- cross-posted to:
- aneurysmposting@sopuli.xyz
- cross-posted to:
- aneurysmposting@sopuli.xyz
I’m just picturing that robot from Star Trek (the one thinking about “this sentence is false”) going “huh” and then blowing up…
I’m just picturing that robot from Star Trek (the one thinking about “this sentence is false”) going “huh” and then blowing up…
Christ, is this why anti-trans people are so focused on this shit? Because they can only think of people in terms of their fuckability through their own experiences? And through their tunnel vision, anyone with complex sex gene and hormone biology, and who present differently than the anti-trans person’s gender or the gender they’re typically attracted to, is automatically a filthy gender-bending subhuman??
“I am hot man. This is hot girl. These here are neither hot men like me nor hot girl like her. EX*CUTE THEM!!!”
That’s part of it, yeah. A major part
Women are only good for one thing, that’s the idea behind it all. Any time a woman isn’t fuckable, they become lesser, no matter what other traits they have.
It’s misogyny all the way down. Now, to the sides, there’s also other prejudice involved, but the basis of the anti trans thought is the same basis as misogyny.
You can bet your ass that if she had some conventionally beautiful face, none of this shit would have happened.
Or they’ll confuse them the wrong way around.
“You look like a woman so you’ll never be a man!” - “I used to be a man.” - “I don’t believe you!”
Almost. It’s only fuckability, but through a lens of their own sexual repression. Gay is bad by definition and now they have to answer the question: Is it gay to find this attractive woman attractive if it used to have a penis?
The answer is: Labels don’t matter. Everything’s all individual, anyway. This person is attractive to you or not, period. There’s a) no implication on your sexual preferences and b) if there was, who cares? Or rather, it’s only you and your likes who care, and none of you have to.
This is basically Jordan Peterson’s entire brand