General transgender discussion thread - Take the tranny related debates here.

  • 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
jorgoth said:
Some more may mays for your perusal.
Click to expand...
troon son dead.jpg

bitches from this country mad ugly.png

t. rope.jpg

heh
 
I kind of feel like transgenderism is the logical result of NEET-dom. It's what happens when you're so disconnected from your body, so disconnected from society, that you become totally immersed in fantasy and Internet logocentrism. In a sense the alt-right and trannies/furries are two halves of the same coin. They start from the same place, but move in opposite directions. The alt right tries to pull back from the precipice of madness by idolizing those who would presumably have no use for the Internet like "chads" and Nazis, while LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ jumps headlong into it.
 
Last edited:
jorgoth said:
I kind of feel like transgenderism is the logical result of NEET-dom. It's what happens when you're so disconnected from your body, so disconnected from society, that you become totally immersed in fantasy and Internet logocentrism. In a sense the alt-right and trannies/furries are two halves of the same coin. They start from the same place, but move in opposite directions. The alt right tries to pull back from the precipice of madness, while LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ jumps headlong into it.
Click to expand...
I'd mostly agree, but the alt-right is still a jump into madness as well.

I'd say they're not as crazy as LGBTQURADJDF, but I am deeply conservative politically. Where the crazy comes out more is the edgy Catboykami, Danke Pepe memes, kekistan and other manifestations of NEET/Student-dom and lack of power or any real motivation to do anything about your situation.

Wokeandans are exactly the same, they just espouse a different flavor of NEET/student-dom.
 
The thing is, though, the Kekistanis try in their own way to reconstruct what is commonly viewed as "normal". Trad life, duty to state, etc. whereas Woko Haram actively fight against it. They both might come off as crazy, sure, but the aspirations and the relations of their aspirations to what is generally called sanity/normalcy are very different. It's the difference between Visigoths trying to integrate into Roman society and early Christians running around breaking the nose off of statues.
 
Last edited:
jorgoth said:
The thing is, though, the Kekistanis try in their own way to reconstruct what they view as "normal". Trad life, duty to state, etc. whereas Woko Haram actively fight against it. They both might come off as crazy, sure, but the aspirations and the relations of their aspirations to what is generally called sanity/normalcy are very different.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure. Al-Wokeida campaigns against the status quo or tradition, but also tries to build what they want to be "normal" as well. I'm saying this as someone who has started work this year on a University campus where Libshits wear those awful badges detailing their pronouns.

They have created a caste-system, there is a eunuch/clerical class with special powers (Trannies), there is a religion (4th wave femenism), there are collective cult rituals (taking the knee, pussy hats etc), there areseveral political ideologies: most infamously black-supremacist marxism in the form of BLM, but there are others such as sex-based positive action....

There is a woke world being created day by day as well, if anything in some respects it's far stronger and more firmly grounded than the alt-right one in no short part to having far greater social-privileges and financial backing than the alt-right.
 
Right, point is the alt-right tries to champion some past ideal of normalcy, whereas the far left tries to reify neoliberalism.
 
jorgoth said:
Right, point is the alt-right tries to champion some past ideal of normalcy, whereas the far left tries to reify neoliberalism.
Click to expand...
Maybe I'm insane. I have this bizarre opinion maybe we should let people live their lives and at the same time, let them have their opinions, too. Even if their opinions are your life is dumb. And troonery is fucking stupid. I just want to be able to express that opinion, not somehow invoke the power of the government to say you're not allowed to live your UTTER FUCKING DUMB lifestyle. I just want to be able to say it. Is that so wrong?
 
AnOminous said:
Maybe I'm insane. I have this bizarre opinion maybe we should let people live their lives and at the same time, let them have their opinions, too. Even if their opinions are your life is dumb. And troonery is fucking stupid. I just want to be able to express that opinion, not somehow invoke the power of the government to say you're not allowed to live your UTTER FUCKING DUMB lifestyle. I just want to be able to say it. Is that so wrong?
Click to expand...
I'd love for your view to be dominant ON BOTH SIDES problem is that with these people it's becoming more clearly a "kill or be killed" scenario. The far left is only viewed as being morally superior to the far right because it is marginally better at concealing its murderous intentions.
 
Last edited:
I'm a few chapters into Abigail Shrier's book, good so far. TLDR; It points to social media & poor socialization being a possible large factor in more girls experiencing dysphoria. Gen Z kids have far less social opportunities & experiences than previous generations, particularly sexual or romantic social opportunities. Group socialization is a core element of female adolescence they're now missing or using in ways that worsen each other's mental health.
If you’re an American born before 1990, the words “teenage girls” likely invoke a clutch of young women giggling at the mall. Backs against the pile carpet of a bedroom floor, hair splayed, listening to a song on repeat while conversation runs a similar circuit, chasing some ambiguous interaction with a boy or a girl. Untold hours poorly spent that somehow add up to the truest friendship. Recounting a first kiss or heartache or longing for both and neither, nail polish remover spoiling the air like turpentine. To understand the contemporary trans epidemic among teenage girls, we’ll need to explore just how far girlhood has departed from this picture. It isn’t merely that the image requires a gadget update—Spotify for CDs, text messages swapped in for telephone talk. It’s that adolescence today contains far fewer of the in-person comforts and torments and consolations that once filled the everyday life of teenage girls.
Click to expand...
As Kate Julian observed in The Atlantic, we are in the midst of a “sex recession” especially severe among members of Gen Z. In 1994, 74 percent of seventeen-year-old women had had a “special romantic relationship” in the past eighteen months. “In 2014, when the Pew Research Center asked seventeen-year-olds whether they had ‘ever dated, hooked up with or otherwise had a romantic relationship with another person’—seemingly a broader category than the earlier one—only 46 percent said yes.” Many of the adolescent girls who adopt a transgender identity have never had a single sexual or romantic experience. They have never been kissed by a boy or a girl. What they lack in life experience, they make up for with a sex-studded vocabulary and avant-garde gender theory. Deep in the caverns of the internet, a squadron of healers waits to advise them.
Click to expand...
Between 2009 and 2017, the number of high schoolers who contemplated suicide increased 25 percent. The number of teens diagnosed with clinical depression grew 37 percent between 2005 and 2014. And the worst hit—experiencing depression at a rate three times that of boys—were teenage girls. Lest one assume that these girls are merely reporting their depression in greater numbers (and not necessarily experiencing more of it), Haidt points out that the average rates of self-harm reflect the same spike: an increase of 62 percent since 2009—all among teenage girls. Among preteen girls aged ten to fourteen, rates of self-harm are up 189 percent since 2010, nearly triple what they were only six years before.
Click to expand...
Psychologists who study peer influence ask what it is about teenage girls that makes them so susceptible to peer contagion and so good at spreading it. Many believe it has something to do with the way girls tend to socialize. “When we listen to girls versus boys talk to each other, girls are much more likely to reply with statements that are validating and supportive than questioning,” Amanda Rose, professor of psychology at the University of Missouri, told me. “They’re willing to suspend reality to get into their friends’ worlds more. For this reason, adolescent girls are more likely to take on, for instance, the depression their friends are going through and become depressed themselves.” [...] But it also leads friends to take on each other’s ailments. Teenage girls spread psychic illness because of features natural to their modes of friendship: co-rumination; excessive reassurance seeking; and negative-feedback seeking, in which someone maintains a feeling of control by angling for confirmation of her low self-concept from others.
Click to expand...

Another thing she mentions is the earlier occurrence of puberty & it's possible effects:
The girls weathering these changes have never been so young. The average age of menarche among American girls is now twelve, according to Scientific American, down from age fourteen a century ago. The average age of breast development is now nine to ten years old. [...] They are almost certainly psychologically unprepared for sexual advances—but attention from men they will receive, and they have never received it so young.
Puberty is also when today’s transgender craze among girls typically takes hold. Girls feel alienated from a body pummeling them from the inside. The stress brought on by puberty is age-old. What is new is today’s adolescents’ relative inability to bear it—and the constant presence of apparent alternatives.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Gender ID Believers Plot to Burn Books That Analyze Transgender Ideology

US — Berkeley, California. Believers in the gender identity faith are openly advocating the destruction of Abigail Shrier’s intellectual work, the book Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters, which holds a critical lens to gender identity theory’s influence and effects on young girls.

On November 13, 2020, Grace Lavery, a transgender-identifying Associate Professor of English at the University of California at Berkeley, tweeted: “what we could do is find copies of Abigail Shrier’s book IRREVERSIBLE DAMAGE in our local libraries, rip out the interiors without consent, and install the texts of our own propaganda before sewing the jacket back up. stop this rubbish from reproducing itself.” Some of Mr Lavery’s followers contributed ideas on how they could help destroy the books. @thekateblack offered, “Grace, I’m in Brooklyn and literally have a gallon jug of archival glue from my bookbinding days.”

In the face of inquiry and criticism about his position, Mr Lavery clarified the following day:
Since some ppl have misunderstood my tone, and censorship is an important matter and as a public educator I have a duty to be precise, let me clarify: I do NOT advocate defacing library books. I DO encourage followers to steal Abigail Shrier’s book and burn it on a pyre. Plz [please] make sure you use a safe pyre, and that you have an extinguisher to hand. Be safe, when you are burning books. Remember: all you’re doing is removing a commodity from circulation—much as one might destroy a contaminated crop, or take action if a distributor failed to do so

Mr Lavery’s call to burn the books has thus far received a thousand ‘likes’. The idea to destroy the books appears to have been planted after Mr Lavery encouraged his followers to steal copies of Irreversible Damage and “[photograph] themselves putting their pinky finger in the hole like what phalloplasty is, i will post hole.” Twitter user @fite_heron, a self-described “poet, translator” responded, “grace are you daring me to engage in my pastime of altering fashy books at stores” – to which Mr Lavery wryly replied, “as a public educator i couldn’t possibly encourage you to go into a store.” @fite_heron claimed to always carry a “big fat sharpie” to facilitate a hobby of destroying books, and even tweeted a detailed account of regularly defacing colleagues’ dissertations and theses at the library. This inspired Mr Lavery to urge his followers to engage in subversive tactics to remove Ms Shrier’s books from circulation.

“If you are a public educator, you should probably retire,” one man pointed out to Mr Lavery. “Education should be about teaching kids how to think instead of what to think.” Several tweeters accused Mr Lavery and his devoted followers of engaging in fascist action, despite identifying as “anti-fascist” or “antifa” in their bios. A woman tweeted, “The nazis would be so proud of you, just as cowardly and controlling, fearing knowledge and dissent and hiding it behind a sanctimonious front, it makes me shed a tear.” Twitter had blocked one of Mr Lavery’s tweets from showing in Germany. The unifying factor between all types of purposeful book-burners in the 20th century, [Rebecca] Knuth says, is that the perpetrators feel like victims, even if they’re the ones in power. Smithsonian Mag According to the Smithsonian Magazine, book-burners have targeted books and libraries worldwide for thousands of years. Book-burners’ motivation is often either to destroy material that may contradict their religious beliefs, or to centralize and control thought during times of conquest or political upheaval.

The magazine notes that some of the most famous book-burnings were “those staged by Adolf Hitler and the Nazis,” who were also experts at framing language; Mao Zedong’s Cultural Revolution following takeover of China, which saw “any book that didn’t conform to party propaganda” destroyed; and Sinhalese Buddhists’ recent burning of 100,000 books from the Jaffna Public Library of Sri Lanka to quell the perceived threat of Hinduism from the Tamils they outnumber. Jonathan Zimmerman at the Chicago Tribune argued in a op-ed this week, “When censorship wins, minorities lose.” He said the movement by transgender activists to censor Irreversible Damage would ultimately backfire and hurt minority, marginalized and oppressed groups: Once you establish that some ideas are simply too harmful to be aired, you clear the way for other people to make the same claim. And one day, they’ll come after you. That’s why every great warrior for social justice in our history — including Frederick Douglass, Susan B. Anthony and Martin Luther King Jr. — was also a champion of free speech. Without that right, people at the bottom of our society can’t critique the wrongs they have suffered. Mr Lavery demured after the University of California – Berkeley was flooded with complaints to fire the book-burning advocate from his teaching position, and again after Campus Reform published a story about his tweets. He insisted his words were never intended to be taken literally.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom