X-Git-Url: http://unremediatedgender.space/source?p=Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git;a=blobdiff_plain;f=notes%2Fnotes.txt;h=15759ec959196f1f05669fe11c7912f36d7ebac7;hp=653be34814fc4786675e67715d574bf673a070ba;hb=f42d9732b3cbde16cd81eee3fd6550ceca0d4e2b;hpb=ae72674b30c8ac6c3a388f25dd47419d19bb3710

diff --git a/notes/notes.txt b/notes/notes.txt
index 653be34..15759ec 100644
--- a/notes/notes.txt
+++ b/notes/notes.txt
@@ -1747,6 +1747,15 @@ You're always going to be dominated by _someone's_ memeplex. The question is, if
 
 ----
 
+https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/comments/dy7241/peak_trans_x_tell_your_story_here/fmg5eps/
+
 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16488877
 > independent of the masculinizing effects of gonadal secretions, XY and XX brain cells have different patterns of gene expression that influence their differentiation and function
 
+Don't speak truth to power. Speak truth against your incentive gradient. I mean, _try_ to do that. You can't _literally_ do that, because you're _always_ following your incentive gradient, by definition. Speak truth against your _current model_ of your incentive gradient.
+
+----
+
+Theorem: when you strike at a king, you must kill him. (Credit assignment: Ralph Waldo Emerson.)
+
+My restatement (yours may be different, but still): when you strike at the God-Empress—well, striking at the God-Empress wouldn't work. But when you strike at one of the God-Empress's minions, you have to either kill him or provide sufficiently strong evidence that you could kill him if you wanted.