Misogynist: Should transsexuals be allowed to compete in women's athletics?
TERF: No.
Misogynist: Why not?
TERF: Because they aren't Women.
Misogynist: So?
TERF: So, if they aren't Women, then they shouldn't be allowed to compete in WOMEN'S athletics.
Misogynist: But, what about being inclusive?
TERF: (*dirty look)
Misogynist: No, seriously. Why shouldn't transsexual be included in women's athletics. You're all about inclusiveness when it means women being included. Why shouldn't transsexuals get the same treatment?
TERF: Because it's ridiculous! It's WOMEN'S athletics, it's unfair to let MEN compete in it.
Misogynist: See, "unfair" gets us into some trouble. Because what constitutes "unfair" will tend to oscillate, sometimes wildly, between any two people. For example...(*pretends to be thinking) fire-fighting. In order to become a fire-fighter in this country, one has to meet an exacting physical standard. That standard is markedly lowered for women. The standard is lowered for women for no reason, other than to make it easier for women to meet the standard. Is that unfair?
TERF: Having a different physical standard for Women is important, because it redresses the innate societal imbalance that prejudices against Women, and for men.
Misogynist: I'm told that an even greater societal imbalance exists against transsexuals. So, in the interest of dismantling this imbalance, why not allow transsexuals to compete in women's athletics? Surely, if fire-fighting is fair game for inclusion, so are professional athletics.
TERF: There is no imbalance against transsexuals, transsexuals are men. All they have to do is cut their hair and switch the sundress for a pair of khakis, and they're back at the top of society.
Misogynist: But they don't want to take off the sundress. The sundress is really important to them. They tell me that they are women, in every way but the physical, and that if they are forced to conform to what society - you - tell them they should be, they'll end up dead by their own hand.
TERF: Just because they say it doesn't make it so.
Misogynist: Put it another way; every industry that you point to and say "there are more men in this industry than women. Therefore, this industry is prejudiced against women". I can point to and say "there are more cis people in this industry than trans people. Therefore, this industry is prejudiced against trans people". Why do the same standards that demonstrate the patriarchy not demonstrate cistriarchy?
TERF: (*dirty look)
Misogynist: Going back to unfairness. I have a problem with the notion that it is unfair to allow a group of people to compete. There are exceptions, weight-classes in combat sports, for example. But this isn't a weight-class issue. If a 6'4, 240lb. woman wants to compete on the Australian women's handball team, you won't tell her to fuck off, so, it's not about weight.
TERF: (*deep, beleaguered, breath) The purpose of Women's athletics is to allow Women a place, in athletics, where they can compete without being overshadowed by men. It is unfair then, to allow MEN to compete in WOMEN'S athletics.
Misogynist: Let's do away with fairness for the moment. Lets talk instead about good or bad. Let's say that allowing transsexuals to compete against women is good for transsexuals, but, it is bad for women, so, it is bad. Meanwhile, lowering the standard for women is bad for men, but, it is good for women, so, it is good. It seems to me that your - the TERF - definition of fairness is the same, in every instance, one-hundred percent of the time, with zero deviation; fairness means preferential treatment for women. Whether a firm is hiring, a judge is making a ruling, a homeless shelter is letting people in for the evening, OR A BUILDING IS ON FIRE - fairness, decency, equality, justice - means preferential treatment for women. Well, the inter-sectionals have decided that transsexuals matter more than cis-women, in exactly the same way that you have decided that cis-women matter more than men. It seems to me, that in this one instance, you are being treated the way you treat men, and it is freaking you right out.
TERF: Fuck off, incel!
Misogynist: I hope the trannies take everything from you.
TERF: (*begins furiously tweeting)
World War T has turned me from libertarian to auth right
These assholes want to make it so you can't do anything publicly unless it is in open support of their delusions. And they want to invade literally everything so there is no way to escape them.
It also made me see that every single argument that applies against trannies also applies against homos.
That is false. The only problem inherently tied to homosexuality is the inability to conceive children. There could exist a society in which male homosexuals still consider sodomy to be taboo (and thus aren't responsible for 2/3rds of new HIV cases) and neither male nor female homosexuals think they need to support the communists and traitors of the left.
On the other hand, transsexuality is inherently bad. Transsexuality is hatred for your own immutable characteristics, and that will never be healthy. The best thing you could ever do for a transsexual is convince them that their natural, healthy body is not a flaw, so that they can find lasting happiness. Additionally, a transsexual is a post-modernist by definition: someone who believes subjective belief trumps objective reality, which means they are always going to lean more towards destructive stupidity of other sorts.
This is the kind of discussion we can't have on any "mainstream" site.
This should be a whole article but here are the summary points, all apply to both trannies and homos.
With that said I don't see anything morally wrong with guys getting each other off if thats what they like. Or with guys wearing panties because it turns them on. What is wrong is taking what is essentially a hobby, having another guy rub your dick, and turning it into a group identify or even worse an open political interest group. And expecting normal people to accept and not judge when you being open about your fetishes.
Don't ask, don't tell is the correct policy. Fuck who you want and act as weird as you want in the bedroom, act normal in public. Get married, have kids, be a link in the chain of ancestry.
List of people and things tradcucks have blamed to avoid finally understanding the issue.
Jews
Bankers
The Democratic Party
The globalists
Homosexuals
The media
Young men
Porn
Games
Lack of maturity
Movies and TV
Work
House prices
Illegal immigration
I could keep going forever.
What is the issue?
That women only acknowledge the humanity of the top few % of men yet the rest of the men are expected to expend their lives to work and sacrifice maintaining a society that doesn't give a fuck about them?
That is a just a fact of life for primates.
You make the best of the situation you are in. However you feel about it your ancestors incurred a debt to create the circumstances which allowed you to exist at all. The way you pay back that debt is you start a family and reproduce.
The issue is that women are not just hard to get, but utterly worthless even when you do. Be top 1% and they still don't give a fuck about you. Everyone from Bezos (1% financially) to various actors (1% looks) will tell you that.
I don't want a family and I don't want to leeched off like I got a doctor from the Middle Ages.
Your expectations are too high or maybe you haven't learned how to do the dance. If you never expect adult women to act at a higher level of maturity than your average 8-9 year old boy then you will never be disappointed.
And you will sometimes be pleasantly surprised when they occasionally randomly exceed your expectations.
If you can't afford it then somewhere along the way you made poor life choices. Begrudging the resources required to maintain a family is childish and unproductive. A burden voluntarily shouldered feels much lighter than the same when it is carried with hostile resentment.
I don't have a problem with supporting a family, as long as I'm a part of that family. In the West today, if the mother of my children decides, at any moment, that she would prefer it if I kept supporting the family, but was no longer a part of the family, then that's what is going to happen.
If you want to roll those dice, then go ahead, and good luck to you. But it's absurd (and frankly, fucking obtuse) for anyone to look at this deal (marriage/family) and say "if a man doesn't want to be put in this position, he's being childish and unproductive".
Edit: It's like calling a man a coward because he won't step on a bear trap.
You're assuming that the TERF (or any feminist for that matter) will actually argue and debate anyone who disagrees with them for this long. They don't. They either rally the crowd to silence them with slander and insults right off the bat, or they storm off first thing and angrily report on them on the news, their crappy blog, or their fucking Twitter account, and rally a mob together to silence them and ruin their lives.
As if this was TERF-exclusive.
Just ask JK Rowling.
And then everyone clapped.
I appreciate the effort. Sadly, the only rebuttal you'll ever hear is the silence of deaf ears. The only argument that will ever convince a marxist, is a bullet.
Posts like this make me wish we had .win gold.
blush
The time draws near where all of the SJWs will have to pick a side. Women or trannies. It will be glorious.
My experience with feminists is that the majority of them dislike the terfs. I'm fact terf is a slur by main stream feminists to describe that group that calls themselves gender critical feminist.
We should never promote degeneracy