>A transgender woman was arrested at the Florida State Capitol last month after she used a bathroom there to protest a state law that blocks transgender people from using a rest room that aligns with their gender identity. >The transgender woman, Marcy Rheintgen, 20, said on Sunday that she had intentionally broken the law. Civil rights experts said that this was the first known case of someone being arrested for challenging a law that bans transgender people from using bathrooms in government buildings that do not align with their gender at birth. >Ms. Rheintgen said she had been feeling emotional about what she described as dehumanizing language used by elected officials to talk about transgender people when the idea came to her: “What if I just broke the law because the law is so stupid?” >Ms. Rheintgen said that she sent 160 letters to state representatives, the attorney general and governor to tell them when she would use the bathroom and asked that she not be arrested. >She arrived at the bathroom on the second floor of the House office building of the Capitol in Tallahassee on March 19. >Two police officers spoke to Ms. Rheintgen outside the bathroom and told her that she would be given a trespass warning if she entered, according to an arrest report from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. >The police had seen a copy of Ms. Rheintgen’s letter, said the report, which used male pronouns to refer to her. >According to the report, Ms. Rheintgen told the officers, “I am here to break the law,” and entered the bathroom. She said in an interview with The New York Times that she spent probably 30 seconds to a minute inside. >“I was originally intending to pray the rosary, but I didn’t have enough time,” she said. “I was just washing my hands, and they told me to leave.” >An officer followed inside and said that Ms. Rheintgen would be subject to arrest if she did not leave, and Ms. Rheintgen said, “OK,” according to the report. >She said she spent about 24 hours in jail. If convicted, she faces up to 60 days in jail and a $500 fine. Her arraignment is scheduled for May, according to court records. >The Florida Department of Law Enforcement said in an email on Monday that Ms. Rheintgen was arrested for “trespass on property after warning,” not specifically for violating the state’s bathroom law, the “Safety in Private Spaces Act.” >Ms. Rheintgen is from Illinois but she said she visits Florida every year to see family and was on such a trip when she engaged in her protest. She said that she did not see herself as an activist before, but she felt like she had to be one now. >In her letter to Florida representatives, she included a photo of herself because, without it, she did not think officials would be able to tell that she was the person breaking the law. >“I know that you know in your heart that transgender people are human too, and that you can’t arrest us away,” Ms. Rheintgen wrote.
Trans Rosa Parks :
Anonymous :
21 days ago :
No.3897
>>3898
>>3897 (OP)
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/07/us/politics/trans-student-arrest-bathroom-law-florida.html
>>3917>>3897 (OP)
Is op pic her?
>>3897 (OP)
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/07/us/politics/trans-student-arrest-bathroom-law-florida.html
Anonymous :
21 days ago :
No.3899
>>3900
>>3899
>she just used the women's restroom without making a scene about it, then she wouldn't have been arrested.
Do you really not see that is the point of the letters? She wants to be trans Rosa Parks. If you think this is crazy, go read about how Plessy V Ferguson was setup.
>>3904>>3899
You don't have to kneel to do the Rosary or the Ave Maria for that matter, otherwise prayer would be impossible when on a train, at work, etc. There's an old line about this, often attributed to the Jesuits:
>“Can I smoke while praying?” “Of course not, that would be inappropriate.”
>"Can I pray while smoking?" “Of course you can, why not?”
It's a bit of a self-conscious convert behaviour, of course, to head somewhere to pray the rosary. Most Catholics don't have rosary beads on them (would be better if that was the case, though). I think her (?) intention is to draw moderate Republicans to the trans side, and implicitly to set up a distinction between decent, normal trans like her ('hey--I'm even a Catholic, like you!) and weird ones like, for instance, Dylan Mulvaney. On the other hand, she doesn't seem particularly well-organised, and the letter spree sounds like it was a bit spur of the moment.
>>3900
And also 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, the facts of which were completely fabricated to set up a case for the court to rule on. However, I can't see how a court, even an activist-minded one, could decide there is some constitutional provision which mandates transsexuals be allowed to use the bathroom of their identified sex. Equal protection has never been held to outlaw single-sex toilets, locker rooms, etc.
She manifestly expressed her intention to violate the law before she did so, so it sounds like she got what she wanted. It seems to me that if "Ms." Rheintgen really was a woman, and she just used the women's restroom without making a scene about it, then she wouldn't have been arrested.
Also, she said she intended to "pray the rosary" while she was in the bathroom. How does she think other women or girls who might have wanted to use the ladies' restroom at that time would have felt to share it with someone, who is in their eyes a man, kneeling (?) on the floor and saying Hail Marys while they are trying to urinate?
Anonymous :
21 days ago :
No.3900
>>3904
>>3899
You don't have to kneel to do the Rosary or the Ave Maria for that matter, otherwise prayer would be impossible when on a train, at work, etc. There's an old line about this, often attributed to the Jesuits:
>“Can I smoke while praying?” “Of course not, that would be inappropriate.”
>"Can I pray while smoking?" “Of course you can, why not?”
It's a bit of a self-conscious convert behaviour, of course, to head somewhere to pray the rosary. Most Catholics don't have rosary beads on them (would be better if that was the case, though). I think her (?) intention is to draw moderate Republicans to the trans side, and implicitly to set up a distinction between decent, normal trans like her ('hey--I'm even a Catholic, like you!) and weird ones like, for instance, Dylan Mulvaney. On the other hand, she doesn't seem particularly well-organised, and the letter spree sounds like it was a bit spur of the moment.
>>3900
And also 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, the facts of which were completely fabricated to set up a case for the court to rule on. However, I can't see how a court, even an activist-minded one, could decide there is some constitutional provision which mandates transsexuals be allowed to use the bathroom of their identified sex. Equal protection has never been held to outlaw single-sex toilets, locker rooms, etc.
>>3899
She manifestly expressed her intention to violate the law before she did so, so it sounds like she got what she wanted. It seems to me that if "Ms." Rheintgen really was a woman, and she just used the women's restroom without making a scene about it, then she wouldn't have been arrested.
Also, she said she intended to "pray the rosary" while she was in the bathroom. How does she think other women or girls who might have wanted to use the ladies' restroom at that time would have felt to share it with someone, who is in their eyes a man, kneeling (?) on the floor and saying Hail Marys while they are trying to urinate?
>she just used the women's restroom without making a scene about it, then she wouldn't have been arrested.
Do you really not see that is the point of the letters? She wants to be trans Rosa Parks. If you think this is crazy, go read about how Plessy V Ferguson was setup.
Anonymous :
21 days ago :
No.3904
>>3905
>>3904
Should have mentioned that, in connection with
>I think her (?) intention is to draw moderate Republicans to the trans side, and implicitly to set up a distinction between decent, normal trans like her ('hey--I'm even a Catholic, like you!) and weird ones
the fact that s/he looks rather feminine is useful. Wouldn't work with the ones who look like linebackers.
>>3909>>3904
> However, I can't see how a court, even an activist-minded one, could decide there is some constitutional provision which mandates transsexuals be allowed to use the bathroom of their identified sex.
Well the mind of a trans woman it's probably that the law is barring certain women from the women's restroom, but regardless I'm not convinced getting the law overturned is even the goal. I think it may be an imitation of a 3rd grade understanding of civil rights activism; the kneeling and praying would have been because it's act of martyrdom.
>>3899
She manifestly expressed her intention to violate the law before she did so, so it sounds like she got what she wanted. It seems to me that if "Ms." Rheintgen really was a woman, and she just used the women's restroom without making a scene about it, then she wouldn't have been arrested.
Also, she said she intended to "pray the rosary" while she was in the bathroom. How does she think other women or girls who might have wanted to use the ladies' restroom at that time would have felt to share it with someone, who is in their eyes a man, kneeling (?) on the floor and saying Hail Marys while they are trying to urinate?
You don't have to kneel to do the Rosary or the Ave Maria for that matter, otherwise prayer would be impossible when on a train, at work, etc. There's an old line about this, often attributed to the Jesuits:
>“Can I smoke while praying?” “Of course not, that would be inappropriate.”
>"Can I pray while smoking?" “Of course you can, why not?”
It's a bit of a self-conscious convert behaviour, of course, to head somewhere to pray the rosary. Most Catholics don't have rosary beads on them (would be better if that was the case, though). I think her (?) intention is to draw moderate Republicans to the trans side, and implicitly to set up a distinction between decent, normal trans like her ('hey--I'm even a Catholic, like you!) and weird ones like, for instance, Dylan Mulvaney. On the other hand, she doesn't seem particularly well-organised, and the letter spree sounds like it was a bit spur of the moment.
>>3900>>3899
>she just used the women's restroom without making a scene about it, then she wouldn't have been arrested.
Do you really not see that is the point of the letters? She wants to be trans Rosa Parks. If you think this is crazy, go read about how Plessy V Ferguson was setup.
And also 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, the facts of which were completely fabricated to set up a case for the court to rule on. However, I can't see how a court, even an activist-minded one, could decide there is some constitutional provision which mandates transsexuals be allowed to use the bathroom of their identified sex. Equal protection has never been held to outlaw single-sex toilets, locker rooms, etc.
Anonymous :
21 days ago :
No.3905
>>3910
>>3905
> the fact that s/he looks rather feminine is useful
rats one fluffy tail away from acceptance applies very well to trans women
>>3904
>>3899
You don't have to kneel to do the Rosary or the Ave Maria for that matter, otherwise prayer would be impossible when on a train, at work, etc. There's an old line about this, often attributed to the Jesuits:
>“Can I smoke while praying?” “Of course not, that would be inappropriate.”
>"Can I pray while smoking?" “Of course you can, why not?”
It's a bit of a self-conscious convert behaviour, of course, to head somewhere to pray the rosary. Most Catholics don't have rosary beads on them (would be better if that was the case, though). I think her (?) intention is to draw moderate Republicans to the trans side, and implicitly to set up a distinction between decent, normal trans like her ('hey--I'm even a Catholic, like you!) and weird ones like, for instance, Dylan Mulvaney. On the other hand, she doesn't seem particularly well-organised, and the letter spree sounds like it was a bit spur of the moment.
>>3900
And also 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, the facts of which were completely fabricated to set up a case for the court to rule on. However, I can't see how a court, even an activist-minded one, could decide there is some constitutional provision which mandates transsexuals be allowed to use the bathroom of their identified sex. Equal protection has never been held to outlaw single-sex toilets, locker rooms, etc.
Should have mentioned that, in connection with
>I think her (?) intention is to draw moderate Republicans to the trans side, and implicitly to set up a distinction between decent, normal trans like her ('hey--I'm even a Catholic, like you!) and weird ones
the fact that s/he looks rather feminine is useful. Wouldn't work with the ones who look like linebackers.
Anonymous :
21 days ago :
No.3909
>>3912
>>3909
https://apnews.com/article/florida-transgender-bathroom-arrest-be735cfe5eafa7f510692cfb3c58269e
>Rheintgen was in town visiting her grandparents when she decided to pen a letter to each of Florida’s 160 state lawmakers informing them of her plan to enter a public restroom inconsistent with her sex assigned at birth. The Illinois resident said her act of civil disobedience was fueled by anger at seeing a place she loves and visits regularly grow hostile toward trans people.
>“I know that you know in your heart that this law is wrong and unjust,” she wrote in her letter to lawmakers. “I know that you know in your heart that transgender people are human too, and that you can’t arrest us away. I know that you know that I have dignity. That’s why I know that you won’t arrest me.”
>“People are telling me it’s a legal test, like this is the first case that’s being brought,” she said. “It’s how they test the law. But I didn’t do this to test the law. I did it because I was upset. I can’t have any expectations for what’s going to happen because this has never been prosecuted before. I’m horrified and scared.”
I think, based on all the religion talk, s/he was suffused with a sort of universal-love brotherhood-of-man mania that some Christians develop (hence 'Christian socialism') and had the honest expectation that her 'stand' would lead to the end of 'oppression', and so on. There is a martyr-like aspect about it which is disarming, and slightly disconcerting too. Hard to know how the media will play it.
>>3904
>>3899
You don't have to kneel to do the Rosary or the Ave Maria for that matter, otherwise prayer would be impossible when on a train, at work, etc. There's an old line about this, often attributed to the Jesuits:
>“Can I smoke while praying?” “Of course not, that would be inappropriate.”
>"Can I pray while smoking?" “Of course you can, why not?”
It's a bit of a self-conscious convert behaviour, of course, to head somewhere to pray the rosary. Most Catholics don't have rosary beads on them (would be better if that was the case, though). I think her (?) intention is to draw moderate Republicans to the trans side, and implicitly to set up a distinction between decent, normal trans like her ('hey--I'm even a Catholic, like you!) and weird ones like, for instance, Dylan Mulvaney. On the other hand, she doesn't seem particularly well-organised, and the letter spree sounds like it was a bit spur of the moment.
>>3900
And also 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, the facts of which were completely fabricated to set up a case for the court to rule on. However, I can't see how a court, even an activist-minded one, could decide there is some constitutional provision which mandates transsexuals be allowed to use the bathroom of their identified sex. Equal protection has never been held to outlaw single-sex toilets, locker rooms, etc.
> However, I can't see how a court, even an activist-minded one, could decide there is some constitutional provision which mandates transsexuals be allowed to use the bathroom of their identified sex.
Well the mind of a trans woman it's probably that the law is barring certain women from the women's restroom, but regardless I'm not convinced getting the law overturned is even the goal. I think it may be an imitation of a 3rd grade understanding of civil rights activism; the kneeling and praying would have been because it's act of martyrdom.
Anonymous :
21 days ago :
No.3910
>>3916
>>3910
If most trans women looked like picrel, Valentina Sampaio, a model for Vogue, there'd be no controversy......
>>3905
>>3904
Should have mentioned that, in connection with
>I think her (?) intention is to draw moderate Republicans to the trans side, and implicitly to set up a distinction between decent, normal trans like her ('hey--I'm even a Catholic, like you!) and weird ones
the fact that s/he looks rather feminine is useful. Wouldn't work with the ones who look like linebackers.
> the fact that s/he looks rather feminine is useful
rats one fluffy tail away from acceptance applies very well to trans women
Anonymous :
21 days ago :
No.3912
>>3913
>>3912
Also, I personally feel sorry for her and view her as deluded rather than bad.
>>4408>>4404
She's based, kind of like the anti-Brianna Wu. She is a mixture of very knowing and somewhat naive, which I think, as >>3912 said, is disarming
>>4406
I think it's more a case of excessive religion on the mind than either of those things. She seems rather of the Simone Weil sort (yes: on the histrionic side) and believed she would convince Floridians with the power of 'love'
There was a photograph of her letter to Florida politicians which I can't find now but it went on about Jesus Christ and how we need to love one another
>>3909
>>3904
> However, I can't see how a court, even an activist-minded one, could decide there is some constitutional provision which mandates transsexuals be allowed to use the bathroom of their identified sex.
Well the mind of a trans woman it's probably that the law is barring certain women from the women's restroom, but regardless I'm not convinced getting the law overturned is even the goal. I think it may be an imitation of a 3rd grade understanding of civil rights activism; the kneeling and praying would have been because it's act of martyrdom.
https://apnews.com/article/florida-transgender-bathroom-arrest-be735cfe5eafa7f510692cfb3c58269e
>Rheintgen was in town visiting her grandparents when she decided to pen a letter to each of Florida’s 160 state lawmakers informing them of her plan to enter a public restroom inconsistent with her sex assigned at birth. The Illinois resident said her act of civil disobedience was fueled by anger at seeing a place she loves and visits regularly grow hostile toward trans people.
>“I know that you know in your heart that this law is wrong and unjust,” she wrote in her letter to lawmakers. “I know that you know in your heart that transgender people are human too, and that you can’t arrest us away. I know that you know that I have dignity. That’s why I know that you won’t arrest me.”
>“People are telling me it’s a legal test, like this is the first case that’s being brought,” she said. “It’s how they test the law. But I didn’t do this to test the law. I did it because I was upset. I can’t have any expectations for what’s going to happen because this has never been prosecuted before. I’m horrified and scared.”
I think, based on all the religion talk, s/he was suffused with a sort of universal-love brotherhood-of-man mania that some Christians develop (hence 'Christian socialism') and had the honest expectation that her 'stand' would lead to the end of 'oppression', and so on. There is a martyr-like aspect about it which is disarming, and slightly disconcerting too. Hard to know how the media will play it.
>>3912
>>3909
https://apnews.com/article/florida-transgender-bathroom-arrest-be735cfe5eafa7f510692cfb3c58269e
>Rheintgen was in town visiting her grandparents when she decided to pen a letter to each of Florida’s 160 state lawmakers informing them of her plan to enter a public restroom inconsistent with her sex assigned at birth. The Illinois resident said her act of civil disobedience was fueled by anger at seeing a place she loves and visits regularly grow hostile toward trans people.
>“I know that you know in your heart that this law is wrong and unjust,” she wrote in her letter to lawmakers. “I know that you know in your heart that transgender people are human too, and that you can’t arrest us away. I know that you know that I have dignity. That’s why I know that you won’t arrest me.”
>“People are telling me it’s a legal test, like this is the first case that’s being brought,” she said. “It’s how they test the law. But I didn’t do this to test the law. I did it because I was upset. I can’t have any expectations for what’s going to happen because this has never been prosecuted before. I’m horrified and scared.”
I think, based on all the religion talk, s/he was suffused with a sort of universal-love brotherhood-of-man mania that some Christians develop (hence 'Christian socialism') and had the honest expectation that her 'stand' would lead to the end of 'oppression', and so on. There is a martyr-like aspect about it which is disarming, and slightly disconcerting too. Hard to know how the media will play it.
Also, I personally feel sorry for her and view her as deluded rather than bad.
>>3897 (OP)
Is op pic her?
>>3917
>>3897 (OP)
Is op pic her?
Yes.
I feel like this case gets to the heart of why modern attempts at replicating the civil rights movement fall flat: no one actually cares. This is a protest of the anti-trans law but it's more so calling its bluff. The people who wrote that law don't have 1% of the hate in their hearts for the trans as their grandfather had for blacks, so the law is basically performative. You have to send a letter with a photo of yourself and your plan to break the law to the governor to actually suffer any consequences, whereas a black guy walking into the wrong bathroom in the 60s in Florida may have easily just been killed by a vigilante
You absolutely could not get me to give a shit about trans issues one way or another in Anno Domini MMXXV
Let them pee it's not as if that's the worst thing one can encounter in a Florida women's bathroom
Anonymous (Moderator) :
17 days ago :
No.4119
>>4122
>>4119
Well damn, now I'm curious
>>4125>>4119
nothing very interesting just some guy saying he thought we should murder all trans people
>>4117
Why is the last post in this thread 3 days old, but in the catalog it's above threads with posts made 4 hours ago?
I deleted the most recent post but that doesn't reset the bump time.
Go Marcy!
>Trans rosa parks
>Tries to convince children they're black if they like rap or sneaker culture
Anonymous :
11 days ago :
No.4334
>>4662
>>4334
The phenomenon of misogynistic trannies is under-discussed. There's Andrea Long Chu's assertion that women are just holes to be fucked. I also remember reading about some writer/journalist lady whose abusive dad transitioned and afterward talked about being a "dumb broad". (Not Katy Tur, there's multiple examples.) I wonder if it's at all like white racists becoming obsessed with interracial porn or tranny-haters (which I'm honestly not) with tranny porn.
Anonymous :
9 days ago :
No.4404
>>4408
>>4404
She's based, kind of like the anti-Brianna Wu. She is a mixture of very knowing and somewhat naive, which I think, as >>3912 said, is disarming
>>4406
I think it's more a case of excessive religion on the mind than either of those things. She seems rather of the Simone Weil sort (yes: on the histrionic side) and believed she would convince Floridians with the power of 'love'
There was a photograph of her letter to Florida politicians which I can't find now but it went on about Jesus Christ and how we need to love one another
Anonymous :
9 days ago :
No.4406
>>4408
>>4404
She's based, kind of like the anti-Brianna Wu. She is a mixture of very knowing and somewhat naive, which I think, as >>3912 said, is disarming
>>4406
I think it's more a case of excessive religion on the mind than either of those things. She seems rather of the Simone Weil sort (yes: on the histrionic side) and believed she would convince Floridians with the power of 'love'
There was a photograph of her letter to Florida politicians which I can't find now but it went on about Jesus Christ and how we need to love one another
Homosexuals and autogynephiles just can't help but engage in histrionic performances.
Anonymous :
9 days ago :
No.4408
>>4409
Following on from >>4408, it is possible she will actually get sent to jail and it may be a galvanizing moment, but I think it could bring real harm to her
>>4451>>4408
If he were actually religious he wouldn't be living in unrepentant mortal sin. No surprise 🚂s gravitate towards pharisaical and performative religions like Catholicism because substance over form is their whole thing, but there's no need to take this performance seriously. He's as Catholic as he is a woman.
>>4404
She's based, kind of like the anti-Brianna Wu. She is a mixture of very knowing and somewhat naive, which I think, as >>3912
>>3909
https://apnews.com/article/florida-transgender-bathroom-arrest-be735cfe5eafa7f510692cfb3c58269e
>Rheintgen was in town visiting her grandparents when she decided to pen a letter to each of Florida’s 160 state lawmakers informing them of her plan to enter a public restroom inconsistent with her sex assigned at birth. The Illinois resident said her act of civil disobedience was fueled by anger at seeing a place she loves and visits regularly grow hostile toward trans people.
>“I know that you know in your heart that this law is wrong and unjust,” she wrote in her letter to lawmakers. “I know that you know in your heart that transgender people are human too, and that you can’t arrest us away. I know that you know that I have dignity. That’s why I know that you won’t arrest me.”
>“People are telling me it’s a legal test, like this is the first case that’s being brought,” she said. “It’s how they test the law. But I didn’t do this to test the law. I did it because I was upset. I can’t have any expectations for what’s going to happen because this has never been prosecuted before. I’m horrified and scared.”
I think, based on all the religion talk, s/he was suffused with a sort of universal-love brotherhood-of-man mania that some Christians develop (hence 'Christian socialism') and had the honest expectation that her 'stand' would lead to the end of 'oppression', and so on. There is a martyr-like aspect about it which is disarming, and slightly disconcerting too. Hard to know how the media will play it.
said, is disarming
>>4406Homosexuals and autogynephiles just can't help but engage in histrionic performances.
I think it's more a case of excessive religion on the mind than either of those things. She seems rather of the Simone Weil sort (yes: on the histrionic side) and believed she would convince Floridians with the power of 'love'
There was a photograph of her letter to Florida politicians which I can't find now but it went on about Jesus Christ and how we need to love one another
Following on from >>4408
>>4404
She's based, kind of like the anti-Brianna Wu. She is a mixture of very knowing and somewhat naive, which I think, as >>3912 said, is disarming
>>4406
I think it's more a case of excessive religion on the mind than either of those things. She seems rather of the Simone Weil sort (yes: on the histrionic side) and believed she would convince Floridians with the power of 'love'
There was a photograph of her letter to Florida politicians which I can't find now but it went on about Jesus Christ and how we need to love one another
, it is possible she will actually get sent to jail and it may be a galvanizing moment, but I think it could bring real harm to her
Anonymous :
9 days ago :
No.4451
>>4452
>>4451
Substance and form are the same thing lol
>>4468>>4451
A Bad Catholic is still a Catholic, and therefore miles ahead of your typical secular atheist who constitute the main part of the modern world. Also, it is probably not a moral sin to troon out if the relationship is hetereosexual from the point-of-view of the troon's birth sex, or if he/she remains chaste. Christian emperors in the East had eunuchs and this was not understood at the time as mortal sin.
>>4408
>>4404
She's based, kind of like the anti-Brianna Wu. She is a mixture of very knowing and somewhat naive, which I think, as >>3912 said, is disarming
>>4406
I think it's more a case of excessive religion on the mind than either of those things. She seems rather of the Simone Weil sort (yes: on the histrionic side) and believed she would convince Floridians with the power of 'love'
There was a photograph of her letter to Florida politicians which I can't find now but it went on about Jesus Christ and how we need to love one another
If he were actually religious he wouldn't be living in unrepentant mortal sin. No surprise 🚂s gravitate towards pharisaical and performative religions like Catholicism because substance over form is their whole thing, but there's no need to take this performance seriously. He's as Catholic as he is a woman.
>>4451
>>4408
If he were actually religious he wouldn't be living in unrepentant mortal sin. No surprise 🚂s gravitate towards pharisaical and performative religions like Catholicism because substance over form is their whole thing, but there's no need to take this performance seriously. He's as Catholic as he is a woman.
Substance and form are the same thing lol
Anonymous :
8 days ago :
No.4468
>>4530
>>4468
I can't speak so much to the Catholic view of things, but what upsets people about trannies is not so much that they take hormones and cut off their genitals but that they insist doing so makes them women. (And vice versa for FTMS.)
This seems similar to what Francis gets at in >>4469, that these acts of man somehow overcome distinctions made by God. Conversely, eunuchs were always understood to be nothing more than castrated dudes.
>>4451
>>4408
If he were actually religious he wouldn't be living in unrepentant mortal sin. No surprise 🚂s gravitate towards pharisaical and performative religions like Catholicism because substance over form is their whole thing, but there's no need to take this performance seriously. He's as Catholic as he is a woman.
A Bad Catholic is still a Catholic, and therefore miles ahead of your typical secular atheist who constitute the main part of the modern world. Also, it is probably not a moral sin to troon out if the relationship is hetereosexual from the point-of-view of the troon's birth sex, or if he/she remains chaste. Christian emperors in the East had eunuchs and this was not understood at the time as mortal sin.
Anonymous :
8 days ago :
No.4469
>>4530
>>4468
I can't speak so much to the Catholic view of things, but what upsets people about trannies is not so much that they take hormones and cut off their genitals but that they insist doing so makes them women. (And vice versa for FTMS.)
This seems similar to what Francis gets at in >>4469, that these acts of man somehow overcome distinctions made by God. Conversely, eunuchs were always understood to be nothing more than castrated dudes.
Amoris laetitia, no. 56:
>Yet another challenge is posed by the various forms of an ideology of gender that “denies the difference and reciprocity in nature of a man and a woman and envisages a society without sexual differences, thereby eliminating the anthropological basis of the family. This ideology leads to educational programmes and legislative enactments that promote a personal identity and emotional intimacy radically separated from the biological difference between male and female. Consequently, human identity becomes the choice of the individual, one which can also change over time”. It is a source of concern that some ideologies of this sort, which seek to respond to what are at times understandable aspirations, manage to assert themselves as absolute and unquestionable, even dictating how children should be raised. It needs to be emphasized that “biological sex and the socio-cultural role of sex (gender) can be distinguished but not separated”. On the other hand, “the technological revolution in the field of human procreation has introduced the ability to manipulate the reproductive act, making it independent of the sexual relationship between a man and a woman. In this way, human life and parenthood have become modular and separable realities, subject mainly to the wishes of individuals or couples”. It is one thing to be understanding of human weakness and the complexities of life, and another to accept ideologies that attempt to sunder what are inseparable aspects of reality. Let us not fall into the sin of trying to replace the Creator. We are creatures, and not omnipotent. Creation is prior to us and must be received as a gift. At the same time, we are called to protect our humanity, and this means, in the first place, accepting it and respecting it as it was created.
Anonymous :
7 days ago :
No.4530
>>4537
>>4530
A lot of trans have a self-image of themselves as a third sex in between male and female (especially the ones who are fine with their natural genitals and want to keep them, but want to develop a different body shape, or remove/add on body hair). For various reasons (some of which are quite understandable) Western societies make no allowance for this and demand someone to make up their minds and be either man or woman. The issue is that some will be forever deficient as either a man or a woman because of biological differences (lack of masculinization in the brain in the womb, or over-masculinization) or because of socialization in childhood.
I would be interested to know whether Catholics think the soul has a sex or not. I understand that God is without sex, but is referred to as male because of the analogical relation of male with creation.
>>4468
>>4451
A Bad Catholic is still a Catholic, and therefore miles ahead of your typical secular atheist who constitute the main part of the modern world. Also, it is probably not a moral sin to troon out if the relationship is hetereosexual from the point-of-view of the troon's birth sex, or if he/she remains chaste. Christian emperors in the East had eunuchs and this was not understood at the time as mortal sin.
I can't speak so much to the Catholic view of things, but what upsets people about trannies is not so much that they take hormones and cut off their genitals but that they insist doing so makes them women. (And vice versa for FTMS.)
This seems similar to what Francis gets at in >>4469Amoris laetitia, no. 56:
>Yet another challenge is posed by the various forms of an ideology of gender that “denies the difference and reciprocity in nature of a man and a woman and envisages a society without sexual differences, thereby eliminating the anthropological basis of the family. This ideology leads to educational programmes and legislative enactments that promote a personal identity and emotional intimacy radically separated from the biological difference between male and female. Consequently, human identity becomes the choice of the individual, one which can also change over time”. It is a source of concern that some ideologies of this sort, which seek to respond to what are at times understandable aspirations, manage to assert themselves as absolute and unquestionable, even dictating how children should be raised. It needs to be emphasized that “biological sex and the socio-cultural role of sex (gender) can be distinguished but not separated”. On the other hand, “the technological revolution in the field of human procreation has introduced the ability to manipulate the reproductive act, making it independent of the sexual relationship between a man and a woman. In this way, human life and parenthood have become modular and separable realities, subject mainly to the wishes of individuals or couples”. It is one thing to be understanding of human weakness and the complexities of life, and another to accept ideologies that attempt to sunder what are inseparable aspects of reality. Let us not fall into the sin of trying to replace the Creator. We are creatures, and not omnipotent. Creation is prior to us and must be received as a gift. At the same time, we are called to protect our humanity, and this means, in the first place, accepting it and respecting it as it was created.
, that these acts of man somehow overcome distinctions made by God. Conversely, eunuchs were always understood to be nothing more than castrated dudes.
>>4530
>>4468
I can't speak so much to the Catholic view of things, but what upsets people about trannies is not so much that they take hormones and cut off their genitals but that they insist doing so makes them women. (And vice versa for FTMS.)
This seems similar to what Francis gets at in >>4469, that these acts of man somehow overcome distinctions made by God. Conversely, eunuchs were always understood to be nothing more than castrated dudes.
A lot of trans have a self-image of themselves as a third sex in between male and female (especially the ones who are fine with their natural genitals and want to keep them, but want to develop a different body shape, or remove/add on body hair). For various reasons (some of which are quite understandable) Western societies make no allowance for this and demand someone to make up their minds and be either man or woman. The issue is that some will be forever deficient as either a man or a woman because of biological differences (lack of masculinization in the brain in the womb, or over-masculinization) or because of socialization in childhood.
I would be interested to know whether Catholics think the soul has a sex or not. I understand that God is without sex, but is referred to as male because of the analogical relation of male with creation.
Anonymous :
7 days ago :
No.4542
>>4570
>>4542
Perhaps in San Francisco or New York, but not in America in general.
If you have a male body and dress in feminine clothes or have a feminine manner you will be consigned to being either (a) freak (b) gay or (c) mentally ill, and it is only a little bit better for women who want to dress masculine.
America is indeed relatively open and tolerant--it's not very common people would get attacked for being gender nonconforming, because we are a liberal society--but there is still a severe social cost for those who don't want to be masculine men or feminine women. Hence why there are more trans people from the working class. In general, poor people are more impulsive and feel the weight of social control less than rich people. If we were open to gender nonconforming behavior more, there would be more rich people--doctors, lawyers--choosing to be something a bit different than their sex
It seems like if a lot of trans develop the idea of themselves as in-between male or female, this would be a much better outcome for them as it means they would be less likely to get surgeries which they could do without, and also, less likely to be obsessed and neurotic about 'passing'. Conservatives should embrace the idea of the third gender rather than making fun of non-binary people as they do. I don't think many trans people actually view themselves as being literally the opposite sex, I think that's a metaphor for not being happy in their role of being the sex they were born as (or 'assigned' to use the modern-day lingo)
>Western societies make no allowance for this
No allowance? I think not. You probably have in your mind some institutional bureaucratic crap like "no X/other option on passports" (America brained) or some shit instead of looking out your window and seeing the gamut of gender nonconformity acted out in a day-to-day fashion.
Anonymous :
7 days ago :
No.4570
>>4590
>>4570
I don't really care what people do, but if I see a man in a dress in public, I assume he's at least somewhat mentally ill. And having met plenty of men in dresses, I've yet to be wrong in this assumption. So it'd be a little concerning if I went to see a doctor or lawyer about an important matter and he turned out to be a guy in a dress.
>>4542
>Western societies make no allowance for this
No allowance? I think not. You probably have in your mind some institutional bureaucratic crap like "no X/other option on passports" (America brained) or some shit instead of looking out your window and seeing the gamut of gender nonconformity acted out in a day-to-day fashion.
Perhaps in San Francisco or New York, but not in America in general.
If you have a male body and dress in feminine clothes or have a feminine manner you will be consigned to being either (a) freak (b) gay or (c) mentally ill, and it is only a little bit better for women who want to dress masculine.
America is indeed relatively open and tolerant--it's not very common people would get attacked for being gender nonconforming, because we are a liberal society--but there is still a severe social cost for those who don't want to be masculine men or feminine women. Hence why there are more trans people from the working class. In general, poor people are more impulsive and feel the weight of social control less than rich people. If we were open to gender nonconforming behavior more, there would be more rich people--doctors, lawyers--choosing to be something a bit different than their sex
It seems like if a lot of trans develop the idea of themselves as in-between male or female, this would be a much better outcome for them as it means they would be less likely to get surgeries which they could do without, and also, less likely to be obsessed and neurotic about 'passing'. Conservatives should embrace the idea of the third gender rather than making fun of non-binary people as they do. I don't think many trans people actually view themselves as being literally the opposite sex, I think that's a metaphor for not being happy in their role of being the sex they were born as (or 'assigned' to use the modern-day lingo)
Anonymous :
6 days ago :
No.4578
>>4593
>>4590
Sure, and your suspicions are based in fact. I would agree with this.
No doubt if wearing certain clothes is stigmatized, those who do it will be those who are impulsive, or a little exhibitionistic, low IQ, low self-control, etc. It's like the fact that face tattoos are associated with low IQ disreputable riff-raff: if a doctor, say, thought a particular tattoo would be good on his face, he's not going to get it because of the stereotype. But there could be a society where there was no social issue with face tattoos and people's actions reflected their inner preferences much better. Don't know if that makes sense. The idea is that the people you see when out and about are not representative of the wider class who want to but don't dress that way, because they have a sense of restraint
In terms of men wearing dresses, this is not a good look because men have a different body shape. It is more things like having long, luscious head hair or having a somewhat f*ggy voice.
>>4578
Whatever, America this America that... I say the West doesn't accept gender noncomformity and you deny this because you see people walking around dressed up in the clothes of the opposite sex. But try going to the doctor and saying you want to take hormones but not to transition to the opposite sex, but to just be a bit in-between. You won't get far! The old sexological notion of sexual inversion (deemed outmoded by the bien pensants) represents gays, lesbians and a lot of trans people more accurately than all the modern theories do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_inversion_(sexology) Why else do butch lesbians LARP as men and fem gays act like stereotypes of women??
There's a severe social cost for doing anything different than how small-brained American masses want it, but it doesn't mean the west (you said "western", by the way) has "no allowance". Making that claim with the context of the other 200 countries of this world is fucking retarded. You are the typical "worldly" American liberal who at the same time reveals his fishbowl myopia by talking about culture in generalities while only really participating in the Great Internal Dialogue of their land
Anonymous :
6 days ago :
No.4590
>>4593
>>4590
Sure, and your suspicions are based in fact. I would agree with this.
No doubt if wearing certain clothes is stigmatized, those who do it will be those who are impulsive, or a little exhibitionistic, low IQ, low self-control, etc. It's like the fact that face tattoos are associated with low IQ disreputable riff-raff: if a doctor, say, thought a particular tattoo would be good on his face, he's not going to get it because of the stereotype. But there could be a society where there was no social issue with face tattoos and people's actions reflected their inner preferences much better. Don't know if that makes sense. The idea is that the people you see when out and about are not representative of the wider class who want to but don't dress that way, because they have a sense of restraint
In terms of men wearing dresses, this is not a good look because men have a different body shape. It is more things like having long, luscious head hair or having a somewhat f*ggy voice.
>>4578
Whatever, America this America that... I say the West doesn't accept gender noncomformity and you deny this because you see people walking around dressed up in the clothes of the opposite sex. But try going to the doctor and saying you want to take hormones but not to transition to the opposite sex, but to just be a bit in-between. You won't get far! The old sexological notion of sexual inversion (deemed outmoded by the bien pensants) represents gays, lesbians and a lot of trans people more accurately than all the modern theories do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_inversion_(sexology) Why else do butch lesbians LARP as men and fem gays act like stereotypes of women??
>>4784>>4590
Performing your god-given gender role in public is a common decency that you owe other people, and refusing to do so points to attention-seeking tendencies or even mental illness.
That statement is uncontroversial when applied to other biologically-based social roles like age (everyone would recognise a 50 year old acting like they're 5 for what it is - attention-seeking, a fetish, or mental illness) but man-in-a-dress propaganda has fried everyone's brains.
>>4570
>>4542
Perhaps in San Francisco or New York, but not in America in general.
If you have a male body and dress in feminine clothes or have a feminine manner you will be consigned to being either (a) freak (b) gay or (c) mentally ill, and it is only a little bit better for women who want to dress masculine.
America is indeed relatively open and tolerant--it's not very common people would get attacked for being gender nonconforming, because we are a liberal society--but there is still a severe social cost for those who don't want to be masculine men or feminine women. Hence why there are more trans people from the working class. In general, poor people are more impulsive and feel the weight of social control less than rich people. If we were open to gender nonconforming behavior more, there would be more rich people--doctors, lawyers--choosing to be something a bit different than their sex
It seems like if a lot of trans develop the idea of themselves as in-between male or female, this would be a much better outcome for them as it means they would be less likely to get surgeries which they could do without, and also, less likely to be obsessed and neurotic about 'passing'. Conservatives should embrace the idea of the third gender rather than making fun of non-binary people as they do. I don't think many trans people actually view themselves as being literally the opposite sex, I think that's a metaphor for not being happy in their role of being the sex they were born as (or 'assigned' to use the modern-day lingo)
I don't really care what people do, but if I see a man in a dress in public, I assume he's at least somewhat mentally ill. And having met plenty of men in dresses, I've yet to be wrong in this assumption. So it'd be a little concerning if I went to see a doctor or lawyer about an important matter and he turned out to be a guy in a dress.
>>4590
>>4570
I don't really care what people do, but if I see a man in a dress in public, I assume he's at least somewhat mentally ill. And having met plenty of men in dresses, I've yet to be wrong in this assumption. So it'd be a little concerning if I went to see a doctor or lawyer about an important matter and he turned out to be a guy in a dress.
Sure, and your suspicions are based in fact. I would agree with this.
No doubt if wearing certain clothes is stigmatized, those who do it will be those who are impulsive, or a little exhibitionistic, low IQ, low self-control, etc. It's like the fact that face tattoos are associated with low IQ disreputable riff-raff: if a doctor, say, thought a particular tattoo would be good on his face, he's not going to get it because of the stereotype. But there could be a society where there was no social issue with face tattoos and people's actions reflected their inner preferences much better. Don't know if that makes sense. The idea is that the people you see when out and about are not representative of the wider class who want to but don't dress that way, because they have a sense of restraint
In terms of men wearing dresses, this is not a good look because men have a different body shape. It is more things like having long, luscious head hair or having a somewhat f*ggy voice.
>>4578There's a severe social cost for doing anything different than how small-brained American masses want it, but it doesn't mean the west (you said "western", by the way) has "no allowance". Making that claim with the context of the other 200 countries of this world is fucking retarded. You are the typical "worldly" American liberal who at the same time reveals his fishbowl myopia by talking about culture in generalities while only really participating in the Great Internal Dialogue of their land
Whatever, America this America that... I say the West doesn't accept gender noncomformity and you deny this because you see people walking around dressed up in the clothes of the opposite sex. But try going to the doctor and saying you want to take hormones but not to transition to the opposite sex, but to just be a bit in-between. You won't get far! The old sexological notion of sexual inversion (deemed outmoded by the bien pensants) represents gays, lesbians and a lot of trans people more accurately than all the modern theories do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_inversion_(sexology) Why else do butch lesbians LARP as men and fem gays act like stereotypes of women??
Anonymous :
5 days ago :
No.4648
>>4665
>>4648
In her own words:
>Although I describe myself as transgender (I was donning flamboyant male costumes from early childhood on), I am highly skeptical about the current transgender wave, which I think has been produced by far more complicated psychological and sociological factors than current gender discourse allows.
>>4641
The fact that there are two tranny threads on PT says something about this quiet "live and let live" demographic
Camille Paglia isn't a tranny, anon.
And yet, there is some of "that element" in her isn't there? Something we can all sense intuitively without worrying about Defining Terminology as Praxis
Anonymous :
5 days ago :
No.4662
>>4664
>>4662
Chu is an obnoxious moron, maybe psychotic, most transsexuals who are aware of her find her very off-putting and creepy. She was discussed a lot on the redscare subreddit in negative terms
However, it is curious that radfems attack her, because she has long been saying the same things radical feminists say: being female is inherently degrading, and that trans women are not real women (she wrote a whole article about how taking hormones and getting a vagina will never make her feel like a real woman). She was made reviewer at New York Magazine because to succeed in this current literary world, you have to be in some way bizarre or unusual or provocative. I'm suspicious of people who talk about literature but never wrote any themselves
>>4334
The phenomenon of misogynistic trannies is under-discussed. There's Andrea Long Chu's assertion that women are just holes to be fucked. I also remember reading about some writer/journalist lady whose abusive dad transitioned and afterward talked about being a "dumb broad". (Not Katy Tur, there's multiple examples.) I wonder if it's at all like white racists becoming obsessed with interracial porn or tranny-haters (which I'm honestly not) with tranny porn.
Anonymous :
5 days ago :
No.4664
>>4667
To expand on >>4664, Chu's always denied she has a 'core female identity' and says she wants to be a woman with a woman's body but can never be one, then has all these odd dada theories about why she transitioned anyway
A great example people who see trans people as perverts can point to
>>4719>>4664
insane misreading of radical feminism, but that's unsurprising coming from a schizo tranny
>>4662
>>4334
The phenomenon of misogynistic trannies is under-discussed. There's Andrea Long Chu's assertion that women are just holes to be fucked. I also remember reading about some writer/journalist lady whose abusive dad transitioned and afterward talked about being a "dumb broad". (Not Katy Tur, there's multiple examples.) I wonder if it's at all like white racists becoming obsessed with interracial porn or tranny-haters (which I'm honestly not) with tranny porn.
Chu is an obnoxious moron, maybe psychotic, most transsexuals who are aware of her find her very off-putting and creepy. She was discussed a lot on the redscare subreddit in negative terms
However, it is curious that radfems attack her, because she has long been saying the same things radical feminists say: being female is inherently degrading, and that trans women are not real women (she wrote a whole article about how taking hormones and getting a vagina will never make her feel like a real woman). She was made reviewer at New York Magazine because to succeed in this current literary world, you have to be in some way bizarre or unusual or provocative. I'm suspicious of people who talk about literature but never wrote any themselves
>>4648
>>4641
Camille Paglia isn't a tranny, anon.
In her own words:
>Although I describe myself as transgender (I was donning flamboyant male costumes from early childhood on), I am highly skeptical about the current transgender wave, which I think has been produced by far more complicated psychological and sociological factors than current gender discourse allows.
To expand on >>4664
>>4662
Chu is an obnoxious moron, maybe psychotic, most transsexuals who are aware of her find her very off-putting and creepy. She was discussed a lot on the redscare subreddit in negative terms
However, it is curious that radfems attack her, because she has long been saying the same things radical feminists say: being female is inherently degrading, and that trans women are not real women (she wrote a whole article about how taking hormones and getting a vagina will never make her feel like a real woman). She was made reviewer at New York Magazine because to succeed in this current literary world, you have to be in some way bizarre or unusual or provocative. I'm suspicious of people who talk about literature but never wrote any themselves
, Chu's always denied she has a 'core female identity' and says she wants to be a woman with a woman's body but can never be one, then has all these odd dada theories about why she transitioned anyway
A great example people who see trans people as perverts can point to
Anonymous :
5 days ago :
No.4669
>>4688
>>4669
Most trannies see themselves as "real women" because, so the explanation goes, their brain developed as female in the womb. Chu openly embraces that she is transitioning for sordid reasons
>says she wants to be a woman with a woman's body but can never be one, then has all these odd dada theories about why she transitioned anyway
How does this differ from other trannies?
>4665
the fuck
Anonymous :
4 days ago :
No.4688
>>4701
>>4688
Yeah, I know they say that. I just question whether it's actually true for the vast majority.
>>4669
>says she wants to be a woman with a woman's body but can never be one, then has all these odd dada theories about why she transitioned anyway
How does this differ from other trannies?
Most trannies see themselves as "real women" because, so the explanation goes, their brain developed as female in the womb. Chu openly embraces that she is transitioning for sordid reasons
Praying for a good outcome for this brave young woman being persecuted by bullies.
Anonymous :
4 days ago :
No.4701
>>4707
>>4701
I was talking about self-perception. I don't know if it is true that there is a neurological reason for gender dysphoria. But all things being equal, the trans person who transitions because they think they are 'really' the opposite sex is probably more normal than the one who transitions for the pleasure of living in a female body
>>4701
>>4688
Yeah, I know they say that. I just question whether it's actually true for the vast majority.
I was talking about self-perception. I don't know if it is true that there is a neurological reason for gender dysphoria. But all things being equal, the trans person who transitions because they think they are 'really' the opposite sex is probably more normal than the one who transitions for the pleasure of living in a female body
Anonymous :
3 days ago :
No.4719
>>4722
>>4719
Yeah, big difference between "I'm a woman who thinks it's degrading when men treat women as holes to be fucked" and "I'm a man who thinks it's hot and degrading that women are holes to be fucked".
>>4733>>4719
Read Sheila Jeffreys to understand
>PENETRATION:
>Penetration is an act of great symbolic significance by which the oppressor enters the body of the oppressed. But it is more than a symbol, its function and effect is the punishment and control of women. It is not just rape which serves this function but every act of penetration, even that which is euphemistically described as making love'. We have all heard men say about an 'uppity woman', 'What she needs is a good fuck'. This is no idle remark. Every man knows that a fucked woman is a woman under the control of men, whose body is open to men, a woman who is tamed and broken in. Before the sexual revolution there was no mistake about penetration being for the benefit of men. The sexual revolution is a con trick. It serves to disguise the oppressive nature of male sexuality and we are told that penetration is for our benefit as well. Every act of penetration for a woman is an invasion which undermines her confidence and saps her strength. For a man it is an act of power and mastery which makes him stronger, not just over one woman but over all women. So every woman who engages in penetration bolsters the oppressor and reinforces the class power of men.
>"But we don't do penetration, my boyfriend and me"
>If you engage in any form of sexual activity with a man you are reinforcing his class power. You may escape the most extreme form of ritual humiliation but because of the emotional accretions to any form of heterosexual behaviour, men gain great advantages and women lose. There is no such thing as 'pure' sexual pleasure. Such 'pleasure' is created by fantasy, memory and experience. Sexual 'pleasure' cannot be separated from the emotions that accompany the exercise of power and the experience of powerlessness.
>(If you don't do penetration, why not take a woman lover? If you strip a man of his unique ability to humiliate, you are left with a creature who is merely worse at every sort of sexual activity than a woman is).
It is obviously a strategy to convince heterosexual women to become lesbians like them, btw.
>>4664
>>4662
Chu is an obnoxious moron, maybe psychotic, most transsexuals who are aware of her find her very off-putting and creepy. She was discussed a lot on the redscare subreddit in negative terms
However, it is curious that radfems attack her, because she has long been saying the same things radical feminists say: being female is inherently degrading, and that trans women are not real women (she wrote a whole article about how taking hormones and getting a vagina will never make her feel like a real woman). She was made reviewer at New York Magazine because to succeed in this current literary world, you have to be in some way bizarre or unusual or provocative. I'm suspicious of people who talk about literature but never wrote any themselves
insane misreading of radical feminism, but that's unsurprising coming from a schizo tranny
everytime i see this thread i cant help but imagine xer girlcock 😭
Anonymous :
3 days ago :
No.4722
>>4734
>>4733
Should have included this GEM:
>Men are the enemy. Heterosexual women are collaborator with the enemy. All the good work that our heterosexual feminist sisters do for women is undermined by the counter-revolutionary activity they engage in with men. Being a heterosexual feminist is like being in the resistance in Nazi-occupied Europe where in the daytime you blow up a bridge, in the evening you rush to repair it.
Heavy stuff!
>>4722
The issue being that radfems acknowledge that women who are not frigid like themselves do experience a sexual drive and so on, and say that the taproot of a hetero woman's sexuality is that she eroticized being oppressed by men. From this vantage, there is no difference between hetero women and even the highly perverse Andrea Long Chu-type transgenders, except for the arbitrary decision to designate the former as permanently victim, even though they (as the responses to Jeffrey's article showed) are well aware of the arguments for becoming a lesbian separatist but reject them. And indeed, they are compared to collaborators in wartime France above, and also in this:
>It is you, heterosexual sisters, who are guilt-tripping us. It is possible to stop collaborating and asking you to do that is not a guilt-trip.
>>4719
>>4664
insane misreading of radical feminism, but that's unsurprising coming from a schizo tranny
Yeah, big difference between "I'm a woman who thinks it's degrading when men treat women as holes to be fucked" and "I'm a man who thinks it's hot and degrading that women are holes to be fucked".
Anonymous :
3 days ago :
No.4733
>>4734
>>4733
Should have included this GEM:
>Men are the enemy. Heterosexual women are collaborator with the enemy. All the good work that our heterosexual feminist sisters do for women is undermined by the counter-revolutionary activity they engage in with men. Being a heterosexual feminist is like being in the resistance in Nazi-occupied Europe where in the daytime you blow up a bridge, in the evening you rush to repair it.
Heavy stuff!
>>4722
The issue being that radfems acknowledge that women who are not frigid like themselves do experience a sexual drive and so on, and say that the taproot of a hetero woman's sexuality is that she eroticized being oppressed by men. From this vantage, there is no difference between hetero women and even the highly perverse Andrea Long Chu-type transgenders, except for the arbitrary decision to designate the former as permanently victim, even though they (as the responses to Jeffrey's article showed) are well aware of the arguments for becoming a lesbian separatist but reject them. And indeed, they are compared to collaborators in wartime France above, and also in this:
>It is you, heterosexual sisters, who are guilt-tripping us. It is possible to stop collaborating and asking you to do that is not a guilt-trip.
>>4762>>4733 >>4734
It's fun to read this sort of thing but does she have any prescription? If penetration is inherently oppressive than the only liberation can come through extinction of the human race (unlikely) or some sort of mass scale trans-humanist / test-tube baby program to eliminate men from the reproductive process...
>>4766>>4733
None of this contradicts what I said. ALC thinks women are holes to be fucked and dominated. Sheila Jeffries thinks men thinks women are holes to be fucked and dominated.
>>4719
>>4664
insane misreading of radical feminism, but that's unsurprising coming from a schizo tranny
Read Sheila Jeffreys to understand
>PENETRATION:
>Penetration is an act of great symbolic significance by which the oppressor enters the body of the oppressed. But it is more than a symbol, its function and effect is the punishment and control of women. It is not just rape which serves this function but every act of penetration, even that which is euphemistically described as making love'. We have all heard men say about an 'uppity woman', 'What she needs is a good fuck'. This is no idle remark. Every man knows that a fucked woman is a woman under the control of men, whose body is open to men, a woman who is tamed and broken in. Before the sexual revolution there was no mistake about penetration being for the benefit of men. The sexual revolution is a con trick. It serves to disguise the oppressive nature of male sexuality and we are told that penetration is for our benefit as well. Every act of penetration for a woman is an invasion which undermines her confidence and saps her strength. For a man it is an act of power and mastery which makes him stronger, not just over one woman but over all women. So every woman who engages in penetration bolsters the oppressor and reinforces the class power of men.
>"But we don't do penetration, my boyfriend and me"
>If you engage in any form of sexual activity with a man you are reinforcing his class power. You may escape the most extreme form of ritual humiliation but because of the emotional accretions to any form of heterosexual behaviour, men gain great advantages and women lose. There is no such thing as 'pure' sexual pleasure. Such 'pleasure' is created by fantasy, memory and experience. Sexual 'pleasure' cannot be separated from the emotions that accompany the exercise of power and the experience of powerlessness.
>(If you don't do penetration, why not take a woman lover? If you strip a man of his unique ability to humiliate, you are left with a creature who is merely worse at every sort of sexual activity than a woman is).
It is obviously a strategy to convince heterosexual women to become lesbians like them, btw.
Anonymous :
3 days ago :
No.4734
>>4762
>>4733 >>4734
It's fun to read this sort of thing but does she have any prescription? If penetration is inherently oppressive than the only liberation can come through extinction of the human race (unlikely) or some sort of mass scale trans-humanist / test-tube baby program to eliminate men from the reproductive process...
>>4733
>>4719
Read Sheila Jeffreys to understand
>PENETRATION:
>Penetration is an act of great symbolic significance by which the oppressor enters the body of the oppressed. But it is more than a symbol, its function and effect is the punishment and control of women. It is not just rape which serves this function but every act of penetration, even that which is euphemistically described as making love'. We have all heard men say about an 'uppity woman', 'What she needs is a good fuck'. This is no idle remark. Every man knows that a fucked woman is a woman under the control of men, whose body is open to men, a woman who is tamed and broken in. Before the sexual revolution there was no mistake about penetration being for the benefit of men. The sexual revolution is a con trick. It serves to disguise the oppressive nature of male sexuality and we are told that penetration is for our benefit as well. Every act of penetration for a woman is an invasion which undermines her confidence and saps her strength. For a man it is an act of power and mastery which makes him stronger, not just over one woman but over all women. So every woman who engages in penetration bolsters the oppressor and reinforces the class power of men.
>"But we don't do penetration, my boyfriend and me"
>If you engage in any form of sexual activity with a man you are reinforcing his class power. You may escape the most extreme form of ritual humiliation but because of the emotional accretions to any form of heterosexual behaviour, men gain great advantages and women lose. There is no such thing as 'pure' sexual pleasure. Such 'pleasure' is created by fantasy, memory and experience. Sexual 'pleasure' cannot be separated from the emotions that accompany the exercise of power and the experience of powerlessness.
>(If you don't do penetration, why not take a woman lover? If you strip a man of his unique ability to humiliate, you are left with a creature who is merely worse at every sort of sexual activity than a woman is).
It is obviously a strategy to convince heterosexual women to become lesbians like them, btw.
Should have included this GEM:
>Men are the enemy. Heterosexual women are collaborator with the enemy. All the good work that our heterosexual feminist sisters do for women is undermined by the counter-revolutionary activity they engage in with men. Being a heterosexual feminist is like being in the resistance in Nazi-occupied Europe where in the daytime you blow up a bridge, in the evening you rush to repair it.
Heavy stuff!
>>4722>>4719
Yeah, big difference between "I'm a woman who thinks it's degrading when men treat women as holes to be fucked" and "I'm a man who thinks it's hot and degrading that women are holes to be fucked".
The issue being that radfems acknowledge that women who are not frigid like themselves do experience a sexual drive and so on, and say that the taproot of a hetero woman's sexuality is that she eroticized being oppressed by men. From this vantage, there is no difference between hetero women and even the highly perverse Andrea Long Chu-type transgenders, except for the arbitrary decision to designate the former as permanently victim, even though they (as the responses to Jeffrey's article showed) are well aware of the arguments for becoming a lesbian separatist but reject them. And indeed, they are compared to collaborators in wartime France above, and also in this:
>It is you, heterosexual sisters, who are guilt-tripping us. It is possible to stop collaborating and asking you to do that is not a guilt-trip.
Anonymous :
2 days ago :
No.4762
>>4763
>>4762
The prescription is for ordinary, heterosexual women in loving relationships with male partners to become lesbians. It is like the lesbian version of being an incel: very obviously, this sophisticated apparatus of reasoning is based at achieving a much less sophisticated goal. Hence the admonition to become a les, rather than living as a celibate.
Here dialectic inversion is achieved: feminists say that sexuality is mutable and not biologically fixed and that women are the authors of their own oppression, engaging in 'counter-revolutionary activity' by falling in love having babies.
It is as frank an example as one will ever see of psychopathology expressed as intellectuality
>>4733
>>4719
Read Sheila Jeffreys to understand
>PENETRATION:
>Penetration is an act of great symbolic significance by which the oppressor enters the body of the oppressed. But it is more than a symbol, its function and effect is the punishment and control of women. It is not just rape which serves this function but every act of penetration, even that which is euphemistically described as making love'. We have all heard men say about an 'uppity woman', 'What she needs is a good fuck'. This is no idle remark. Every man knows that a fucked woman is a woman under the control of men, whose body is open to men, a woman who is tamed and broken in. Before the sexual revolution there was no mistake about penetration being for the benefit of men. The sexual revolution is a con trick. It serves to disguise the oppressive nature of male sexuality and we are told that penetration is for our benefit as well. Every act of penetration for a woman is an invasion which undermines her confidence and saps her strength. For a man it is an act of power and mastery which makes him stronger, not just over one woman but over all women. So every woman who engages in penetration bolsters the oppressor and reinforces the class power of men.
>"But we don't do penetration, my boyfriend and me"
>If you engage in any form of sexual activity with a man you are reinforcing his class power. You may escape the most extreme form of ritual humiliation but because of the emotional accretions to any form of heterosexual behaviour, men gain great advantages and women lose. There is no such thing as 'pure' sexual pleasure. Such 'pleasure' is created by fantasy, memory and experience. Sexual 'pleasure' cannot be separated from the emotions that accompany the exercise of power and the experience of powerlessness.
>(If you don't do penetration, why not take a woman lover? If you strip a man of his unique ability to humiliate, you are left with a creature who is merely worse at every sort of sexual activity than a woman is).
It is obviously a strategy to convince heterosexual women to become lesbians like them, btw.
>>4734>>4733
Should have included this GEM:
>Men are the enemy. Heterosexual women are collaborator with the enemy. All the good work that our heterosexual feminist sisters do for women is undermined by the counter-revolutionary activity they engage in with men. Being a heterosexual feminist is like being in the resistance in Nazi-occupied Europe where in the daytime you blow up a bridge, in the evening you rush to repair it.
Heavy stuff!
>>4722
The issue being that radfems acknowledge that women who are not frigid like themselves do experience a sexual drive and so on, and say that the taproot of a hetero woman's sexuality is that she eroticized being oppressed by men. From this vantage, there is no difference between hetero women and even the highly perverse Andrea Long Chu-type transgenders, except for the arbitrary decision to designate the former as permanently victim, even though they (as the responses to Jeffrey's article showed) are well aware of the arguments for becoming a lesbian separatist but reject them. And indeed, they are compared to collaborators in wartime France above, and also in this:
>It is you, heterosexual sisters, who are guilt-tripping us. It is possible to stop collaborating and asking you to do that is not a guilt-trip.
It's fun to read this sort of thing but does she have any prescription? If penetration is inherently oppressive than the only liberation can come through extinction of the human race (unlikely) or some sort of mass scale trans-humanist / test-tube baby program to eliminate men from the reproductive process...
Anonymous :
2 days ago :
No.4763
>>4765
>>4763
I don't really go on the radical feminist side of Tumblr because it's just blackpill after blackpill but I lurked around there for a while and aside from Ovarit (which no one will really miss) it's the most prominent radfem hub in the mainstream internet. Even there, lesbian separatists were mostly quiet about their most extreme takes like these and this kind of cognitive dissonance was still called out more often than not. Sure I did read posts calling straight women a "cancer" and saying that female anatomy is inherently oppressive but they stood out precisely because they were rare to see. Most other radfems called them out for being basically indistinguishable from incels.
Again I don't go lurk around there anymore because it's genuine suicide fuel to see how men can treat women and get away with it, and then read post after post about how it could happen to any woman and it's only getting worse etc., but it has to be said that even among the notoriously doomer women that make up those spaces, takes this extreme are still rare.
>>4762
>>4733 >>4734
It's fun to read this sort of thing but does she have any prescription? If penetration is inherently oppressive than the only liberation can come through extinction of the human race (unlikely) or some sort of mass scale trans-humanist / test-tube baby program to eliminate men from the reproductive process...
The prescription is for ordinary, heterosexual women in loving relationships with male partners to become lesbians. It is like the lesbian version of being an incel: very obviously, this sophisticated apparatus of reasoning is based at achieving a much less sophisticated goal. Hence the admonition to become a les, rather than living as a celibate.
Here dialectic inversion is achieved: feminists say that sexuality is mutable and not biologically fixed and that women are the authors of their own oppression, engaging in 'counter-revolutionary activity' by falling in love having babies.
It is as frank an example as one will ever see of psychopathology expressed as intellectuality
Anonymous :
2 days ago :
No.4765
>>4770
>4766
Jeffreys thinks men and women alike (!) think women are holes..., etc. So she does not think women are unaware. For her, heterosexual women understand the 'true' nature of all this and would have to in order to achieve sexual responsivity at all, because if a woman had not 'bought into' this then she would refuse to date men and would naturally be a lesbian. Hence her convicting hetero women of collaboration with the oppressor (as I said before, an obviously pathological way of speaking).
This means that according to her theories (though not how her theories have been applied rhetorically) there is no difference between AGPs and natal women. Both take part in the eroticization of women's subordination. This applies even to masochistic-minded AGPs like ALC (remember that most AGPs are quiet autists)
>>4765
>but it has to be said that even among the notoriously doomer women that make up those spaces, takes this extreme are still rare.
Because lesbianism is both a biological fact and uncommon, the number of heterosexual women in the rank-and-file of the movement outweighs the number of lesbian feminists. Often the het women are involved in these ideas because of some personality disorder, emotional issues or relationship troubles of their own (this is not an insult because it is true for almost all political movements: most activists in politics are trying to achieve some emotional need, and this goes whatever the actual ideas, though the ideas are of course related to the pathology in question).
However, the spirit of Jeffreys and other les feminists still hangs over this whole debate, and indeed there was a quote of hers at the footer of every Ovarit page. Hence the over-representation of les separatists in the leadership of the movement: in the UK, essentially all those who are not conservatives who made common cause for convenience are the direct descendants of lesbian feminists, often separatists, from the second wave.
>ure I did read posts calling straight women a "cancer" and saying that female anatomy is inherently oppressive but they stood out precisely because they were rare to see. Most other radfems called them out for being basically indistinguishable from incels.
Becuase lesbian separatism is about emotional needs on the part of the lesbians in question, the ideas are totally inconsistent as I showed above and more ordinary, rank-and-file hetero women are able to pick them up and run with them. But it always serves an emotional need on the part of the speaker. Whenever I hear of 'fat acceptance' all I can think is: you are a fat person (nothing particularly wrong with it) who is embarrassed by it and are having a counter-transference with those around you. The same goes for anti-porn activists: you think you are unattractive and worry your boyfriend is dreaming of other women. How many of these people inveigh against sperm donation, which is eugenic in nature given the requirements for donors and also directly involves an exchange of money between donor and recepient in exchange for the donor's engaging in a sexual act? I thought that was exploitation, which was wrong? It just doesn't make sense and should be deconstructed rather than taken seriously imo.
>>4763
>>4762
The prescription is for ordinary, heterosexual women in loving relationships with male partners to become lesbians. It is like the lesbian version of being an incel: very obviously, this sophisticated apparatus of reasoning is based at achieving a much less sophisticated goal. Hence the admonition to become a les, rather than living as a celibate.
Here dialectic inversion is achieved: feminists say that sexuality is mutable and not biologically fixed and that women are the authors of their own oppression, engaging in 'counter-revolutionary activity' by falling in love having babies.
It is as frank an example as one will ever see of psychopathology expressed as intellectuality
I don't really go on the radical feminist side of Tumblr because it's just blackpill after blackpill but I lurked around there for a while and aside from Ovarit (which no one will really miss) it's the most prominent radfem hub in the mainstream internet. Even there, lesbian separatists were mostly quiet about their most extreme takes like these and this kind of cognitive dissonance was still called out more often than not. Sure I did read posts calling straight women a "cancer" and saying that female anatomy is inherently oppressive but they stood out precisely because they were rare to see. Most other radfems called them out for being basically indistinguishable from incels.
Again I don't go lurk around there anymore because it's genuine suicide fuel to see how men can treat women and get away with it, and then read post after post about how it could happen to any woman and it's only getting worse etc., but it has to be said that even among the notoriously doomer women that make up those spaces, takes this extreme are still rare.
>>4733
>>4719
Read Sheila Jeffreys to understand
>PENETRATION:
>Penetration is an act of great symbolic significance by which the oppressor enters the body of the oppressed. But it is more than a symbol, its function and effect is the punishment and control of women. It is not just rape which serves this function but every act of penetration, even that which is euphemistically described as making love'. We have all heard men say about an 'uppity woman', 'What she needs is a good fuck'. This is no idle remark. Every man knows that a fucked woman is a woman under the control of men, whose body is open to men, a woman who is tamed and broken in. Before the sexual revolution there was no mistake about penetration being for the benefit of men. The sexual revolution is a con trick. It serves to disguise the oppressive nature of male sexuality and we are told that penetration is for our benefit as well. Every act of penetration for a woman is an invasion which undermines her confidence and saps her strength. For a man it is an act of power and mastery which makes him stronger, not just over one woman but over all women. So every woman who engages in penetration bolsters the oppressor and reinforces the class power of men.
>"But we don't do penetration, my boyfriend and me"
>If you engage in any form of sexual activity with a man you are reinforcing his class power. You may escape the most extreme form of ritual humiliation but because of the emotional accretions to any form of heterosexual behaviour, men gain great advantages and women lose. There is no such thing as 'pure' sexual pleasure. Such 'pleasure' is created by fantasy, memory and experience. Sexual 'pleasure' cannot be separated from the emotions that accompany the exercise of power and the experience of powerlessness.
>(If you don't do penetration, why not take a woman lover? If you strip a man of his unique ability to humiliate, you are left with a creature who is merely worse at every sort of sexual activity than a woman is).
It is obviously a strategy to convince heterosexual women to become lesbians like them, btw.
None of this contradicts what I said. ALC thinks women are holes to be fucked and dominated. Sheila Jeffries thinks men thinks women are holes to be fucked and dominated.
Anonymous :
2 days ago :
No.4770
>>4774
>>4770
Oh my god, I'm not reading all this schizo. You're not a woman.
>>4837>>4770
Insultingly simplistic to make a parallel between the fat acceptance movement and the antiporn one, and then saying it's only made up of insecure ugly women. Seriously it's posts like these that make me miss radical feminist Tumblr despite having all the shitty aspects I mentioned. I get that this is an image board and it's going to attract mostly men and specifically mentally ill men who think that their infantile assessment of the world is how everything truly works, but have some respect for other's intelligence for the love of god.
>4766
Jeffreys thinks men and women alike (!) think women are holes..., etc. So she does not think women are unaware. For her, heterosexual women understand the 'true' nature of all this and would have to in order to achieve sexual responsivity at all, because if a woman had not 'bought into' this then she would refuse to date men and would naturally be a lesbian. Hence her convicting hetero women of collaboration with the oppressor (as I said before, an obviously pathological way of speaking).
This means that according to her theories (though not how her theories have been applied rhetorically) there is no difference between AGPs and natal women. Both take part in the eroticization of women's subordination. This applies even to masochistic-minded AGPs like ALC (remember that most AGPs are quiet autists)
>>4765
>>4763
I don't really go on the radical feminist side of Tumblr because it's just blackpill after blackpill but I lurked around there for a while and aside from Ovarit (which no one will really miss) it's the most prominent radfem hub in the mainstream internet. Even there, lesbian separatists were mostly quiet about their most extreme takes like these and this kind of cognitive dissonance was still called out more often than not. Sure I did read posts calling straight women a "cancer" and saying that female anatomy is inherently oppressive but they stood out precisely because they were rare to see. Most other radfems called them out for being basically indistinguishable from incels.
Again I don't go lurk around there anymore because it's genuine suicide fuel to see how men can treat women and get away with it, and then read post after post about how it could happen to any woman and it's only getting worse etc., but it has to be said that even among the notoriously doomer women that make up those spaces, takes this extreme are still rare.
>but it has to be said that even among the notoriously doomer women that make up those spaces, takes this extreme are still rare.
Because lesbianism is both a biological fact and uncommon, the number of heterosexual women in the rank-and-file of the movement outweighs the number of lesbian feminists. Often the het women are involved in these ideas because of some personality disorder, emotional issues or relationship troubles of their own (this is not an insult because it is true for almost all political movements: most activists in politics are trying to achieve some emotional need, and this goes whatever the actual ideas, though the ideas are of course related to the pathology in question).
However, the spirit of Jeffreys and other les feminists still hangs over this whole debate, and indeed there was a quote of hers at the footer of every Ovarit page. Hence the over-representation of les separatists in the leadership of the movement: in the UK, essentially all those who are not conservatives who made common cause for convenience are the direct descendants of lesbian feminists, often separatists, from the second wave.
>ure I did read posts calling straight women a "cancer" and saying that female anatomy is inherently oppressive but they stood out precisely because they were rare to see. Most other radfems called them out for being basically indistinguishable from incels.
Becuase lesbian separatism is about emotional needs on the part of the lesbians in question, the ideas are totally inconsistent as I showed above and more ordinary, rank-and-file hetero women are able to pick them up and run with them. But it always serves an emotional need on the part of the speaker. Whenever I hear of 'fat acceptance' all I can think is: you are a fat person (nothing particularly wrong with it) who is embarrassed by it and are having a counter-transference with those around you. The same goes for anti-porn activists: you think you are unattractive and worry your boyfriend is dreaming of other women. How many of these people inveigh against sperm donation, which is eugenic in nature given the requirements for donors and also directly involves an exchange of money between donor and recepient in exchange for the donor's engaging in a sexual act? I thought that was exploitation, which was wrong? It just doesn't make sense and should be deconstructed rather than taken seriously imo.
Anonymous :
2 days ago :
No.4772
>>4775
>>4772
This is obviously a transwoman going by his mental gymnastics.
>>4799>>4772
I'm a man ('cis man', as we now have to say)
I'm a social scientist and I talk with a wide variety of people through my work. Lesbians are definitely unhappier people in general, though this doesn't mean lesbianism should be discouraged, because discouraging it won't make it go away, only transmute it into other forces (becoming a nun, etc)
>>4775
Not so....
>>4784
People with mental disabilities are treated as more childish and given less responsibility. The reason it would be strange for a non-disabled 50 year-old to act childishly is because that is not in his nature and is one of those things you mention.
For trannies, it is in their nature to adopt the mannerisms and roles of the opposite sex, and thanks to modern medicine, they can adopt their bodies (to some extent) and look more like what they want to be.
>Becuase lesbian separatism is about emotional needs on the part of the lesbians in question
This is quite true in my own experience, and of lesbian behavior in general. If you don't mind me asking, did you arrive at this conclusion based on your experiences with this by being a straight woman or are you just an above-average perceptive man looking in?
>>4770
>4766
Jeffreys thinks men and women alike (!) think women are holes..., etc. So she does not think women are unaware. For her, heterosexual women understand the 'true' nature of all this and would have to in order to achieve sexual responsivity at all, because if a woman had not 'bought into' this then she would refuse to date men and would naturally be a lesbian. Hence her convicting hetero women of collaboration with the oppressor (as I said before, an obviously pathological way of speaking).
This means that according to her theories (though not how her theories have been applied rhetorically) there is no difference between AGPs and natal women. Both take part in the eroticization of women's subordination. This applies even to masochistic-minded AGPs like ALC (remember that most AGPs are quiet autists)
>>4765
>but it has to be said that even among the notoriously doomer women that make up those spaces, takes this extreme are still rare.
Because lesbianism is both a biological fact and uncommon, the number of heterosexual women in the rank-and-file of the movement outweighs the number of lesbian feminists. Often the het women are involved in these ideas because of some personality disorder, emotional issues or relationship troubles of their own (this is not an insult because it is true for almost all political movements: most activists in politics are trying to achieve some emotional need, and this goes whatever the actual ideas, though the ideas are of course related to the pathology in question).
However, the spirit of Jeffreys and other les feminists still hangs over this whole debate, and indeed there was a quote of hers at the footer of every Ovarit page. Hence the over-representation of les separatists in the leadership of the movement: in the UK, essentially all those who are not conservatives who made common cause for convenience are the direct descendants of lesbian feminists, often separatists, from the second wave.
>ure I did read posts calling straight women a "cancer" and saying that female anatomy is inherently oppressive but they stood out precisely because they were rare to see. Most other radfems called them out for being basically indistinguishable from incels.
Becuase lesbian separatism is about emotional needs on the part of the lesbians in question, the ideas are totally inconsistent as I showed above and more ordinary, rank-and-file hetero women are able to pick them up and run with them. But it always serves an emotional need on the part of the speaker. Whenever I hear of 'fat acceptance' all I can think is: you are a fat person (nothing particularly wrong with it) who is embarrassed by it and are having a counter-transference with those around you. The same goes for anti-porn activists: you think you are unattractive and worry your boyfriend is dreaming of other women. How many of these people inveigh against sperm donation, which is eugenic in nature given the requirements for donors and also directly involves an exchange of money between donor and recepient in exchange for the donor's engaging in a sexual act? I thought that was exploitation, which was wrong? It just doesn't make sense and should be deconstructed rather than taken seriously imo.
Oh my god, I'm not reading all this schizo. You're not a woman.
Anonymous :
2 days ago :
No.4775
>>4799
>>4772
I'm a man ('cis man', as we now have to say)
I'm a social scientist and I talk with a wide variety of people through my work. Lesbians are definitely unhappier people in general, though this doesn't mean lesbianism should be discouraged, because discouraging it won't make it go away, only transmute it into other forces (becoming a nun, etc)
>>4775
Not so....
>>4784
People with mental disabilities are treated as more childish and given less responsibility. The reason it would be strange for a non-disabled 50 year-old to act childishly is because that is not in his nature and is one of those things you mention.
For trannies, it is in their nature to adopt the mannerisms and roles of the opposite sex, and thanks to modern medicine, they can adopt their bodies (to some extent) and look more like what they want to be.
>>4772
>Becuase lesbian separatism is about emotional needs on the part of the lesbians in question
This is quite true in my own experience, and of lesbian behavior in general. If you don't mind me asking, did you arrive at this conclusion based on your experiences with this by being a straight woman or are you just an above-average perceptive man looking in?
This is obviously a transwoman going by his mental gymnastics.
Indeed. These degenerates cannot even explain why we should accept their hideousness, even when they are given 10,000 words to do it in. Because they are against every law of nature. You may as well deny the existence of gravity. This is why they are acting out recently, just throw them under the jail.
Anonymous :
2 days ago :
No.4784
>>4786
>>4784
Agree, but the tide shall turn soon. Eric Voeglin, Spengler warned of the times we go through today. But once we clamp down -as we did to the Cathrs, who were the pests of their age - the ship of society will begin to right, and a Caesar shall rule again. The polls are in our favour, no one will ever ever ever ever ever stop us from righting the world.
>>4799>>4772
I'm a man ('cis man', as we now have to say)
I'm a social scientist and I talk with a wide variety of people through my work. Lesbians are definitely unhappier people in general, though this doesn't mean lesbianism should be discouraged, because discouraging it won't make it go away, only transmute it into other forces (becoming a nun, etc)
>>4775
Not so....
>>4784
People with mental disabilities are treated as more childish and given less responsibility. The reason it would be strange for a non-disabled 50 year-old to act childishly is because that is not in his nature and is one of those things you mention.
For trannies, it is in their nature to adopt the mannerisms and roles of the opposite sex, and thanks to modern medicine, they can adopt their bodies (to some extent) and look more like what they want to be.
>>4590
>>4570
I don't really care what people do, but if I see a man in a dress in public, I assume he's at least somewhat mentally ill. And having met plenty of men in dresses, I've yet to be wrong in this assumption. So it'd be a little concerning if I went to see a doctor or lawyer about an important matter and he turned out to be a guy in a dress.
Performing your god-given gender role in public is a common decency that you owe other people, and refusing to do so points to attention-seeking tendencies or even mental illness.
That statement is uncontroversial when applied to other biologically-based social roles like age (everyone would recognise a 50 year old acting like they're 5 for what it is - attention-seeking, a fetish, or mental illness) but man-in-a-dress propaganda has fried everyone's brains.
>>4784
>>4590
Performing your god-given gender role in public is a common decency that you owe other people, and refusing to do so points to attention-seeking tendencies or even mental illness.
That statement is uncontroversial when applied to other biologically-based social roles like age (everyone would recognise a 50 year old acting like they're 5 for what it is - attention-seeking, a fetish, or mental illness) but man-in-a-dress propaganda has fried everyone's brains.
Agree, but the tide shall turn soon. Eric Voeglin, Spengler warned of the times we go through today. But once we clamp down -as we did to the Cathrs, who were the pests of their age - the ship of society will begin to right, and a Caesar shall rule again. The polls are in our favour, no one will ever ever ever ever ever stop us from righting the world.
>>4786
>>4784
Agree, but the tide shall turn soon. Eric Voeglin, Spengler warned of the times we go through today. But once we clamp down -as we did to the Cathrs, who were the pests of their age - the ship of society will begin to right, and a Caesar shall rule again. The polls are in our favour, no one will ever ever ever ever ever stop us from righting the world.
Thank you, dear schizoposter, for agreeing with me.
Don't take away my lovely tomboys
>>4772
>Becuase lesbian separatism is about emotional needs on the part of the lesbians in question
This is quite true in my own experience, and of lesbian behavior in general. If you don't mind me asking, did you arrive at this conclusion based on your experiences with this by being a straight woman or are you just an above-average perceptive man looking in?
I'm a man ('cis man', as we now have to say)
I'm a social scientist and I talk with a wide variety of people through my work. Lesbians are definitely unhappier people in general, though this doesn't mean lesbianism should be discouraged, because discouraging it won't make it go away, only transmute it into other forces (becoming a nun, etc)
>>4775>>4772
This is obviously a transwoman going by his mental gymnastics.
Not so....
>>4784>>4590
Performing your god-given gender role in public is a common decency that you owe other people, and refusing to do so points to attention-seeking tendencies or even mental illness.
That statement is uncontroversial when applied to other biologically-based social roles like age (everyone would recognise a 50 year old acting like they're 5 for what it is - attention-seeking, a fetish, or mental illness) but man-in-a-dress propaganda has fried everyone's brains.
People with mental disabilities are treated as more childish and given less responsibility. The reason it would be strange for a non-disabled 50 year-old to act childishly is because that is not in his nature and is one of those things you mention.
For trannies, it is in their nature to adopt the mannerisms and roles of the opposite sex, and thanks to modern medicine, they can adopt their bodies (to some extent) and look more like what they want to be.
Anonymous :
2 days ago :
No.4804
>>4816
>>4804
No, I am familiar with his typology, and I also read his actual articles rather than hearing his thoughts filtered by radical feminists.
There isn't anything I have said that contradicts Blanchard's theories (by the way, he's in favor of letting AGPs transition, if they have bad dysphoria)
>>4799
>>4772
I'm a man ('cis man', as we now have to say)
I'm a social scientist and I talk with a wide variety of people through my work. Lesbians are definitely unhappier people in general, though this doesn't mean lesbianism should be discouraged, because discouraging it won't make it go away, only transmute it into other forces (becoming a nun, etc)
>>4775
Not so....
>>4784
People with mental disabilities are treated as more childish and given less responsibility. The reason it would be strange for a non-disabled 50 year-old to act childishly is because that is not in his nature and is one of those things you mention.
For trannies, it is in their nature to adopt the mannerisms and roles of the opposite sex, and thanks to modern medicine, they can adopt their bodies (to some extent) and look more like what they want to be.
You're unfamiliar with the Blanchard dichotomy
Anonymous :
2 days ago :
No.4816
>>4849
>>4816
If you were familiar with his dichotomy, you would know that acting feminine does not come "naturally" to AGPs. They typically do not start transitioning until later in life, display male typical behavior, and their "femininity" is very much a learned and practiced performance, unlike HSTS.
>>4804
>>4799
You're unfamiliar with the Blanchard dichotomy
No, I am familiar with his typology, and I also read his actual articles rather than hearing his thoughts filtered by radical feminists.
There isn't anything I have said that contradicts Blanchard's theories (by the way, he's in favor of letting AGPs transition, if they have bad dysphoria)
Anonymous :
1 day ago :
No.4837
>>4839
>>4837
You have not really understood the point I made. I am actually in favor of both these movements (fat acceptance only to a moderate extent, because obesity is damaging to health obvs)
What I pointed out was the truism that a person's motivations for engaging in political action may be self-interested, even if the ideals standing behind the movement are worthy.
Do you disagree that the fat acceptance movement is largely constituted of overweight women? I just can't see how one can disagree with that, to be honest. Are they insecure? They do seem insecure to me.
This is just common knowledge, really, uncontroversial stuff.
Re antiporn activism, it is interesting that the people behind this movement are largely older women, and this needs to be explained. It can't be explained by the fact that people get more conservative as they get older, because the thought leaders of the movement (which I distinguish from the rank-and-file when talking about any movement) have left-wing positions on virtually everything else, except perhaps trans topics and alternative sexuality (S/M etc). You need to actually offer an explanation which explains this better than mine, and I'd be interested to hear it
>>4770
>4766
Jeffreys thinks men and women alike (!) think women are holes..., etc. So she does not think women are unaware. For her, heterosexual women understand the 'true' nature of all this and would have to in order to achieve sexual responsivity at all, because if a woman had not 'bought into' this then she would refuse to date men and would naturally be a lesbian. Hence her convicting hetero women of collaboration with the oppressor (as I said before, an obviously pathological way of speaking).
This means that according to her theories (though not how her theories have been applied rhetorically) there is no difference between AGPs and natal women. Both take part in the eroticization of women's subordination. This applies even to masochistic-minded AGPs like ALC (remember that most AGPs are quiet autists)
>>4765
>but it has to be said that even among the notoriously doomer women that make up those spaces, takes this extreme are still rare.
Because lesbianism is both a biological fact and uncommon, the number of heterosexual women in the rank-and-file of the movement outweighs the number of lesbian feminists. Often the het women are involved in these ideas because of some personality disorder, emotional issues or relationship troubles of their own (this is not an insult because it is true for almost all political movements: most activists in politics are trying to achieve some emotional need, and this goes whatever the actual ideas, though the ideas are of course related to the pathology in question).
However, the spirit of Jeffreys and other les feminists still hangs over this whole debate, and indeed there was a quote of hers at the footer of every Ovarit page. Hence the over-representation of les separatists in the leadership of the movement: in the UK, essentially all those who are not conservatives who made common cause for convenience are the direct descendants of lesbian feminists, often separatists, from the second wave.
>ure I did read posts calling straight women a "cancer" and saying that female anatomy is inherently oppressive but they stood out precisely because they were rare to see. Most other radfems called them out for being basically indistinguishable from incels.
Becuase lesbian separatism is about emotional needs on the part of the lesbians in question, the ideas are totally inconsistent as I showed above and more ordinary, rank-and-file hetero women are able to pick them up and run with them. But it always serves an emotional need on the part of the speaker. Whenever I hear of 'fat acceptance' all I can think is: you are a fat person (nothing particularly wrong with it) who is embarrassed by it and are having a counter-transference with those around you. The same goes for anti-porn activists: you think you are unattractive and worry your boyfriend is dreaming of other women. How many of these people inveigh against sperm donation, which is eugenic in nature given the requirements for donors and also directly involves an exchange of money between donor and recepient in exchange for the donor's engaging in a sexual act? I thought that was exploitation, which was wrong? It just doesn't make sense and should be deconstructed rather than taken seriously imo.
Insultingly simplistic to make a parallel between the fat acceptance movement and the antiporn one, and then saying it's only made up of insecure ugly women. Seriously it's posts like these that make me miss radical feminist Tumblr despite having all the shitty aspects I mentioned. I get that this is an image board and it's going to attract mostly men and specifically mentally ill men who think that their infantile assessment of the world is how everything truly works, but have some respect for other's intelligence for the love of god.
Anonymous :
1 day ago :
No.4839
>>4848
>>4839
da but anti porn activists are largely anti porn because they think the performers are being exploited / raped and because they think porn habits bleed into mistreatment and objectification (mostly of women) in real life
reducing it to just the jealousy of ugly women is kinda gross. no wonder ur a tranny
>>4837
>>4770
Insultingly simplistic to make a parallel between the fat acceptance movement and the antiporn one, and then saying it's only made up of insecure ugly women. Seriously it's posts like these that make me miss radical feminist Tumblr despite having all the shitty aspects I mentioned. I get that this is an image board and it's going to attract mostly men and specifically mentally ill men who think that their infantile assessment of the world is how everything truly works, but have some respect for other's intelligence for the love of god.
You have not really understood the point I made. I am actually in favor of both these movements (fat acceptance only to a moderate extent, because obesity is damaging to health obvs)
What I pointed out was the truism that a person's motivations for engaging in political action may be self-interested, even if the ideals standing behind the movement are worthy.
Do you disagree that the fat acceptance movement is largely constituted of overweight women? I just can't see how one can disagree with that, to be honest. Are they insecure? They do seem insecure to me.
This is just common knowledge, really, uncontroversial stuff.
Re antiporn activism, it is interesting that the people behind this movement are largely older women, and this needs to be explained. It can't be explained by the fact that people get more conservative as they get older, because the thought leaders of the movement (which I distinguish from the rank-and-file when talking about any movement) have left-wing positions on virtually everything else, except perhaps trans topics and alternative sexuality (S/M etc). You need to actually offer an explanation which explains this better than mine, and I'd be interested to hear it
Anonymous :
1 day ago :
No.4848
>>4882
>>4848
But Jeffreys is claiming that women (cis women, that is) are aware of the underlying nature of what sex is (for her, all sex is rape, as with Dworkin) and they actually ENJOY this FOR this reason
Hence women are collaborating with the enemy when they sleeping with men. Men are not deceiving them: they are really aware.
This means that according to these theories, there is no difference between Andrea Long Chu and ordinary women: both eroticize subordination. This is obviously an absurd view but it is the radical feminist position. The decision to be all anti-Andrea Long Chu, from their end, seems contradictory when they already interpret women as eroticizing being subordinated
>>4849
It's true that late transitioners don't display feminine behavior as kids, but non-autistic AGPs (and a lot of them are autistic) can show ordinary female mannerisms because they pick up naturally on the way women vs men behave, and they do not consciously learn or practice. What you are talking about is the autistic subtype, who actually have to study (and as you say, it has a very practiced feel about it)
The actor Hunter Schafer is an example of a non-autistic AGP who seems (at least to me) to be quite feminine. At least she doesn't set off mannish vibes, which is the test I use.
The reason I talk about AGP as something in a person's nature is that there is some evidence it's caused by hormones in the womb, see digit lengths etc. There are also studies looking at brains in fMRI but these are small and unreliable. I do think there is an underlying undermasculinization. Doesn't mean every AGP should transition; only if they feel severe, unremitting dysphoria (hence my suspicion of Andrea Long Chu, who seems to be doing it purely for pleasure's sake)
>>4839
>>4837
You have not really understood the point I made. I am actually in favor of both these movements (fat acceptance only to a moderate extent, because obesity is damaging to health obvs)
What I pointed out was the truism that a person's motivations for engaging in political action may be self-interested, even if the ideals standing behind the movement are worthy.
Do you disagree that the fat acceptance movement is largely constituted of overweight women? I just can't see how one can disagree with that, to be honest. Are they insecure? They do seem insecure to me.
This is just common knowledge, really, uncontroversial stuff.
Re antiporn activism, it is interesting that the people behind this movement are largely older women, and this needs to be explained. It can't be explained by the fact that people get more conservative as they get older, because the thought leaders of the movement (which I distinguish from the rank-and-file when talking about any movement) have left-wing positions on virtually everything else, except perhaps trans topics and alternative sexuality (S/M etc). You need to actually offer an explanation which explains this better than mine, and I'd be interested to hear it
da but anti porn activists are largely anti porn because they think the performers are being exploited / raped and because they think porn habits bleed into mistreatment and objectification (mostly of women) in real life
reducing it to just the jealousy of ugly women is kinda gross. no wonder ur a tranny
Anonymous :
1 day ago :
No.4849
>>4882
>>4848
But Jeffreys is claiming that women (cis women, that is) are aware of the underlying nature of what sex is (for her, all sex is rape, as with Dworkin) and they actually ENJOY this FOR this reason
Hence women are collaborating with the enemy when they sleeping with men. Men are not deceiving them: they are really aware.
This means that according to these theories, there is no difference between Andrea Long Chu and ordinary women: both eroticize subordination. This is obviously an absurd view but it is the radical feminist position. The decision to be all anti-Andrea Long Chu, from their end, seems contradictory when they already interpret women as eroticizing being subordinated
>>4849
It's true that late transitioners don't display feminine behavior as kids, but non-autistic AGPs (and a lot of them are autistic) can show ordinary female mannerisms because they pick up naturally on the way women vs men behave, and they do not consciously learn or practice. What you are talking about is the autistic subtype, who actually have to study (and as you say, it has a very practiced feel about it)
The actor Hunter Schafer is an example of a non-autistic AGP who seems (at least to me) to be quite feminine. At least she doesn't set off mannish vibes, which is the test I use.
The reason I talk about AGP as something in a person's nature is that there is some evidence it's caused by hormones in the womb, see digit lengths etc. There are also studies looking at brains in fMRI but these are small and unreliable. I do think there is an underlying undermasculinization. Doesn't mean every AGP should transition; only if they feel severe, unremitting dysphoria (hence my suspicion of Andrea Long Chu, who seems to be doing it purely for pleasure's sake)
>>4816
>>4804
No, I am familiar with his typology, and I also read his actual articles rather than hearing his thoughts filtered by radical feminists.
There isn't anything I have said that contradicts Blanchard's theories (by the way, he's in favor of letting AGPs transition, if they have bad dysphoria)
If you were familiar with his dichotomy, you would know that acting feminine does not come "naturally" to AGPs. They typically do not start transitioning until later in life, display male typical behavior, and their "femininity" is very much a learned and practiced performance, unlike HSTS.
>>4848
>>4839
da but anti porn activists are largely anti porn because they think the performers are being exploited / raped and because they think porn habits bleed into mistreatment and objectification (mostly of women) in real life
reducing it to just the jealousy of ugly women is kinda gross. no wonder ur a tranny
But Jeffreys is claiming that women (cis women, that is) are aware of the underlying nature of what sex is (for her, all sex is rape, as with Dworkin) and they actually ENJOY this FOR this reason
Hence women are collaborating with the enemy when they sleeping with men. Men are not deceiving them: they are really aware.
This means that according to these theories, there is no difference between Andrea Long Chu and ordinary women: both eroticize subordination. This is obviously an absurd view but it is the radical feminist position. The decision to be all anti-Andrea Long Chu, from their end, seems contradictory when they already interpret women as eroticizing being subordinated
>>4849>>4816
If you were familiar with his dichotomy, you would know that acting feminine does not come "naturally" to AGPs. They typically do not start transitioning until later in life, display male typical behavior, and their "femininity" is very much a learned and practiced performance, unlike HSTS.
It's true that late transitioners don't display feminine behavior as kids, but non-autistic AGPs (and a lot of them are autistic) can show ordinary female mannerisms because they pick up naturally on the way women vs men behave, and they do not consciously learn or practice. What you are talking about is the autistic subtype, who actually have to study (and as you say, it has a very practiced feel about it)
The actor Hunter Schafer is an example of a non-autistic AGP who seems (at least to me) to be quite feminine. At least she doesn't set off mannish vibes, which is the test I use.
The reason I talk about AGP as something in a person's nature is that there is some evidence it's caused by hormones in the womb, see digit lengths etc. There are also studies looking at brains in fMRI but these are small and unreliable. I do think there is an underlying undermasculinization. Doesn't mean every AGP should transition; only if they feel severe, unremitting dysphoria (hence my suspicion of Andrea Long Chu, who seems to be doing it purely for pleasure's sake)