When Bruce met Caitlyn and vice versa

CaitlynJennerMr/Miss/Other Jenner is making my head spin, and I haven’t had a drop to drink since last night. Having first turned Bruce into Caitlyn, he/she now wants to turn Caitlyn back into Bruce, thereby restoring the status quo ante.

Since modern democracy cum consumer-oriented free market is all about freedom of choice, one has to commend Bruce/Caitlyn for upholding this uniquely important tenet of Western modernity. He/she is also striking a telling blow for progress, especially in the areas of medical science and surgical techniques.

Surgeons specialising in such procedures and their patients do what they do for the same reason a dog licks a certain part of its anatomy: they do it because they can. Anything modern science can do must be done, and if you don’t believe this you’re a hopeless reactionary unfit to live in our brave new world. Why, before long you’ll start objecting to human cloning.

Being one of those sticks-in-the-mud myself, the question I’m always likely to ask first isn’t ‘How?’ but ‘Why?’. Hence what fascinates me about Bruce/Caitlyn’s current volte-face is the reason for it.

You see, having become Caitlyn, he/she lost some bits and pieces but retained a most Bruce-like roving eye for women. One would think that a person progressive enough to have a vagina inserted where his penis used to be, wouldn’t see that as a problem. Our society being as progressive as he is, it won’t just turn a blind eye on a bit of lesbian hanky-panky but will positively encourage it.

Homosexuality, after all, has long since left the confinement of sex to enter the broad arena of liberal politics. Having started out as a mortal sin, it first became a tolerable eccentricity and then a sort of cross between sexual democracy and homosocialism.

Such is the vector of our secular world, but Caitlyn, née Bruce, has a problem with it. He/she wants no part of our secular world because he/she is a pious Christian. Hence, for old times’ sake, Caitlyn/Bruce won’t consummate his/her urges in the way first popularised on the charming Greek island of Lesbos. Such an act would go against Bruce/Caitlyn’s religious beliefs, specifically those prescribed by Leviticus and Romans.

Far be it from me to criticise any demonstration of Christian faith, wherein the commitment to living a Christian life plays a key role. One might suggest that Bruce/Caitlyn draws the line in some funny (and unmentionable) places, but he/she would win the theological argument hands down – and please, no more double entendres.

When all is said and done, while both Testaments take issue with homosexuality, there exists not a single scriptural injunction against round-trip transsex operations. Neither the scribes who put the scripture down on parchment nor indeed God who inspired it possessed enough foresight to envision such a possibility. They simply weren’t progressive enough by the standards of our scientifically advanced society.

In fact, our society is so advanced that I’m sure a medical solution to Caitlyn/Bruce’s problem can be found. Why not reattach Bruce’s bits without removing Caitlyn’s ones?

In that way Caitlyn/Bruce could add a whole new meaning to the notions of bisexuality, swinging both ways and autoeroticism. The latter would be a doddle for a former world-class athlete who must have retained some of his/her erstwhile flexibility. And, by way of culmination, he/she could then marry each other.

He/she would thus be able to practise his/her peculiar take on some aspects of Judaeo-Christian sexual morality, while ignoring numerous Biblical proscriptions against fornication. It does stand to reason that hermaphroditic sexuality should conform to hermaphroditic theology uniting the old and the new into one ungodly mess.

Old Bruce/Caitlyn could also open up a whole new world of entrepreneurial opportunities by pitching his Double Your Pleasure tent at county fairs, next to those housing a bearded woman and a man with breasts. I’d pay good money to go in, wouldn’t you?

One matter that still remains unresolved is lavatorial rectitude, as mandated by America’s laudably progressive president Barak Hussein. O’Bummer, as he likes to be called by his friends of whom I’m one, says transsexual pupils should be allowed to use those lavatories that befit their current, as opposed to original, sex.

Since within a year or two the same philosophy will be applied in all public buildings, Bruce/Caitlyn will be able to reaffirm our sacrosanct freedom of choice by opting for either facility, depending on how he/she feels today. That’s what consumer society is all about, although those of us whose choice in this matter is limited may feel slight discomfort at this particular manifestation of consumerism.

That Mr/Miss/Other Jenner is a deeply disturbed individual in need of aggressive psychiatric treatment goes without saying. What’s perhaps worth saying is that exactly the same thing can be said about a society that actively promotes such freakish sideshows.

Have we all gone mad? Don’t answer this one.









2 thoughts on “When Bruce met Caitlyn and vice versa”

  1. The Jenner phenomenon is by no means novel, Alex. Back in the early 1960s when acts of gross indeceny were still proscribed by law I once arrested a man who regularly hustled on the streets of Mayfair dressed as a woman, wearing a blonde female Irish jig. In his off-duly hours he dressed as a man. He lived with a suteneur who, during the period of surveillance, on one occasion ‘entertained’ another cross-dresser, a man with boobs as big as Sabrina’s (remember her?) in the bedchamber he cohabited with the hooker – while the latter was ‘on duty’ in Shepherd’s market. Unfortunately for the Ponce and his bit of spare, business wasn’t too brisk that night Up West, so the hooker returned home early, only to find his partner in flagrante delicto, whereupon the hooker detached a section of aluminium pipe from their vacuum cleaner and chased the stark-bollock-naked interloper into the streets of Hammersmith, shouting words that I dare not repeat on a respectable blog such as yours. It looked for a moment that the contemplated charges of gross indecency could well have been upped to GBH but, as we were under cover, we allowed the scenario to develop. Luckily for the interloper (who by the way not only had tits like Sabrina, but also sported a dick that would have graced a thoroughbred stallion) was fleeter of foot than the irate hooker and managed to flee the locality without being buggered by Hoover. which in an even earlier era in America was not an unusual occurrence, I understand, but that may well have been just scurrilous tittle-tattle.

    Anyway, the upshot was that when we eventually busted the ‘case’ while the hooker was engaged with a client, who was astride the hooker in the modified crucified position, the officer in charge of the raid deftly removed the hooker’s blonde wig to reveal cropped black hair beneath. The punter, apparently horrified, yelled, “My God! She’s a man!” Further summary examination revealed that the hooker had skillfully tucked his three-piece suite under his girdle and had arranged his scrotum in a convincingly vaginal looking tuck. Obtaining money under false pretences was added to the rap sheet.

    The culmination of this story was a long spell in the (male) slammer for the hooker who, while serving , attended Archie McKindoe’s clinic in Surrey, had the chop – and one of Archie’s protégés moulded the hapless hooker a vinyl vagina to enable him/her either to Carry on Up The Khyber, or in the missionary position according to his/her clients’ preferences.

    I heard some time later that she/he too had (like Bruce/Caitlyn) became an ardent lesbian. Seems some folks just enjoy being different….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.