can bring to bear on the world, and from Vaisya hierarchies, which are largely about ownership of capital, harnessing economic factors, and business connections. Brahmin delight in educating others, ensuring proper ritual behavior, learning, and preaching.
There are other, older, works describing modern American Brahmin, and that’s not what this piece is about. No, this is about Desmond The Amazing Cross-Dressing Child Prostitute, and others of his ilk. This piece is about the precursor of the American Eunuch. Here, I answer the question asked earlier: Who staffs the bureaucracies? Brahmin do. The problem with Brahmin, is that they reproduce biologically and intellectually in an organic manner. Brahmin do have their own interests, and they do not necessarily align with the political will of whoever happens to be in power. Today American Brahmin do not breed very much (or really at all), but they could if they wanted to. Remember, these people are the intellectual and biological descendants of men and women who believed in the necessity of having at least ten children in the name of Manifest Destiny, Christianizing the heathen, and eradicating the Indians (in both senses of the word). A Brahmin, when backed up against the wall, WILL engage in behavior that is quite politically incorrect because Brahmin still have some connection to reality and still have some interests outside of those approved by The State. Examples of Brahmin who let their children be mauled in the name of Diversity and don’t care at all are quite rare in truth, which is why they make the headlines when it does happen, as a desperate attempt to cow other Brahmin into Doing The Right Thing (which is to let their children by mauled by Diverse and Multicultural Youthful). Every SWPL is constantly on the lookout for “good schools”; this is just that political incorrectness peaking out. So, what are those in power to do? They can’t trust the Brahmin to do what they’re told, at least not perfectly. Who do they turn to? Eunuchs.
The best example of Eunuchs is those found in Chinese culture. Chinese civilization is based on family units rooted in filial piety: your parents cared for you in infancy, so you care for them in seniority. All of inter-personal relations in China are oriented around this axis. The Chinese Eunuch is castrated (testicles and penis removed in “one stroke”), removing their ability to breed. Thus, the Chinese Eunuch can never truly be connected to anyone, because they cannot make children to take care of them when they are elderly. No one will take them in, because why would you care for and feed some random cockless old guy? The Eunuch must thus live off of charity. In a subsistence level agrarian society, this is a perilous proposition. Thus, only the wealthy can afford to feed and house a Eunuch.
Confucian Scholar-Bureaucrats, Chinese Pseudo-Brahmin, are ideological men, wanting things like “benevolence”, “virtue”, “not murdering-your-brother-so-he-doesn’t-steal-your-throne”, and “fair and just taxation”. They cannot be trusted to do certain things. Eunuchs can, because a Eunuch is entirely loyal to the ruler. So loyal, that they can watch your wife. Or, if you’re wealthy enough for it, wives. The Ottomans would do the same thing, employing a Black Eunuch (Black as in “Sub-Saharan African”) to watch their harems. The Scholar Bureaucrat, a Pseudo-Brahmin, has cares about things other than just what is going on in the head of his patron at any given moment, but a Eunuch’s doesn’t.
The final benefit of Eunuchs is that not only are they reliant on some political power that they can never have for themselves to survive, but they are reliant on that external power to even reproduce. You cannot have Eunuchs without a ruling class. A Eunuch can only be made by being castrated by someone else (you could in theory castrate yourself, but you wouldn’t do that without a patron already lined up, thereby meaning you’ve already gotten external support to make you a Eunuch in the first place), and by being cared for, and thus accepted as a Eunuch thereby completing their transformation, by someone else
All empires, eventually, start using Eunuchs. The most developed tradition of Eunuchs is found in China. Indian states used Eunuchs, as did many Near-Eastern Empires. Persia had a long history of Eunuchs, as did the Ottoman Empire. The first appearance of castration in this manner in the West is that of the Galli in Greek Anatolia, who almost certainly come from some pre-Greek Anatolian tradition, possibly that of the Hittittes, alternatively maybe Semitic in nature. The Galli don’t arouse much interest or literature prior to their movement to Rome, and indeed before their movement to Rome the Galli were actually only a small part of the cult of Cybele. Exactly why these cross-dressing self-castrated (with a broken shard of pottery) beggar-priests were brought to Rome is sort of a mystery. Singular Gallus, a homonym both with the Latin for “person from Gaul” and “chicken”.
Upon a disastrous military defeat, followed by dire portents, in the Second Punic War, the Sibylline Books stated that victory was dependent upon Rome gaining the favor of the Great Mother, interpreted as the goddess Cybele; a transfer of sacred idols from Greek Anatolia followed. One could probably big-brain a theory or two about this being a narrative cover for loans, arms, and men being sent alongside the idols. The Galli never occupied much official importance in Rome, and the Roman state went to great pains to keep Roman men from joining their ranks due to a legal and moral quandary arising from the fact that Roman citizens could not be castrated, nor could a priesthood just be allowed to operate without being run by Roman Citizens. The Galli were, however, quite popular with wealthy women, and Caesar was scandalized by the large amount of money his wife spent on fine dresses to give to the Galli, in addition to a complicated incident leading to Caesar divorcing said wife due to an unrelated third party cross-dressing as a fellow Galli-adoring socialite in an attempt to seduce said wife of Caesar and thereby ruin Caesar’s political career.
It would not be until Diocletian began to import Eastern (Persian) forms of government that eunuchs began to staff the Imperial bureaucracies en masse. While we might assume that a Galli or two found their way in to the personal retinues of important Romans before this, Constantine’s whole “Christianity” thing put an end to the idea of a pagan mother-goddess cult… well, existing, and we have no indication that Diocletian’s regime employed many of these Galli as opposed to eunuchs unrelated to the Galli. Eunuchs were, however, widely used in the newly Christianized Roman Empire. The Byzantine Empire would use them until it’s conquest by the Ottomans, and as mentioned earlier the Ottomans had been using them since its foundation (along with various other, uniquely Ottoman, traditions). Western Europe never had much of a taste for Eunuchs, with Catholic Clergymen and Monks acting as the Western equivalent of the Eunuch. The Clergyman and Monks as a Eunuch is a good example of how the Eunuch-Brahmin relations can be incredibly nuanced, and the two can work in close proximity, even coexisting. It also is a good example of how a Eunuch doesn’t literally have to be castrated, they just have to be utterly loyal and dependent upon some external power source for survival and reproduction.
Eunuchs make good bureaucrats and functionaries because of their stalwart loyalty. A Eunuch cares only about survival, and they will do whatever they need to in order to survive. Brahmins actually believe their own bullshit, Eunuchs don’t. A Eunuch will pivot on a dime so fast your head will spin trying to keep up. If Nancy and Chuckles suddenly said that the Democratic Party was now going to fight to re-legalize slavery and the re-enslavement of Blacks, there would be many SWPLs who would adamantly fight against such a proposition. Every tranny, however, would adamantly defend the Democratic Party’s wise decision. They would also, gladly, shove cisgendered homosexuals back into the closet, or better yet an oven, if asked. A historical example, Julian (of Apostasy fame) had a chief eunuch who had also been chief eunuch for Constantine (of The Great fame), and every emperor of the East in between; this Eunuch would be assassinated in the reign of Julian’s successor for political reasons unrelated to Julian’s Apostasy. A Eunuch, in recap, is 1) Loyal to their source of survival rather than ideals and 2) Incapable of organically reproducing.
Why not use gays? They don’t breed, right? Gays violate the two principles. Gays are, as a group, quite independent, and reproduce entirely organically. The idea of “the gay” needs some ~unpacking~, so let’s start there.
Historically, “gays” did not exist, they are a purely Modern phenomenon. There were merely men who were sexually attracted to other men (in some capacity, I count “lust for little boys” here, but that is a completely separate discussion), men who engaged in sodomy, and men who did neither. Mystics and wise-men report that women can also engage in this sort of thing, but girls are icky and strange and we men are generally flummoxed by their ways. The construction of homosexuality (which is, coincidentally, the title of a terrible book wherein the author argues that Odin was a homosexual Siberian shaman that gained his powers by sucking men off therefore the Crusades were inherently immoral and racist thus marriage must be abolished and in case you were wondering yes, the author is) creates a system wherein there are eight genders, not merely two: Straight men, gay men, bisexual men, asexual men, straight women, gay women, bisexual women, and asexual women. This is where the idea of “56,342 Genders in the LGBTTTPEOAJQKQMBBQJSKFBICIANSAIRS+OEPQ<JKRL” and sexually identifying as an Apache Blackhawk Helicopter come from.
This is, naturally, quite confusing, completely incoherent, and totally divorced from reality. To help fight this, I’ll coin terms here, homoandrophilia and homogynophilia. To be a homoandrophile is nothing different than being a podphile, a scatophile, or a lactophile (people erotically attracted to feet, poop, and human breast milk. respectively). A homoandrophile is simply a man who is sexually attracted to other men, and a homogynophile is simply a woman who is sexually attracted to other women. It’s entirely possible, thus, to be a married individual with twelve children and also be a homoandrophile and to never act on this desire at all, just as it is entirely possible to be a podophile and never suck on toes, or want to eat a piece of cake really badly and never do it.
Reworking it into these terms, homoandrophilia is simply as natural as any other paraphilia. There are “causes”, but you’d pretty much have to be a god in order to understand the mechanisms by which this occurs (there may be some evidence of, say, womb temperature leading to homoandrophilia in male babies, but how can that possibly be measured in a mechanistic way? How much is enough? For how long? What exactly does it change about the fetus? etc). There is some percentage of the population that is born with this trait. Given the capacity, these people will naturally find each other by the very nature of their sexual desires (barring rape, you need a fellow homoandrophile to engage in sodomy together with). Homoandrophiles will, if history is any indication, manage to survive in more or less any environment. The entire globe has ancient attestations of homoandrophilia, so it’s pretty safe to say that while you may be able to repress the “nurture” aspect, you need to take particular care to actually stop the “nature” aspect, and that particular care was simply infeasible up until now (one could argue it still is). We see something similar, “sexual communities”, with any fetish that requires a willing and sexually compatible partner to engage in in real life. There’s a subreddit for hookups for basically any partner-requiring paraphilia imaginable (that is legal to engage in).
This is a form of organic reproduction: every child has an x% chance of being a homoandrophile/homogynophile and these people will naturally congregate for their own pleasures. A (sub)culture forms, with ways of seeking out this x%. All human populations, essentially, have the same percentage chance of a child coming out homoandrophilic/homogynophilic when the gods roll the genetic dice, and there doesn’t appear to be much of a way to stop that from happening. Within our circle, look at Peter Thiel, a man who is at least “dissident listening”. For a more extreme example, look at Ernst Röhm and Edmund Heines, both of whom were “openly” homoandrophiles within the Nazi regime. Homoandrophiles are not dependent upon any higher (human) power for their reproduction, and the fact that at one point gay Nazis and gay Commies were duking it out in the streets over ideologies not at all connected to their sexual pastimes demonstrates that they’re not dependent upon some higher (human) power for their survival. There are homoandrophiles and homogynophiles born to Orthodox Jewish, African tribal, Islamic, Anglo-Saxon atheist, Russian Orthodox, Australian, and Chinese parents, and they form their sexual communities within the confines of each of these larger cultures (to varying degrees of success).
Which leaves us to the tranny. You might say “But wait, autogynophilia is ‘natural’ in the same sense as homoandrophilia!” and you would be right, but, you look at it from the perspective of someone who isn’t a tranny! We must examine the tranny to understand the tranny. There are two types of trannies: Autogynophiliacs and uber-twinks. The latter are just homoandrophiles who take the idea of being a twink to its logical conclusion and try to be particularly girly men with feminine penises. These are roughly 30% of the tranny population and tend to not be associated with transgender causes, we can ignore them. The other 70% are autogynophiliacs: largely heterosexual, these are men who are sexually aroused by being told that they are women, by women. At tranny story time, the Slaaneshi Chaos Demon is popping a stiffy not at the little boys, but at the little girls and the teacher telling him that he is in fact a her.
Trannies hold to a Gnostic sense of self. For those unaware, Gnosticism is a bizarre ancient religious and mystical set of beliefs and traditions formed by the intersection of Platonic philosophy and Judaism (it crops up in Abrahamic religion repeatedly due to the specific philosophical aspects of Abrahamism, but that is beyond this piece). I do not allege that Trannies are part of some ancient tradition, mind you, but merely call attention to the similarities. The key similarity is the rejection of crude matter and the desire to achieve a higher, true self, locked away inside. The Tranny believes that they have within them a “real them”, a true self, a beautiful and pure self. This self is wrapped up in crude, barbaric matter. By cutting away the crude, barbaric matter, they are able to achieve their true self. That is where your idea of the tranny differs from how the tranny sees themselves: To the tranny, the hormone added surgery riddled person IS the real them.
This is why a tranny is a Eunuch. A Tranny is dependent upon a higher power (The Man, The System, USG, The Cathedral, Woke Capital, The Synagagoue, etc) for reproduction, they cannot “just exist”, surgery and hormones are not things that are just plucked off of trees, and access to these things is even more important. China has these things; China does not allow them to be used for the purposes that autogynophiliacs use them, ergo there can be no Trannies in China. Gay Eden is possible; Tranny Eden is not. Likewise, because these can be given, they can be taken away. Ignoring the real or perceived violence a tranny can face (if we weren’t in Clown World, Tranny Story Time would end in blood, in Minecraft), the Tranny is dependent upon The State for continuous hormones, surgery, and simple legal recognition (the right to barge into the women’s bathroom, the right to change your name for purely fetishistic reasons). If these things go away, the Tranny community does too. The Tranny NEEDS the surgery, the Tranny NEEDS the hormones, the Tranny NEEDS the legal recognition, because these things are necessary to keep the crude matter from growing back and scabbing over, hiding their beautiful True Self. The Tranny will do whatever is necessary to secure their own survival, and will adhere to whatever narratives they need to in order to stay alive. Remember, de-transitioning is essentially death as far as these people are concerned.
If the comparison of America to Rome is to be considered apt, the fact that these freaks are allowed to roam free and are given state protection, but aren’t actually put into power, is quite expected. The Galli never made it into significant power, and indeed Roman Eunuch traditions were imported from, or done in comparison to, Persian Eunuch traditions. The question of why the Romans tolerated these weirdos is an apt one. I won’t go into specifics, but every attestation we have about the Galli is by Romans (both Pagan and Christian) who think they’re weird freaks. Borzoi’s essays on humiliation are certainly apt. The Romans loved Magna Mater, the goddess Cybele, mother of kingly Jupiter Optimus Maximus, but at all times sought to separate her from her priesthood (the Galli were largely irrelevant when the cult was centered in Anatolia, with the majority of worship of Cybele not involving them). So why bother with them at all? We cannot be certain. The Romans imported the cult of Cybele to ensure their victory in the Punic Wars and viewed her as a patriotic Mother (of The State) Goddess, perhaps the idea of kicking her weird cult to the curb was something everyone wanted to do, but just couldn’t create a narrative to justify?
My theory, and I am merely a humble autist so feel free to disagree, was that the importation of the Galli was a large-scale attempt at Rome pushing the boundaries of its theological tolerance; a religious digestion the likes of which Rome had never seen before. The Galli may have been brought over as a simple requirement of importing Magna Mater, they may have been re-purposed by Patricians as a means of crude humiliation, but to what ends did it lead? An act of cultural shock sent down by the Patricians of the Republican period in order to justify something.
The Romans were an eminently pragmatic people, and were always on the lookout for new signs from the divine. The unlimited polytheism of Roman religion meant that many deities could be brought together; after all, given that Cybele is real (and why would she not be?) you’d have to be an idiot to not want her on your side. Oh, but her wacky priests! Rome set about to create a framework wherein the Galli could be digested into the broader Roman milieu; to change the system such that it could further the broader Roman ideological goals. At this time, “Rome” was still highly fractured along ethnic lines, with various Italian groups being a few bad days away from open violence. The Galli, then, are a means to shock the various disparate groups lorded over by Rome into a coherent “Roman people”; a means of a state digesting acquired human capital. Men who wish to rule the world must be ready to tolerate anything, and a state that wishes to rule the world must possess unlimited tolerance. This was not consciously set-about by the Patricians in some broad view, but rather was a series of small steps taken. If Rome wanted to rule the world, it had to defeat Carthage, which meant it had to tolerate the Galli. Previously, if Rome had wanted to rule the world, it would have to tolerate the rest of Italy, which meant it had to tolerate other Italians. Later, if Rome wanted to rule the world, it would have to tolerate the Near East.
The complicated legal frameworks involving the castration of a Roman citizen were done away with when Claudius created the position of Archigallus via Imperial fiat; the Emperor was the ultimate symbol of unlimited tolerance, as the Emperor ruled over the entire world. The Emperor was divine. The Emperor’s ability to overturn Roman culture and law was the ultimate goal of this ideology. Much then as now, the Empire claimed to “belong” to a people it ruled over, but in truth did not.
So why does Globohomo care so much about trannies? Humiliation is one answer, but I think there’s more to it than that. The Types that fill the horrid halls of Globohomo’s center’s of power are not just scheming madmen focused on humiliating redstate Americans because they hate Jesus and Freedom, after all. Like the Roman state, Globohomo too seeks unlimited tolerance, for similar reasons (economic dominance). The Trannies themselves are largely secondary to their usage as a tool: society will be changed, remade even, into one wherein the Tranny can live freely. This is not done for the Tranny’s sake, but rather because out of all of the various societies that Globohomo could rule over, Globohomo found the one best suited to its aims and desires, and that happened to be the one that could be achieved via supporting Trannies. It could just as well, had fate played out another way, been Furries, or foot-fetishists, or some other group that would best bring about this perfect(ly shitty) world.
If we are to further use this model of comparing the US and Rome then it stands to reason that we can predict that the Trannies will never hold any degree of actual power, they’ll merely be used as a cudgel for Globohomo. I think that’s an apt prediction, after all can you really see Chuckles and Nancy standing arm in arm with some hon, let alone one who has an actual say in how things are run? Lindsey Graham jokes aside, I can’t see it. If Spengler is right, after the Second Religiousness, a rise in a new religion that will both wipe away the degeneracy of the old world and perfect the ideology behind it, we can presumably expect to see some new form of Eunuch arise. If the US is Rome then China is the USA’s Persia, thus this new Eunuch will be cribbed from China. What will this strange new beast look like? I haven’t a clue. I don’t know enough about the inner workings of China to say what precisely the “Modern Eunuch” of the CCP is. If I had to guess, it’d probably be a deeply dedicated party functionary who lives, breathes, and eats The Party. If we’re using a 1:1 mapping of China:Persia, the CCP is thus the Parthians and not the Sassanids, so it’s probably something related to “high culture” that the barbaric CCP doesn’t really focus on. I can’t see growth obsessed Xi Jinping bumping elbows with a bunch of literal eunuchs, after all. But then, the mutilation angle itself is really secondary to the broader caste of Eunuchs as a whole. The Christianized Roman Empire’s halls of power were constantly locked in a power struggle over which Eunuch faction would staff the bureaucracies, the Church’s Monks or the Emperor’s (literal) eunuchs.
If I had to spit out a prediction just to end this piece, and I am well aware of the perils of comparing the US to Rome and China to Persia so take it with a grain of salt, I’d say that instead of a man trying to become a woman, it’d be something akin to the Mentats of Frank Herbert’s Dune: the perfect bureaucrat, created through biological engineering. Twenty-five pills, every morning, for that big brain high IQ paper filing. So high on nootropics and ideology they physically cannot achieve sexual arousal except through consumption of propaganda.
2. https://quillette.com/2019/11/06/what-is-autogynephilia-an-interview-with-dr-ray-blanchard/ yes, Quillette is hardly a reliable academic paper, but this information is suppressed for being WrongThink by most journals, and the article mentions Dr. Ray Blanchard, the man who created the “autogynophile vs uber-twink” paradigm, and he cites the figures I mention.