Culture Tranny News Megathread - Hot tranny newds

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...school-attack-caught-camera-says-bullied.html

5412086-6317165-image-m-70_1540490802441.jpg

A transgender girl accused of assaulting two students at a Texas high school alleges that she was being bullied and was merely fighting back

Shocking video shows a student identified by police as Travez Perry violently punching, kicking and stomping on a girl in the hallway of Tomball High School.

The female student was transported to the hospital along with a male student, whom Perry allegedly kicked in the face and knocked unconscious.

According to the police report, Perry - who goes by 'Millie' - told officers that the victim has been bullying her and had posted a photo of her on social media with a negative comment.

One Tomball High School parent whose daughter knows Perry said that the 18-year-old had been the target of a death threat.

'From what my daughter has said that the girl that was the bully had posted a picture of Millie saying people like this should die,' the mother, who asked not to be identified by name, told DailyMail.com.

When Perry appeared in court on assault charges, her attorney told a judge that the teen has been undergoing a difficult transition from male to female and that: 'There's more to this story than meets the eye.'

Perry is currently out on bond, according to authorities.

The video of the altercation sparked a widespread debate on social media as some claim Perry was justified in standing up to her alleged bullies and others condemn her use of violence.

The mother who spoke with DailyMail.com has been one of Millie's most ardent defenders on Facebook.

'I do not condone violence at all. But situations like this show that people now a days, not just kids, think they can post what they want. Or say what they want without thinking of who they are hurting,' she said.

'Nobody knows what Millie has gone through, and this could have just been a final straw for her. That is all speculation of course because I don't personally know her or her family, but as a parent and someone who is part of the LGBTQ community this girl needs help and support, not grown men online talking about her private parts and shaming and mocking her.'

One Facebook commenter summed up the views of many, writing: 'This was brutal, and severe! I was bullied for years and never attacked anyone!'

Multiple commenters rejected the gender transition defense and classified the attack as a male senselessly beating a female.

One woman wrote on Facebook: 'This person will get off because they're transitioning. This is an animal. She kicked, and stomped, and beat...not okay. Bullying is not acceptable, but kicking someone in the head. Punishment doesn't fit the crime.'
Click to expand...


FB https://www.facebook.com/travez.perry http://archive.is/mnEmm

FB_IMG_1540539738552.jpg
 
Last edited:
Click to expand...
Inventor of the Telephone said:
Even normal women are in general incapable of achieving and maintaining basic physical standards, besides being a liability in any kind of battle scenario, there's no way even a single tranny of any sex could be anything but detrimental.
Click to expand...

Nah. Only 10% of troops ever go to a war zone, and of those, only a miniscule amount would ever physically be a part of a "battle scenario", and even then mostly by accident. The incels who whine on about "how is the little lady soldier going to carry a man off the battlefield" as a reason for the whole army not to employ women are just misogynists who don't have a clue what "battle" looks like in the 21st century. Hint: it's more likely to involve a button than a gun.

That said, you can't be in the army if you're dependent on medications or asthmatic or have depression or any one of many, many common things that the general population suffer from. Troons dilating is just off the charts of things the army doesn't need or want. Also: major surgeries, and the kind of debilitating mental illness that makes you convinced you are something which you objectively physically are not.

Anyway, enjoy this snippet of nonsense from the utterly cucked Washington post, about poor stealth trannies who have not been able to "come out" in the army. LOL. I assume they mean that Lt. Jones will now be encouraged to tell all his mates about his enthusiasm for wearing lacy women's panties.

cucked post.PNG
 
Inventor of the Telephone said:
Even normal women are in general incapable of achieving and maintaining basic physical standards, besides being a liability in any kind of battle scenario, there's no way even a single tranny of any sex could be anything but detrimental.
Click to expand...
Which barracks are the troons gonna sleep in? Where are they gonna be sorted for boot camp? (Or whatever they call it.) I can see this being a big negative for women looking to serve, but I guess I'm just a cynic.

Hell, if a troon recruit is actually female will "he" be held to the male standards for physical fitness? Viz:

All recruits arriving at the Navy's boot-camp will complete an initial 1.5 mile run. Male recruits must complete the run in 16 minutes 10 seconds or less, the female recruits in 18 minutes 37 seconds or less. If a recruit fails the first attempt, then they must retest within 48 hours. If a recruit fails the retest, the recruit will be discharged with an entry level separation.
Click to expand...

As in, what happens to an FTM who does it 17 minutes? Does "he" wash out on the first day?

Alternatively, can a male recruit who does it in 17 minutes suddenly declare his new name is Flower Destiny, don't you dare call "her" Harold any more and suddenly qualify? Note that "good" pushups (24) for a female are below the probationary level (42) for a male...which is also the same number as "excellent" pushups for a female.
 
Elwood P. Dowd said:
Which barracks are the troons gonna sleep in? Where are they gonna be sorted for boot camp? (Or whatever they call it.) I can see this being a big negative for women looking to serve, but I guess I'm just a cynic.

Hell, if a troon recruit is actually female will "he" be held to the male standards for physical fitness? Viz:



As in, what happens to an FTM who does it 17 minutes? Does "he" wash out on the first day?

Alternatively, can a male recruit who does it in 17 minutes suddenly declare his new name is Flower Destiny, don't you dare call "her" Harold any more and suddenly qualify? Note that "good" pushups (24) for a female are below the probationary level (42) for a male...which is also the same number as "excellent" pushups for a female.
Click to expand...

To be fair what is the point of having different standards in the first place?
 
We don't really have to worry about FTMs in military because most don't meet the men's height requirement for the military, and the fact the military absolutely won't lower their physical standards for men just so some manlet can get validation.
 
Treasure Champs said:
Nah. Only 10% of troops ever go to a war zone, and of those, only a miniscule amount would ever physically be a part of a "battle scenario", and even then mostly by accident. The incels who whine on about "how is the little lady soldier going to carry a man off the battlefield" as a reason for the whole army not to employ women are just misogynists who don't have a clue what "battle" looks like in the 21st century. Hint: it's more likely to involve a button than a gun.

That said, you can't be in the army if you're dependent on medications or asthmatic or have depression or any one of many, many common things that the general population suffer from. Troons dilating is just off the charts of things the army doesn't need or want. Also: major surgeries, and the kind of debilitating mental illness that makes you convinced you are something which you objectively physically are not.

Anyway, enjoy this snippet of nonsense from the utterly cucked Washington post, about poor stealth trannies who have not been able to "come out" in the army. LOL. I assume they mean that Lt. Jones will now be encouraged to tell all his mates about his enthusiasm for wearing lacy women's panties.

View attachment 1871474
Click to expand...
Greatest fighting Force on God's green earth everyone...God I'm partly glad R Lee ermey isn't here to see whats about to happen to his "beloved Marine Corps."


Also some clown on twitter said "if you hate trans people than you hate american." If that's true than slap a Stahlhelm on my head and call me col klink
 
WinchesterPremium said:
To be fair what is the point of having different standards in the first place?
Click to expand...
because men and women are anatomically different.

women's bodies are anatomically set up to be smaller, have less testosterone, higher body fat, and less muscle than men's because we're the incubators. men are built to be the more physically imposing sex by default so they can go hunt for food and flex on each other. it's just science.

so with all that being said, if you want to give women their fair shakes in the military, sports, etc., you have to have different standards than men. a female athlete is still an athlete, and definitely faster and stronger than the average joe/joelene, but she's still generally not going to be as strong or as fast as a male athlete in that same realm.
 
christie said:
because men and women are anatomically different.

women's bodies are anatomically set up to be smaller, have less testosterone, higher body fat, and less muscle than men's because we're the incubators. men are built to be the more physically imposing sex by default so they can go hunt for food and flex on each other. it's just science.

so with all that being said, if you want to give women their fair shakes in the military, sports, etc., you have to have different standards than men. a female athlete is still an athlete, and definitely faster and stronger than the average joe/joelene, but she's still generally not going to be as strong or as fast as a male athlete in that same realm.
Click to expand...

Personally I feel like that is a liability but IDK, if they don't see combat, it matters less.

Take firefighters for example, obviously we can't make it easier for women to become firefighters just so they can get a fair shot, that would be insane as firefighters need to be in great shape to save people.
 
Ethical Nightmare said:
and the fact the military absolutely won't lower their physical standards for men just so some manlet can get validation.
Click to expand...
I think you're being unduly optimistic, but we shall see.

Syntaxion12 said:
Take firefighters for example, obviously we can't make it easier for women to become firefighters just so they can get a fair shot, that would be insane as firefighters need to be in great shape to save people.
Click to expand...

LOL.

Woman to become NY firefighter despite failing crucial fitness test​

 
Last edited:
Ethical Nightmare said:
We don't really have to worry about FTMs in military because most don't meet the men's height requirement for the military, and the fact the military absolutely won't lower their physical standards for men just so some manlet can get validation.
Click to expand...
Then they’ll just enlist as women and later troon out. That’s what the majority of both FTMs and MTFs do so they can get the military and the VA to pay for everything.
 
Syntaxion12 said:
Personally I feel like that is a liability but IDK, if they don't see combat, it matters less.

Take firefighters for example, obviously we can't make it easier for women to become firefighters just so they can get a fair shot, that would be insane as firefighters need to be in great shape to save people.
Click to expand...

That's already a problem. I've literally seen a barely 5'5" female paramedic struggling to carry the stretcher with nothing on it. If her partner hasn't been a huge guy she'd never manage, even with him being there it was obvious he was doing most of the work and having to watch to make sure nothing else happened because she was not able to complete the tasks. The idea that women 'can do anything' is a dangerous narrative too because you now have women taking on roles that they are physically unsuited for and that endanger other people by doing so.

Lowering the physical standards of people in roles that require physical ability in the name of diversity is a net negative for everyone.
 
Elwood P. Dowd said:
I think you're being unduly optimistic, but we shall see.
Click to expand...
It hasn't happened in sports when FTMs want to compete with men. I have heard of some FTMs getting pissed when they come dead last in sports like swimming or track (despite having great times when they competed on the females team), and they cry about how it's unfair and they deserve special treatment and accommodations, they just get ignored or told to go back on the women's team. And if sports doesn't want to be accommodating to them, why the hell would the military?

I mean, I can see the military allowing the ones who do pass the height requirement to initially join, but they'll quickly wash out once they're unable to keep up with the men.
 
The US military is going to become a bunch of women and trannies staying at home whilst dirt poor actual men (a good chunk of them being black guys) go do the actual fighting and getting maimed/killed.

The Russians and/or Chinese must be fucking delighted. The greatest military in the world is being turned into a dick-girl freakshow.
 
Syntaxion12 said:
Personally I feel like that is a liability but IDK, if they don't see combat, it matters less.

Take firefighters for example, obviously we can't make it easier for women to become firefighters just so they can get a fair shot, that would be insane as firefighters need to be in great shape to save people.
Click to expand...
when i say "get their fair shakes", i don't mean "let them do it because they want to, even if they're not technically qualified". i wholeheartedly agree that it's dangerous for everyone involves, and also a huge disservice to women. this is my assumption of how it works, or at least how it SHOULD work:

let's say a woman who can finish the navy's 1.5 mile run in 18 min is in the 80th percentile when it comes to women's run times, while a man who can do the run in 16 min is in the 60th percentile for men's. if there was one set time, it would be the bare minimum 16 min, which may mean that a woman would have to be in the 95th percentile and be exceptionally athletic just to compete. if it can be observed that women and men who meet the 80th and 60th percentiles respectively are found to be physically capable enough for the job, then those time limits are the ones set for each sex. ideally, it's not meant to make it "easier" for women to get in in the sense that they don't have to be as fit as the job really demands-- but rather so those women in the 80th-94th percentile don't get dismissed even though they're just as or more fit than men in the 60th percentile and technically qualify.

i hope that makes sense. i could be completely wrong, but that what seems logical to me.
 
Trooning out in the military will make the women more useful (if their periods stop that’s an improvement, if they get more aggressive due to the T that is too, and if they get their tits hacked off it can do nothing but improve their physical performance, true a fleshtube would be a negative but almost none of them go that far...) and the men less useful (they’ll whinge for their hormones but unlike with T for the girls it’ll do nothing but be a burden to continue logistically when trying to work, they all like to LARP like they’ve lost the ability to open jars after a few weeks on HRT lol so they’ll be faking weakness all the time, and god forbid they actually get a stink ditch, then they can’t even be relied upon to sit at a desk and work, and they will never be able to go into the field again).

However my understanding is that being say an insulin dependent diabetic precludes you from military service since you cannot go into the field with that sort of medical condition, so I don’t get how anyone whose condition requires maintenance can serve. I consider hormones to be optional nonsense but trannies do not.
 
Last edited:
Calculus said:
Girls are brought up to "be kind" while boys are just left "to be boys". Girls also are constantly told by society to follow a lot more restrictions around how they should look, act, dress, etc and that they should be submissive and that men are more intelligent. It makes sense that young women are going along with "positivity", "being your authentic self" and as part of a movement where the loudest voices are male.

In general, women face much worse social repercussions if they disagree with something than if men do. There's also the issue that trans women overwhelming still look and act like men and instinctively women fear men's violence and anger and so are more likely to agree with whatever they want.
Click to expand...
I don't 100% agree. It depends on the culture and how misogynistic it is. For example, in Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries, women and girls are controlled in every aspect of their lives from what they wear to where they sit in public places. I've heard stories about Saudi and other Muslim elites in the UK having very well-behaved girls who are polite and kind but then the boys are horrendously rude and entitled spoilt brats who can do whatever they please. There are a lot of cases of honour killings and femicides documented in the UK within Muslim families such as the case with Banaz Mahmod as well. If you see the number of women killed in the UK by men, a good portion of the perpetrators and victims have origins from countries where Islam is the dominant religion.
 
Last edited:
christie said:
when i say "get their fair shakes", i don't mean "let them do it because they want to, even if they're not technically qualified". i wholeheartedly agree that it's dangerous for everyone involves, and also a huge disservice to women. this is my assumption of how it works, or at least how it SHOULD work:

let's say a woman who can finish the navy's 1.5 mile run in 18 min is in the 80th percentile when it comes to women's run times, while a man who can do the run in 16 min is in the 60th percentile for men's. if there was one set time, it would be the bare minimum 16 min, which may mean that a woman would have to be in the 95th percentile and be exceptionally athletic just to compete. if it can be observed that women and men who meet the 80th and 60th percentiles respectively are found to be physically capable enough for the job, then those time limits are the ones set for each sex. ideally, it's not meant to make it "easier" for women to get in in the sense that they don't have to be as fit as the job really demands-- but rather so those women in the 80th-94th percentile don't get dismissed even though they're just as or more fit than men in the 60th percentile and technically qualify.

i hope that makes sense. i could be completely wrong, but that what seems logical to me.
Click to expand...
Why wouldn't they both need the same actual time? Isn't that the performance metric they're trying to hit? (Can you run from point A to point B in X minutes?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom