Culture Does Gen Z have a transphobia problem? - It’s often assumed that all young people are ultra-progressive – but this isn’t always the case

  • 🏰 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

1337392.jpg
London Trans+ Pride March 2022

23 January 2023
Serena Smith

There are a lot of stereotypes about Gen Z. We all hate working. We’re brain-dead TikTok addicts. We like to eat Tide pods and chicken stewed in cough syrup. Some are more positive, admittedly: it’s often assumed that we all support social justice issues like the fight for trans rights, the Black Lives Matter movement and climate justice. But is there really any truth in any of these big, sweeping assumptions? Can we really claim to generalise about a demographic that makes up nearly 20 per cent of the UK population?

There is research to suggest that Gen Z genuinely are the most progressive generation. 77 per cent of all young voters went for progressive parties in the 2019 election. Nearly half of young Brits believe systemic racism is a major problem facing the UK. When it comes to trans rights, research from the More in Common think tank found that 62 per cent of Gen Z agreed with the statement “trans men are men, trans women are women”.

This isn’t particularly surprising. “This is a very common pattern for emerging social issues – where it’s not an issue many will have thought about even in the relatively recent past, but the increased profile and focus will increase awareness and understanding over time,” Professor Bobby Duffy, author of Generations: Does When You’re Born Shape Who You Are? tells Dazed. He explains that younger generations are often quicker to embrace changes in social attitudes as they’re more “malleable in their thinking”. As Duffy says, being more receptive to progressive beliefs isn’t really a ‘Gen Z’ thing, though – it’s a ‘young person’ thing. Nowadays, for instance, baby boomers are often perceived as stubborn and regressive (see also: the ‘OK boomer’ meme). But when they were young, they were champions of social justice issues of their time, such as the anti-war movement and sexual liberation.

Of course, it’s erroneous to suggest that every single young person in the 60s and 70s spent their time shagging, protesting and swanning around in bell-sleeve mini-dresses. Equally, it’s a bit of an overblown claim to presume that all Gen Z today are extremely socially liberal and dedicated to fighting for progressive causes. “We tend to stereotype Gen Z as universally ‘woke’,” Duffy says. “But there is much more nuance than we’re led to believe in attitudes.”

Notably, anti-trans sentiments seem particularly common among Gen Z. As aforementioned, while a 62 per cent majority of Gen Z agree that “trans men are men, trans women are women”, that still leaves us with 10 per cent who “don’t know” and 28 per cent who actively disagree – hardly insignificant numbers. Many people might assume that TERFs are almost exclusively middle-class, 50-something white women who post about “trans” on Mumsnet and sycophantically reply to every JK Rowling tweet by saying “Spot on once again, Jo 👏” – and while this demographic does undoubtedly account for a lot of TERFs, it does seem as though there’s a worrying number of younger TERFs too.

While undeniably a minority, transphobic young people are particularly vocal, especially on platforms like Twitter and TikTok where anti-trans sentiments often proliferate within online ‘radfem’ communities. “It’s incredibly easy to get sucked into an alt-right wormhole on social media sites,” Eliott, 22, tells Dazed. “On Twitter you often see young people liking a few radical feminist tweets, and then a few months later they’re a full-blown anti-trans TERF.”

radfem baby terf twitter actually one of the scariest parts of this website cos everyone’s been focused on the old ones while they’re appearing on the timeline more and more every day
— Sock Is A Slur (@leoliveeeeee) October 12, 2022

This can be largely ascribed to the way social media algorithms operate. Generally speaking, algorithms are designed to show people increasingly extreme content, as the more enraged and angry users are, the more engagement spikes – and the more money tech execs make. “The speed at which this happens is even more marked on TikTok because of the nature of the algorithm,” Eliott adds. He’s right: despite TikTok recently banning deadnaming and misgendering trans people, a 2021 report from Media Matters found that TikTok’s recommendation algorithm actually promotes homophobia and anti-trans violence.

It’s not just social media which is engendering transphobia among Gen Z – the press, particularly in the UK, is plagued with anti-trans rhetoric. 23-year-old Ellie recently overheard two students being transphobic while using a public bathroom. “They were saying that we shouldn’t be allowed to use the toilets which align with our gender,” she recalls. “Ironically, when I came out of the cubicle to wash my hands I stood right next to them and they had no idea that the very thing they were complaining about was happening right next to them.”

“It was very clear that they didn’t understand what it meant to be trans,” Ellie continues. “I’m not defending them in any way [...] but they were just talking about an issue that they’ve seen so much in the media and trying to formulate an opinion on it. It’s only natural that they came to such a negative conclusion because of so much of the misinformation, fearmongering, and general toxicity that the UK media has perpetuated over the past few years.” 21-year-old Louis agrees. “I still have a lot of people I went to school with on socials, and it’s so weird because I would genuinely say the majority of them are actually outwardly anti-trans,” he says. “I know people my age who love GB News. It’s so weird – like, that is a news outlet that is made for fucking 50-year-old gammons.”

“On Twitter you often see young people liking a few radical feminist tweets, and then a few months later they’re a full-blown anti-trans TERF” – Eliott

According to analysis by author and trans advocate Shon Faye, in 2020 alone The Times and The Sunday Times published “over 300 articles [about trans issues], almost one a day, and they were all negative”. Elsewhere, transphobes pop up on daytime TV, politicians are asked inflammatory and reductive questions like “can a woman have a penis?”, and columnists refer to the so-called “trans lobby”. It’s also telling that the media treats something as fundamental as trans rights as “up for debate” in the first place. So, it’s not hugely surprising that young people are absorbing transphobic sentiments when they’ve been allowed to proliferate so much in mainstream media.

21-year-old Louis – who lives in Essex – also adds that he suspects anti-trans views are, generally speaking, more prevalent outside of London and in groups of young people who perhaps haven’t encountered more liberal attitudes at university. Research does back this up: a September 2022 survey from the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen) found that a third of Londoners are socially liberal, compared with just 19 per cent of those in urban areas outside the capital. “It would be oversimplifying it to say that these TERF-y sentiments are expected because Southend is a working-class town,” Louis says. “But people are generally scared of change, especially change they don’t understand. So all the hatred comes from a place of the world moving forward, and deep down these people are scared that they’re getting left behind.”

None of this is to say that we aren’t making progress – as aforementioned, attitudes are clearly shifting, with generations becoming increasingly supportive of trans rights over time. Additionally, the fact remains that millennials aren’t becoming more conservative with age – as has been the case for over 100 years – and there’s no huge reason to doubt that Gen Z will follow suit. But that said, we need to do away with the popular conceit that ‘Gen Z will save us’, which glosses over the fact that swathes of young people are being taken in by the unrelenting deluge of anti-trans rhetoric both in the media and on social media. “I think complacency is a far bigger danger to trans people than the actual [anti-trans] radicals themselves,” Eliott says. “Look at the gender recognition bill that was blocked: that would have been voted down if Labour had voted against it, but just 11 Labour MPs voted against it and the rest abstained.” Evidently, while the fight for trans rights is making progress, it’s certainly not a battle won.
 
Expecting radfems to fix clownworld is like expecting a waterfall to flow upwards. Radfem ideology created trannies, its not going to defeat them.

The only reason modern radfems are opposed to trannies is because of self serving reasons, not ideological ones.
I don't see many men actively work to destroy troonism, even Matt Walsh. It's more of a "let's you and him fight" and saying that women deserve it. Matt Walsh didn't start talking about troons since...what? 2019? Even Kellie Jay Keen was fighting longer than that.

Even those who do make a concerted effort give up after a time.
 
I've noticed a worrying trend in a lot of people in my age group under the age of 25 (I'm not completely sure what age cuts off zoomer and millennial, but IMO its 25 and under) is that the ones that are more politically aware are a-OK with authoritarian control when it's their side doing it. Now you might say "isn't that everyone to an extent?", and I would agree with you; however so many zoomers are perfectly fine with their side taking complete control and stripping away their rights so long as their "enemies" get fucked. The rest of zoomers don't give a fuck. Like at all. At best they will troll you or say they support current thing because they don't want to deal with some potential troon banshee reeeeing at them since they literally grew up with the fuckers and know how they react.

A lot of you are saying "the majority just don't give a fuck at all" and it's true, and its a major problem. The hope and care is so far gone that while boomers would cry to the heavens if America became a dictatorship tommorow most zoomers would either just shrug their shoulders, or even worse nod their heads and go "its about time" depending on the beliefs of said dictator. You really shouldn't care about politics too much since that shit isn't healthy and we see where it leads to. However this is beyond that, its total apathy.

We are fucked. The politically active left wing zoomers are the ones you see constantly shitting up twitter, trooning out, sperging about microaggressions, etc. They're following straight into the footsteps of leftist millennials.

Right wing zoomers are either country boys that are lolberts, or kids that got bullied in school that now post constant edgelord shit online to "troll the libs". The rest will just not give a fuck unless it directly affects them heavily, and by that point they will probably just "shut up and do what you're told" by whoever holds the reins in the future.

However I might be wrong on that last point. I am very interested to see what happens when boomers finally start dying off en masse due to old age and gen X becomes the new boomers while the zoomers get to age 35+. Oh things are going to be far worse believe me, but maybe that adversity will actually get peoples heads out their asses and get around to caring about and fixing things.....or just making it worse.
You have some insight, especially about many of us being Loberts, which is quite annoying. However....There are more of us right wing than you realize. The trades are flush with them, and no they aren't all country boys. The problem is we aren't organized because A: were working men, and B: we're scattered across the country, some of us in heavily left wing places with no chances of getting our voices heard (things need welded everywhere, and money is money).

If the trades could be organized WITHOUT union interference, you would have a powerful counter voice. But until then, the indoctrination will continue.
 
No.

They have the same problem everyone else does.

They don’t give a shit about trannies until you force it into their face and mandate that they give a damm.

Then they start to hate you. Real. Real fast.

Litterally the biggist enemy of the LGBTQ is they can’t shut up about it.

People woukd like them more if they weren’t complete faggots.
 
This is how it always is, and it will always be this way. Young people are always more liberal/left leaning

This is not some kind of iron law of human biology. Young people are shaped easily by propaganda. And since that propaganda ensures each generation is more liberal/left than the last, we always get this "old people are conservative, young people are liberal" dichotomy. So in 2022, today's old "conservatives" believe in racial equality, women's lib, and the welfare state, same as they did when they were young "liberals." It's just that today, being "liberal" means you believe in state censorship of misinformation and castrating boys to try and turn them into girls. If the schools were all run by foaming-at-the-mouth Catholic monarchists, we'd always be saying, "Eh, young people are always Catholic/monarchist-leaning than old people."
 
I don't see many men actively work to destroy troonism, even Matt Walsh. It's more of a "let's you and him fight" and saying that women deserve it. Matt Walsh didn't start talking about troons since...what? 2019? Even Kellie Jay Keen was fighting longer than that.

Even those who do make a concerted effort give up after a time.
Because radfems have totally destroyed gender relations. You see more TERFs fighting against troons because troons are stepping in on radfem's gains.

You seem pretty smart in other threads so I don't see why you can't see how feminism gave us troons. It's the logical endpoint.
 
Considering trannies have been the biggest cheerleaders of censorship to keep their delusions going, I can’t imagine why resentment against them is becoming more mainstream.
 
I don't see many men actively work to destroy troonism, even Matt Walsh. It's more of a "let's you and him fight" and saying that women deserve it. Matt Walsh didn't start talking about troons since...what? 2019? Even Kellie Jay Keen was fighting longer than that.

Even those who do make a concerted effort give up after a time.
Why should men fight this fight? We didn’t start this problem, and at the end of the day the reality is it has little direct effect on us.

Let the feminists attempt to slay this beast of their own making.
 
Because radfems have totally destroyed gender relations. You see more TERFs fighting against troons because troons are stepping in on radfem's gains.

You seem pretty smart in other threads so I don't see why you can't see how feminism gave us troons. It's the logical endpoint.
The "radical" in radfems doesn't mean "angry manhating" (although that's often a major trait of radfems). It's a different branch of feminism.

The feminists who pushed tranny nonsense were libfems, not radfems. It's the same crowd that's pro sex work, "sex positive" (ie "hey teens, anal sex is fun!"), having an onlyfans at 18 is empowering, women can do anything a man can, etc, etc.

Both groups are feminist, of course, but it's pretty disingenuous to blame radfems for this.

This happened because a particular brand of feminism ran amok (the corporate friendly, sex positive version) plus the commercial value of coomers. I think both are important.

The radfems are right that this probably wouldn't have gotten off the ground if there wasn't a big crowd of coomers to support it. No movement can get going without at least the tacit approval of most people, and that means somehow getting both men and women on board. One way to get the men on board is to market the movement as sexy. If it can somehow touch on sex in a way that most men can at least sympathize with, it's got a much better chance of surviving.

Like with abortion. Abortion had such a clever marketing scheme. It was sold as something that can only benefit women when in reality, there's tons of skeevy dudes cheering it on out of disgustingly selfish motives. Those guys are massively invested in the ability to compel women to abort their little mistakes so they can dodge responsibility. It's something both sexes can benefit from and be harmed by. But by marketing it as a woman's right, they empowered lots of guys to screech at abortion rallies and on social media, all the while pretending to be soy knights-in-shining-armor. But they're covering their asses ladies, not yours.

It's the same with the tranny stuff. Guys support it either directly because they're coomers or they're seriously ignorant about what the troons are up to and approach it from the lolbert angle of "aww c'mon just let the poor guy coom".

This male support is essential to our current situation.

What I take issue with with the radfems is their delusion that the female support isn't also equally essential to the situation, or that that support wasn't freely given by women. Women and especially libfems, aren't being brainwashed into this by the patriarchy. They're fully grown adults with agency. They're capable of making dumb decisions and supporting troonery completely of their own initiative to fight for "gender equality" and to "be kind".

Both men and women contributed to the tranny problem, each for their own short sighted reasons. The only way you get billionaires and multinational corporations on board is with the support of both.
 
This is not some kind of iron law of human biology. Young people are shaped easily by propaganda. And since that propaganda ensures each generation is more liberal/left than the last, we always get this "old people are conservative, young people are liberal" dichotomy. So in 2022, today's old "conservatives" believe in racial equality, women's lib, and the welfare state, same as they did when they were young "liberals." It's just that today, being "liberal" means you believe in state censorship of misinformation and castrating boys to try and turn them into girls. If the schools were all run by foaming-at-the-mouth Catholic monarchists, we'd always be saying, "Eh, young people are always Catholic/monarchist-leaning than old people."
Kinda but not really. All people are conservative what they know about most and young people don't know much about anything but rarely stay ignorant.

When people learn about the world and especially when become parents, they shed away alot what used to believe as teens and early twenties. Free love didn't stick, disco is dead, satanic panic is a joke and many many other huge fads left little to no mark on the culture at large. People don't abandon everything they ever believed in but plenty because they realize older folks do things for a reason and faults of their ideas start to come apparent with time. As you get older being open to new ideas isn't as fun or useful anymore, most of it you have heard before and tested out.

Some what people found out during their experimenting of youthful ignorance will stick because it works but plenty will be pushed aside for the boring predictable practical peaceful efficiency. Todays teens will be more conservative in their later years just like previous generations and not just because what's traditional changes. Only limited amounts ideas stand the test of time and our elders found many of them already. Young people may live in time where the world doesn't hit as hard as easily and so stay more immature for longer but limits still shine trough. Very few will say it aloud when they get it because whining is childish and it's old news anyway.
 
The "radical" in radfems doesn't mean "angry manhating" (although that's often a major trait of radfems). It's a different branch of feminism.

The feminists who pushed tranny nonsense were libfems, not radfems. It's the same crowd that's pro sex work, "sex positive" (ie "hey teens, anal sex is fun!"), having an onlyfans at 18 is empowering, women can do anything a man can, etc, etc.

Both groups are feminist, of course, but it's pretty disingenuous to blame radfems for this.

This happened because a particular brand of feminism ran amok (the corporate friendly, sex positive version) plus the commercial value of coomers. I think both are important.

The radfems are right that this probably wouldn't have gotten off the ground if there wasn't a big crowd of coomers to support it. No movement can get going without at least the tacit approval of most people, and that means somehow getting both men and women on board. One way to get the men on board is to market the movement as sexy. If it can somehow touch on sex in a way that most men can at least sympathize with, it's got a much better chance of surviving.

Like with abortion. Abortion had such a clever marketing scheme. It was sold as something that can only benefit women when in reality, there's tons of skeevy dudes cheering it on out of disgustingly selfish motives. Those guys are massively invested in the ability to compel women to abort their little mistakes so they can dodge responsibility. It's something both sexes can benefit from and be harmed by. But by marketing it as a woman's right, they empowered lots of guys to screech at abortion rallies and on social media, all the while pretending to be soy knights-in-shining-armor. But they're covering their asses ladies, not yours.

It's the same with the tranny stuff. Guys support it either directly because they're coomers or they're seriously ignorant about what the troons are up to and approach it from the lolbert angle of "aww c'mon just let the poor guy coom".

This male support is essential to our current situation.

What I take issue with with the radfems is their delusion that the female support isn't also equally essential to the situation, or that that support wasn't freely given by women. Women and especially libfems, aren't being brainwashed into this by the patriarchy. They're fully grown adults with agency. They're capable of making dumb decisions and supporting troonery completely of their own initiative to fight for "gender equality" and to "be kind".

Both men and women contributed to the tranny problem, each for their own short sighted reasons. The only way you get billionaires and multinational corporations on board is with the support of both.

Where the radfems and libfems are aligned is denying that the social positioning of men and women is in anyway related to biological reality, and that men are the born enemies of women so long as there is any difference whatsoever in the social roles of the two sexes. Nowhere is this seen more acutely than the issue of women in the military. Women are physically slow, weak, and fragile, which makes them poor fighters, and sexual competition among male soldiers for the attention of female soldiers does tremendous damage to unit cohesion. The human female's "fight or flight" instinct, which is governed by your limbic system, has a *much* stronger "flight" bias than the human male's, and it's such a problem that the military has eliminated penalties for cowardice.

But libfem and radfem alike screech and throw endless tantrums if you actually say any of that and make the logical conclusion that trying to make soldiers out of women is a waste of resources, so we all have to pretend that women make for good infantrymen, and the stress fractures they keep getting in their tiny, bird-like ankles are due to men designing boots wrong. The result of mollifying angry feminists with voting power as that we, as a society, have agreed to pretend there are no meaningful social, physical, or psychological differences between men and women.

The key difference between radfems and libfems is then merely that radfems are obsessed with vaginas and menstruation, but nobody really wants to hear some snarling bitch talk about vagina blood all the time, so the conversation around "what is womanhood, anyway?" has turned into, "Uh, sure, I guess it's just a social status anyone can claim, leave me the fuck alone."

The fact is that without the political empowerment of women, the troon menace would already be over. If women all were as interested in voting as they are in Eastwood Westerns, a creep in a dress going to the ladies' room to leer at women would quickly find himself in a heap on the sidewalk, perhaps short a couple teeth.
 
I don't see many men actively work to destroy troonism, even Matt Walsh.
MtFs are invading female spaces while mostly leaving men alone. FtMs are either crossdressing fujoshis or women who are trying to escape some trauma that they've tied into their femininity-- either way, they don't have interest in invading male spaces to the degree MtFs have for invading female spaces.

This all means it's largely a woman's issue and is fueled largely by female compliance/support. Especially in a society where there is all but enmity between the sexes and women are mostly shooing men away instead of asking for help on this, male involvement in repelling troonism is charity work.
 
This is not some kind of iron law of human biology. Young people are shaped easily by propaganda. And since that propaganda ensures each generation is more liberal/left than the last, we always get this "old people are conservative, young people are liberal" dichotomy. So in 2022, today's old "conservatives" believe in racial equality, women's lib, and the welfare state, same as they did when they were young "liberals." It's just that today, being "liberal" means you believe in state censorship of misinformation and castrating boys to try and turn them into girls. If the schools were all run by foaming-at-the-mouth Catholic monarchists, we'd always be saying, "Eh, young people are always Catholic/monarchist-leaning than old people."
Those on the right-wing who get attached to the "old people are conservative, young people are liberal" dichotomy are either ignorant, coping about the fact that the American left effectively controls the mechanisms of education, finding an excuse to be lazy and not address the problem or the worst of all: nefariously convincing people not to do anything about what is taught in schools so the Overton window is gradually shifted more and more to the left.
 
The "radical" in radfems doesn't mean "angry manhating" (although that's often a major trait of radfems). It's a different branch of feminism.

The feminists who pushed tranny nonsense were libfems, not radfems. It's the same crowd that's pro sex work, "sex positive" (ie "hey teens, anal sex is fun!"), having an onlyfans at 18 is empowering, women can do anything a man can, etc, etc.

Both groups are feminist, of course, but it's pretty disingenuous to blame radfems for this.

This happened because a particular brand of feminism ran amok (the corporate friendly, sex positive version) plus the commercial value of coomers. I think both are important.

The radfems are right that this probably wouldn't have gotten off the ground if there wasn't a big crowd of coomers to support it. No movement can get going without at least the tacit approval of most people, and that means somehow getting both men and women on board. One way to get the men on board is to market the movement as sexy. If it can somehow touch on sex in a way that most men can at least sympathize with, it's got a much better chance of surviving.

Like with abortion. Abortion had such a clever marketing scheme. It was sold as something that can only benefit women when in reality, there's tons of skeevy dudes cheering it on out of disgustingly selfish motives. Those guys are massively invested in the ability to compel women to abort their little mistakes so they can dodge responsibility. It's something both sexes can benefit from and be harmed by. But by marketing it as a woman's right, they empowered lots of guys to screech at abortion rallies and on social media, all the while pretending to be soy knights-in-shining-armor. But they're covering their asses ladies, not yours.

It's the same with the tranny stuff. Guys support it either directly because they're coomers or they're seriously ignorant about what the troons are up to and approach it from the lolbert angle of "aww c'mon just let the poor guy coom".

This male support is essential to our current situation.

What I take issue with with the radfems is their delusion that the female support isn't also equally essential to the situation, or that that support wasn't freely given by women. Women and especially libfems, aren't being brainwashed into this by the patriarchy. They're fully grown adults with agency. They're capable of making dumb decisions and supporting troonery completely of their own initiative to fight for "gender equality" and to "be kind".

Both men and women contributed to the tranny problem, each for their own short sighted reasons. The only way you get billionaires and multinational corporations on board is with the support of both.
If the main disagreement is between whether womanhood is something sacred and something you can acquire ; how does that refute my point about women ruining gender relations?

The 20th and 21st century feminism waves were focused almost exclusively on tearing down men in the name of 'equality' and, as a result, we live in this current clownworld where male spaces don't exist, most divorces are initiated by women and neither sex is actually happy.

So I ask you; why should I root for radfems in this? Even if they succeed in pushing back the tranny menace the damage is still done and, judging by the response to my post, they haven't changed their minds about anything.
 
A lot of you are saying "the majority just don't give a fuck at all" and it's true, and its a major problem. The hope and care is so far gone that while boomers would cry to the heavens if America became a dictatorship tommorow most zoomers would either just shrug their shoulders, or even worse nod their heads and go "its about time" depending on the beliefs of said dictator. You really shouldn't care about politics too much since that shit isn't healthy and we see where it leads to. However this is beyond that, its total apathy.

There's definitely evidence for this. A British poll last September said that 61% of 18-34 year-olds want the country "run by a strong leader who doesn’t have to bother with parliament/elections" (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/09/07/give-young-what-want-raise-voting-age-55/). Does no-one study history anymore?
 
Why should men fight this fight? We didn’t start this problem, and at the end of the day the reality is it has little direct effect on us.

Let the feminists attempt to slay this beast of their own making.
The people who crafted troonism were not women. Hirschfeld wasn't a woman. Alfred Kinsey and John Money weren't women. So yeah, men started it, wrote the theory and crafted the drugs, and it's the male troons dominating the discourse.

People cannot decide whether women are destroyers of civilization or are corrupted by it. In either case, males were cross dressing as AGPs and HSTS for centuries while women weren't legally allowed to wear trousers.

And it affects you when you have children. The Texas father who lost custody of his kid is a direct result of that blase attitude. Aidens may not be as aggressive as MTFs, but they're adamant on changing gay men's sexual orientation, so yes, you are affected. This doesn't happen in a vacuum.

It also confirms my point that men won't do a thing until it personally affects them. Letting the rot spread doesn't save civilization.

@The Ugly One Men aren't doing this anyways. Even if women were disenfranchised of the vote, you still get what Iran has: state funded troonism as a replacement for homosexuality. On polls regarding trans in women's spaces, men might say they're against it, but the dialogue isn't centered on them fixing their own spaces. Troons know this.

You might get angry at that snarling bitch talking about vaginas, but she's admitting physical differences exist.

@Ser Prize see point above. Men crafted the Troon ideology to begin with. This also underscores why feminism was needed at all, if gender relations were already good.
 
Last edited:
The fact is that without the political empowerment of women, the troon menace would already be over. If women all were as interested in voting as they are in Eastwood Westerns, a creep in a dress going to the ladies' room to leer at women would quickly find himself in a heap on the sidewalk, perhaps short a couple teeth.

Voting's irrelevant, it's all about pressure groups rather than the electorate, as we've seen in Scotland. I suspect a lot of troonacy comes from the biological fact that men are more assertive, and the powers that be are hence more inclined to listen to male troons than feminists. Plus I think there's a lot of residual misogyny - look at how Rosie Duffield was treated this week.
 
Back
Top Bottom