SNL sketch about castrati destroys so-called ‘gender-affirming care’

 Saturday Night Live has never struck me as particularly funny, despite the very talented people who have appeared on it over the years. However, occasionally, it has sketches that hit the ball out of the park. Those sketches usually occur when SNL stops being reflexively leftist and actually does something subverting its own values. This past weekend, someone at SNL came up with a sketch that, wittingly or not, completely savages the so-called “transgender” movement. After watching this, no leftist should ever be able to defend what Democrats want to do to children (or adults, for that matter).

What may still be the greatest transgressive sketch SNL ever did was its 1986 skit imagining Reagan as a mastermind:

The point SNL was trying to make was that even thinking that Reagan was smart was a joke. However, history proved that the joke was on SNL. Reagan was a singularly wise president who, while he had his failings (e.g., Iran-Contra), still belongs in the American pantheon.

In November 2016, when Trump won, SNL attacked the insularity of Democrats who were unable to imagine that Hillary might lose. Were it not for the reflexive “black victimhood” moments that Chris Rock and Dave Chappell injected into the sketch, as opposed to the rather amusing riffs from the white actors blaming racism on Trump’s victory, it would have been perfect:

     

In March 2017, SNL came up with one of my favorite sketches, which saw Max, the talking dog, trying to explain why Trump won:

Perhaps because the sketch was so successful, SNL had Max back in December 2019. Ironically, the dog was right again, and his prediction of a Trump blowout was foiled only because Democrats weaponized COVID and George Floyd’s drug-related death:

What distinguishes the above sketches, aside from being funny and intelligent, is that they’re overtly political. This past Saturday, however, SNL did a sketch that is not overtly political. Nevertheless, watching the sketch, the only way to understand it is to believe that the people behind it were attacking the whole concept of transgenderism, especially when it comes to physically mutilating children.

Here’s how NBC describes the sketch:

... in the night’s “Castrati” sketch, [guest host Ariana Grande] took it up high with a falsetto — and wore a bowl-cut wig — playing a boy who's victim of an unfortunately real practice dating back to the 16th century.

The sketch co-stars SNL alums Maya Rudolph and Andy Samberg as the boy's parents, two Italians attempting to convince their prince that the inhumane practice they've subjected the boy to is actually fine (the shellshocked expression on Grande's character's face reveals otherwise).

Surely those involved in creating and acting out that sketch thought to themselves, “Why was castrating a boy then an ‘inhumane practice’, but it’s not an inhumane practice today? For that matter, why isn’t it inhumane to cut off girls’ breasts?”

Or maybe I’m giving all of them too much credit. Maybe they really are so stupid that they think it’s funny to laugh at the practice of castrating boys in the 15th century, but fine to do it in the 21st. After all, that kind of overarching, supercilious, mindless stupidity would explain why today’s Democrats embrace all the destructive policies that they have foisted on America—everything from open borders to climate change madness to fomenting racism, just to name a few—and that they hope to escalate in the coming years.

(Oh, and to be pedantic, Grande is not sporting a “bowl cut” wig. That’s a pageboy wig. This is what a bowl cut looks like.)

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/10/a_saturday_night_live_sketch_about_castrati_destroys_so_called_gender_affirming_care.html