Transsexuals

Locked
Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28251

Post by Guest »

"You are brave, you blessed us, you are loved, wonderful, you are precious to this world"... anyone can see that it is bullshit. The truth is naked and without finery. Have you ever complimented someone this way only once in your life apart from your pet?

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28252

Post by Guest »




Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28253

Post by Guest »


Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28254

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
01 Dec 2021, 20:30
Anyone have a link that's not behind a wall?

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28255

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
01 Dec 2021, 17:46
Thread

After having put an 11 YEAR OLD on puberty blockers, it had become impossible for them to stop, especially before the child reached the age for hormones/surgery, because that would be an admission that they had seriously fucked up with this kid.

What the fuck does an 11-year-old female child "identifying as a boy" even mean? The "doctors" and psychologists who did this to her should be prosecuted and publicly shamed!

Can you imagine the garbage they told this kid's parents, to emotionally blackmail them into agreeing to trans her? "Would you rather have a son that's alive or a daughter that's dead..."

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28256

Post by Guest »

Thread (graphic sexual descriptions in text form)




Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28257

Post by Guest »

Telegraph article on Science Museum exhibition

https://archive.md/Fqsv2

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28258

Post by Guest »


Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28259

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
01 Dec 2021, 20:40
Telegraph article on Science Museum exhibition

https://archive.md/Fqsv2
Thanks

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28260

Post by Guest »


Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28261

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
01 Dec 2021, 20:36
Guest wrote:
01 Dec 2021, 17:46
Thread
After having put an 11 YEAR OLD on puberty blockers, it had become impossible for them to stop, especially before the child reached the age for hormones/surgery, because that would be an admission that they had seriously fucked up with this kid.

What the fuck does an 11-year-old female child "identifying as a boy" even mean? The "doctors" and psychologists who did this to her should be prosecuted and publicly shamed!

Can you imagine the garbage they told this kid's parents, to emotionally blackmail them into agreeing to trans her? "Would you rather have a son that's alive or a daughter that's dead..."
I watched the documentary, and the parents were aboard before they even got to the clinic. They affirmed their daughter's social transition without question when she was 10. (She had some mental health issues too, so concern that she would get worse if they didn't affirm was likely a part of it.)

Then the physician prescribed the blockers without disclosing the potential side effects, but the mother said she trusted him and didn't think to question it or anything, so at that point she probably didn't need much convincing. Just affirmation across the board from parents and health care, textbook how it's "supposed" to be done. (And the mental health issues got worse after she started the blockers, including suicide attempts, but still no one thought to stop the blockers.)

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28262

Post by Guest »

^ For this social transitioning to have taken place, the parents must have got the idea from somewhere. I haven't seen this episode yet, thanks.

The "we'd rather have a son that's alive than a daughter that's dead" is something I've heard a few times from parents of transitioned children. Sounds like something that's been fed to them by gender services. OP.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28263

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
01 Dec 2021, 20:17
"You are brave, you blessed us, you are loved, wonderful, you are precious to this world"... anyone can see that it is bullshit. The truth is naked and without finery. Have you ever complimented someone this way only once in your life apart from your pet?
It's the same logic of worshiping Jesus or God or a cult leader...

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28264

Post by Guest »

I hope this isn't off topic, but has anyone here watched the Orville? S1E3 is focusing on forced infant transition, of course through a sci-fi lense but still very well done. I've actually managed to peak and open the eyes of 3 people now by making them watch this and then Talk about it.

It's quite refreshing to see this portrayed in Media in a sane way.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28265

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 00:34
I hope this isn't off topic, but has anyone here watched the Orville? S1E3 is focusing on forced infant transition, of course through a sci-fi lense but still very well done. I've actually managed to peak and open the eyes of 3 people now by making them watch this and then Talk about it.

It's quite refreshing to see this portrayed in Media in a sane way.
I never went past the pilot despite being a Trekkie from childhood because though it seemed to have potential it annoyed me that Seth McFarlane cast himself as the lead and he just comes across so dull. But I've heard some good things about it and I'd definitely like to check out the episode you mention (early in the first season too, so no big time commitment), so thanks! It'll be especially refreshing after actual nuTrek apparently ruined the Trill as well as the concept of a future where women are equal for the sake of trans pandering (since how could anyone possibly be "nonbinary" if restrictive gender roles have all been left in the past), that's for sure.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28266

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
01 Dec 2021, 19:51
Because this is what (mainstream) feminism is like these days. It doesn't have to use the specific words like liberal feminism or whatever get feminism. Those (groups but also lots of individuals) who use the simple word feminism alone - not as radfem or anything, 9 out of 10 are enthusiastic shills for this kind, from where I see.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28267

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 02:05
Guest wrote:
01 Dec 2021, 19:51
Because this is what (mainstream) feminism is like these days. It doesn't have to use the specific words like liberal feminism or whatever get feminism. Those (groups but also lots of individuals) who use the simple word feminism alone - not as radfem or anything, 9 out of 10 are enthusiastic shills for this kind, from where I see.
DA So true. It's the same "feminism" that will treat a woman who says prostitution isn't a wonderful thing for women as a greater evil than any abusive, woman-hating man. It makes so sick and disheartened to the core of my being.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28268

Post by Guest »


Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28269

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 02:28
Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 02:05
Guest wrote:
01 Dec 2021, 19:51
Because this is what (mainstream) feminism is like these days. It doesn't have to use the specific words like liberal feminism or whatever get feminism. Those (groups but also lots of individuals) who use the simple word feminism alone - not as radfem or anything, 9 out of 10 are enthusiastic shills for this kind, from where I see.
DA So true. It's the same "feminism" that will treat a woman who says prostitution isn't a wonderful thing for women as a greater evil than any abusive, woman-hating man. It makes so sick and disheartened to the core of my being.
All these lunatic feminist and lesbian groups do not see their fanatic support for the Page kind as "invalidating Page's new gender identity". It's logical according to their deranged logic.

Because such feminists and lesbians claim to be, strive to be "in solidarity, inclusive, accepting, celebrating & supporting ppl for who they are" as long as they're not cis men. It makes sense for them to include all these deranged MTFs, FTMs, male NBs, female NBs along with actual women or lesbians in their list to celebrate and support.

Of course it's one of their never-ending contradictions because by their logic, 'oppressed trans men (FTMs) are soooo different from evil cis men', therefore 'trans men are not men', proving their slogan 'trans men are men' as a lie.

But again, pointing out their boundless contradictions is futile to them when they just shriek the parrot talking points and buzzwords.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28270

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 03:11
When his supporters are exactly the most fanatic TRA far left loons to begin with...

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28271

Post by Guest »



I'm heartened to hear about anything good happening for women's rights in Scotland right now. But at the same time, just...wow at what TRAs will openly cop to. When you're talking about someone specifically in a situation where they're going to be very legitimately vulnerable and traumatized, what type of sick fuck makes it about feeling "excluded" when it comes to who they want attending them in an intimate way above a vctim's own sense of safety/security?

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28272

Post by Guest »

viewtopic.php?p=4071931#p4071931

Shit that happens on L Chat

abolish transwomen
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28273

Post by abolish transwomen »

Guest wrote:
01 Dec 2021, 19:51
Is this her first photo where she didn't bother retouching the mastectomy scars out? Which basically proves that her previous pictures (that should have looked like the typical TIF tiktok gore material) had insane amount of editing.

She has served Dahau than, she serves it now, where is the "gender euphoria" in that tetanus-struck face she's making?

abolish transwomen
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28274

Post by abolish transwomen »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 07:39
viewtopic.php?p=4071931#p4071931

Shit that happens on L Chat
Is that thread TRA/TIM friendly? I won't answer there, but this bit is just....wow:
Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 07:28
I think everyone should experience gender dysphoria once in their lifetime. Then they would understand how transgender people feel on the inside.
We already know trannies live their lives like the rapey unhinged psychopath men completely devoid of regular human emotional range and refusing to seek proper psychiatric medication that would at least have curbed their danger to other people, there's so much piling up evidence directly proving that.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28275

Post by Guest »

abolish transwomen wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 07:47
Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 07:39
viewtopic.php?p=4071931#p4071931

Shit that happens on L Chat
Is that thread TRA/TIM friendly? I won't answer there, but this bit is just....wow:
I don't have an extremely strong feeling for the thread, but to my casual experience it's at least mixed. It's definitely not an extreme TRA environment like some stan thread that lives on showing up in Google searches (or so I presume).

abolish transwomen
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28276

Post by abolish transwomen »

Guest wrote:
01 Dec 2021, 16:42
Guest wrote:
01 Dec 2021, 16:18
Lol, all books sell at a reduced price at some point, that's how the whole book market works. Rowling/Galbraith will draw other buyers into the store.

I downloaded Troubled Blood onto my Kindle just today to start reading it. My girlfriend paid full price for it when it first came (i.e. the much higher price set for Kindle when a book is first published, which is almost the same price as the hardback) because she was so desperate to read it.

Does that idiot Steph think George Elliot was trans too?
Probably, if he knows who she is.
He strikes me as the type who would hypothetically know who that is, but only if one of the tranny blogs/twitter accounts he follows would have written about G.E. (obviously under a certain troon-biased light.)

Otherwise I really don't think that he, along with the vast majority of TIMs, ever reads anything that doesn't involve sissification and academic research of the most credible ways to stealth-fuck straight men, so literary classics are def. out of question.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28277

Post by Guest »


abolish transwomen
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28278

Post by abolish transwomen »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 09:22
I wonder how long it will take woke straggots to acknowledge how problematic Ellen's entire transing fuckery has been since day 1, but I'm glad this account is stirring it. One terf voice at time.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28279

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 00:45
Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 00:34
I hope this isn't off topic, but has anyone here watched the Orville? S1E3 is focusing on forced infant transition, of course through a sci-fi lense but still very well done. I've actually managed to peak and open the eyes of 3 people now by making them watch this and then Talk about it.

It's quite refreshing to see this portrayed in Media in a sane way.
I never went past the pilot despite being a Trekkie from childhood because though it seemed to have potential it annoyed me that Seth McFarlane cast himself as the lead and he just comes across so dull. But I've heard some good things about it and I'd definitely like to check out the episode you mention (early in the first season too, so no big time commitment), so thanks! It'll be especially refreshing after actual nuTrek apparently ruined the Trill as well as the concept of a future where women are equal for the sake of trans pandering (since how could anyone possibly be "nonbinary" if restrictive gender roles have all been left in the past), that's for sure.
Yeah, that episode is full of great stuff, and the story gets continues in S2 which just makes it all better tbh. https://www.tvfanatic.com/2017/09/the-o ... ut-a-girl/ an article if you need any convincing.

It's really not afraid to call out things, and it's all in a very casual and viewer friendly manner.
Vorak: I do not see any complication. The child will be taken to Moclas where she will undergo the corrective procedure.
Grayson: Don't start passing out penises just yet, Captain Vorak.
Grayson: I'd have been pretty pissed off if my parents had made the unilateral decision to make me a guy.
Mercer: And, while it may have saved me an entire marriage if they had, it still would've been wrong.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28280

Post by Guest »

As I previously said, Harrop’s sanction was token and minor.

Naturally, a professional being suspended of course has negative consequences within that profession, and many of us with professional jobs would never want to have to explain such a thing.

However, the fact is, it doesn’t stop Harrop practising, and, to the broader public, Twitter fans, etc etc, it is possible for the recipient of that short-term suspension to sell it as the establishment’s punishment for having defended the rights of a vulnerable minority, and to imply that either it’s oppressive; or in the alternative, that in fact there was sympathy there from the authorities, especially with the length suggesting it is not a real impediment on the continued activities of that individual.

Which is to say: banning Harrop for a month sent a message. Rules were technically broken but he isn’t going anywhere and if he wishes, can claim to be a minor martyr to a cause.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28281

Post by Guest »

Harrop's punishment isn't token or minor within the medical profession, it's about the highest sanction before being struck off the register of doctors, which is extremely rare.

I was just reading about an Austrian surgeon who amputated the wrong leg of a man. For such a ghastly, huge mistake, the surgeon was fined €2,700, with half the amount suspended, so she only had to pay €1,350, for chopping off the wrong leg. She can also appeal her sanction.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... -wrong-leg

Denying the severity of Harrop's sanction only benefits him.

abolish transwomen
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28282

Post by abolish transwomen »

Harrop will not stop at this, and judging by what often reads like terminally coked out tweets of him I've seen so far (I haven't been watching the actual unfolding of all this mess back when it happened), he's not the most mentally stable troon-right fighter either.

I feel like we haven't reached any sort of a massive collective peak yet, but the landscape has shifted enough where the same insane attitude repeated by him again will result in a much faster and a much stricter punitive response, and he'll going to snap at some point.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28283

Post by Guest »

Have we talked about Lia Thomas? What a stunning swimming sensation, taking the Ivy League by storm. A brave woman pioneer, breaking records. A wonderful case study of female power.

#StunningAndBrave

abolish transwomen
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28284

Post by abolish transwomen »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 14:33
Have we talked about Lia Thomas? What a stunning swimming sensation, taking the Ivy League by storm. A brave woman pioneer, breaking records. A wonderful case study of female power.

#StunningAndBrave
He is an inspiration for us all 😍 We love men lagging behind other men reinventing womanhood, regress is beautiful and nihilism is literally like so valid!!! 😍 😍 😍

I loved seeing what he looked like before womanizing himself too! This thread often brings out the most beautiful womxn to the surface, and that totally was one of them cuties!!!

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28285

Post by Guest »

Image

I guess there were 0 legit female musician to put on the cover...

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28286

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 15:12
Image

I guess there were 0 legit female musician to put on the cover...
SA, fixed it

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28287

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 14:33
Have we talked about Lia Thomas? What a stunning swimming sensation, taking the Ivy League by storm. A brave woman pioneer, breaking records. A wonderful case study of female power.

#StunningAndBrave
He is a perfect fit, face and rep for Ivy League, totally representing their "values" - not for the unwashed uncultured unenlightened unwoke masses who are not up to the "latest" science (vs "debunked" science) and researches/theories/stats of modern "social" science.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28288

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 15:14
Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 15:12
Image

I guess there were 0 legit female musician to put on the cover...
SA, fixed it
Really?! I like all those playlists...That's annoying. Sometimes its hard to tell if they're just odd looking women or trans...I suppose it could be photoshopped too though.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28289

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 15:23
Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 15:14
Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 15:12
Image

I guess there were 0 legit female musician to put on the cover...
SA, fixed it
Really?! I like all those playlists...That's annoying. Sometimes its hard to tell if they're just odd looking women or trans...I suppose it could be photoshopped too though.
"Bouldry-Morrison came out as transgender in 2016. She recounts that this process began in 2012, when she read a Rolling Stone article about Against Me frontwoman Laura Jane Grace."

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28290

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 14:33
Have we talked about Lia Thomas? What a stunning swimming sensation, taking the Ivy League by storm. A brave woman pioneer, breaking records. A wonderful case study of female power.

#StunningAndBrave
What a queen 👑 😍💗 can't wait for him to dethrone Ledecky as the GOAT Numero uno female swimmer 🙌 ugh what an inspiration for all the young women out there 🥰😘😤 #stunningandbrave

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28291

Post by Guest »

Octo Octa after and before. What a woman! A lot of the male trans have a frumpy sexless suburban housewife look.

Image

abolish transwomen
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28292

Post by abolish transwomen »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 15:30
Octo Octa after and before. What a woman! A lot of the male trans have a frumpy sexless suburban housewife look.

Image
Ugly before and ugly after 😍 😍 😍

I'm glad someone lended him a good wig for that photograph, too bad they couldn't do the same with press-on faux lips and a layer of latex to imitate skin that hasn't gone through male puberty phase.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28293

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 13:09
Harrop's punishment isn't token or minor within the medical profession, it's about the highest sanction before being struck off the register of doctors, which is extremely rare.

I was just reading about an Austrian surgeon who amputated the wrong leg of a man. For such a ghastly, huge mistake, the surgeon was fined €2,700, with half the amount suspended, so she only had to pay €1,350, for chopping off the wrong leg. She can also appeal her sanction.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... -wrong-leg

Denying the severity of Harrop's sanction only benefits him.
Cutting off the wrong leg is a mistake, no malice was involved. Unlike Harrop’s extended and malicious campaign against women he viewed as insufficiently subservient to his views. Harrow’s sanction may be a relatively harsh measure by the lax standards of this board but I dare you to justify a one month suspension after reading about his behavior towards Farrow, and that’s just one example of his insane vitriol. If anything he should have been arrested and deprived of more than just his medical license. That UK policing championed this loon and his gargoyle’s position against women is a stain they’ll be hard pressed to erase.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28294

Post by Guest »




I guess he’s a conservative which will make certain anons apoplectic but politics makes strange bedfellows and all that.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28295

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 15:14
Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 15:12
Image

I guess there were 0 legit female musician to put on the cover...
SA, fixed it
so so tired of this shit, what about actual female musician? :(

abolish transwomen
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28296

Post by abolish transwomen »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 16:01



I guess he’s a conservative which will make certain anons apoplectic but politics makes strange bedfellows and all that.
How is he better than drag queens reading dumb shit to children when no one in attendance except for him and the camera man clearly gets the joke?

I lold a little at this Harrop lookalike yassing his fuckery:

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28297

Post by Guest »

abolish transwomen wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 16:32
Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 16:01



I guess he’s a conservative which will make certain anons apoplectic but politics makes strange bedfellows and all that.
How is he better than drag queens reading dumb shit to children when no one in attendance except for him and the camera man clearly gets the joke?
Well for one thing he’s not a gross caricature of women. :eyeroll:

In straining to make that leap of logic you may have missed the part where he’s reading a book showing the absurdity of conflating a child’s imagination with actual reality and while the kids don’t recognize the parallel to transgenderism they do realize what’s happening to the kid is wrong and a parent can easily make that connection for them.

abolish transwomen
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28298

Post by abolish transwomen »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 16:45
abolish transwomen wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 16:32
Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 16:01



I guess he’s a conservative which will make certain anons apoplectic but politics makes strange bedfellows and all that.
How is he better than drag queens reading dumb shit to children when no one in attendance except for him and the camera man clearly gets the joke?
Well for one thing he’s not a gross caricature of women. :eyeroll:
He's a gross caricature of a dumb libertarian neckbeard with a 15 years old reddit account dropping his voice on camera to sound mah-nly, I'll ask again how is this better than drag queens reading dumb shit?
In straining to make that leap of logic you may have missed the part where he’s reading a book showing the absurdity of conflating a child’s imagination with actual reality
Here's the thing, none of the kids attended have shown any signs of the devious imagination his redditor brain is attributing to a character in a supposedly child-friendly book that children themselves do not get. He asked them beforehand, and the most hyperactive out of the bunch couldn't even call himself a ninja turtle mothra helicopter, or whatever he expected from him.
and while the kids don’t recognize the parallel to transgenderism they do realize what’s happening to the kid is wrong and a parent can easily make that connection for them.
I literally don't believe that sane parents will be making any connections between trannies, bees, flowers and walruses with children of that age, and I would actually have preferred to watch that neckbeard confront a flock of Karens transing their own children because watching them devour each other is actually good comedy; whatever he attempted over there is not.

We all know who is making transing choices for children, and the walrus book does not even attempt touching that because he knows well enough any trxns birthing parxnt would tear him a new one and he is neither smart, nor even fast reactive enough to mess with one.

abolish transwomen
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28299

Post by abolish transwomen »

Guest wrote:
02 Dec 2021, 16:45
Well for one thing he’s not a gross caricature of women. :eyeroll:
OH FOR FUCK'S SAKE I should've dived there sooner before I wasted a minute writing my prev. reply 2 u



Get your life with your bihet MAGA kang and crawl back to /r/donald if you bring dumb shit like him in here.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: Transsexuals

#28300

Post by Guest »


Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: diotima1, Google [Bot] and 525 guests