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)
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.