Feena van

Incels are so very weird.

The fact that it's the fastest selling entry due in part to Capcom openly consulting women for Leon's design must have them so assblasted...

I just crack up at the idea of incels trying to retroactively claim Resident Evil as a "Boys Only" franchise when that shit has been Brendan Fraser Mummy Bisexual from the jump...

Seriously, the biggest shooters for RE in my life have always been women...
#FizzVsGaming

Nobody gives a damn what incels want.

It's the year of our lord 2026. Porn is online in every shape and form but you can't tug one out unless a game character jiggles.

We don't care what you want.
You suck at the game anyway.

BTW: Epstein helped start Gamergate. Chuds.

Every time I write a critique of the New York Time's coverage of transgender people, people always tell me, "submit a letter to the editor."

I have, multiple times.

I don't think people understand how averse the NYT is to publishing a trans person.

It's almost frustrating that people ask me to.

I like when you do your incel voice. That makes me laugh.

The Republican party hates democracy.

This man ordered the murder of over 100 little girls in iran and yet they want to us believe they care about "protecting children" it's bullshit all the way down.

PLEASE HELP IF YOU CAN.

💕 💸
#HelpSky
#MutualAid #HelpFolksLive

25$ to go still ! Please help 🙏🏻

#mutualaid #mav #disabled #helpfolkslive2026 #helpsky #fundsky #MAboost #queer #crowdfund #kofi
#mutualaidmonday

Help dialysis 🙏

#MutualAid
#Emergency
#HelpSky
Emergency🚨🚨 My life is in danger 😭 I don't have the money to pay for my lifelong dialysis treatment; I'm $700 short. I'm disabled. I'm afraid my kidneys will fail 😭 Please help me survive with whatever you can 🙏 I need urgent help.

paypal.me/karellvallejo

Finally some good news for once.

House Kurita in battletech are so cool they are based on shogunate era japan. So of course Their mecha are designed to look like samurai.

Finally some good news for once.

It's a case study in dreadful humans who use fraudulent research to support their dreadfulness.

This whole thing is a case study in dreadful research practice. It’s started with a pervasive methodological failure in meta analysis of an extensive existing research literature. Through to a truly shockingly unethical design of the purported programme to fill the gaps that were never there

And this is the anti-trans logic loop:

1. demand evidence

2. design reviews that cannot find evidence

3. cite absence of evidence as justification for withdrawing care

4. use withdrawal of care to prevent generation of new evidence.

It's what the Reagan administration did to trans folks.

The first is a statement about a search strategy. The second is a clinical conclusion. The reviews conflate them. The policy initiating the ban depends on the conflation.

So what did the reviews actually find? "Very low certainty evidence" across all outcomes in all reviews. "No evidence was identified" 250 times across the combined document.

But "no evidence meeting these extremely specific criteria" is not the same claim as "no evidence these treatments work."

They excluded Baker et al 2021 (systematic review), Chew et al 2018 (systematic review, Pediatrics), Miroshnychenko et al 2025 (systematic review, Archives of Disease in Childhood). Systematic reviews were excluded because they examined hormones as they are actually prescribed.

They excluded Butler et al 2022, data from NHS England's own paediatric endocrine clinics. 1,089 patients over 13 years. Excluded because GnRH analogues were used for puberty suppression.

They excluded Taylor et al 2024, a systematic review that was part of the Cass Review.

They excluded Lavender et al 2023, a UK study, from the Tavistock's own Gender Identity Development Service. The closest thing to directly relevant NHS evidence. Excluded because GnRH analogues were used for puberty suppression. NHS England excluded its own clinical data.

Olson-Kennedy et al 2025, 24-month follow-up, longitudinal, from the same NIH cohort. Excluded. Same reason.
The 3 largest, best-funded prospective studies in the field. All excluded. All because they studied trans youth as a cohort rather than disaggregating by exact hormone regimen.

They excluded Tordoff et al 2022, published in JAMA. Prospective cohort finding 60% lower odds of depression and 73% lower odds of suicidality. Excluded for the same reason: mixed transfeminine and transmasculine cohort.

It gets worse. They excluded Chen et al 2023, published in the New England Journal of Medicine. The largest NIH-funded prospective study of trans youth (n=315). Found that depression and anxiety decreased over two years of hormone therapy. The NEJM study is invisible to all ten reviews.

Boogers et al 2022: "GnRH analogues used in the context of puberty suppression. Intervention out-of-scope."

Klaver et al 2020: "GnRH analogues used in the context of puberty suppression. Intervention out-of-scope."

Schagen et al 2020: Same.
Klink et al 2015: Same.
Hannema et al 2017: Same.

The monotherapy reviews excluded Dutch Protocol studies because participants received GnRH analogues for puberty suppression before hormones.

The combination-therapy reviews also excluded them, because GnRH analogues were initiated for puberty suppression rather than concurrently with hormones.