Reactionary Radical Eliminationists vs. Trans

I'm not unblocking the asshole to see what ginned up likely zealot created fiction he thinks proves something BUT I will note that there have already been several cases when some zealot identifies a trans-inclusive YMCA or similar site and gets themselves in the room with a known trans member and CLAIMS to have seen a penis when, it ultimately turns out, they didn't (in one case the accused transwoman was literally post op, but the reactionary right had already spent a month losing their shit over the sighting of a no-longer-existent penis)

So be careful about taking anything he may have vomited up here at face value.

Say, remember "American Gladiators"?
Remember how the female contestants were Jane Fonda workout level fit at best, and the female gladiators were WWE level ripped?
Where were the "I'm concerned about women's sports" assholes for that circus sideshow?
I mean, the obvious answer is the x-ers were 10-13, and the millennials were fetuses, and z-ers were cum, but why wasn't Rush Limbaugh crying about that shit?
The equally obvious answer is conservatives never gave a shit about women's sports, and this is all fake.

I did not see much there aside from tyhere was a trans woman in a gym dressing room where someone might have seen her penis. However, there does not even seem to be any real verification this ever happened because this seems to have come from libs of tik tok so it could all be make believe.

There was not really an internet back then to complain to, or at least not one that MAGAts could get to because AOL had not made it simple enough for them to use. However, I was operating a video store and there were a few comments about Skin Deep which was an old John Ritter movie where he actually dfated an american gladiator and almost died of snu snu years before Fry and company. There was also a hillarious use of the lightsaber special effect for an in the dark glowy condom sword fight.

This was Ronda Rowsy acting before Ronda Rowsy was a thing.

This. They never gave a shit. They still don't give a shit. This is about hurting trans folks.

I just presume everything UA says is a lie or otherwise some sort of misrepresentation.

I haven't been wrong yet...

Is it a lie if he passes on someone else's shit?
Is he not then a dupe?
Or, does it full circle become a lie again if he's a willful dupe?

third one

It's about refusing your false entitlement.

This from a white American male.

you always go to this...

what entitlements do you think trans people are falsely claiming?

How to bigot without feeling like a bigot.

Step 1: call the minority entitled.
Step 2: widen the goalposts so anything less than stoically bearing forced slave labor in a coal mine is entitlement
Step 3: never apply this standard to yourself
Step 4: if called out on 3, throw up a smokescreen of curses and homophobic insinuations.

Enjoy!! No one will ever figure this out!! Libs are dumb!!

(I put that last post in the wrong thread. Missed by a fucking pixel. Oh, and thanks again for that edit time limit, FF. ).

Which means you can assert my "privilege" by default, without having to prove it. Clown World rules.

They have the same rights as everyone else, while insisting on the additional imposition of requiring everyone else to play along with their delusion. That's the line that will not be crossed .

And gays had equal rights before Obergefell because they had exactly the same right to enter into a heterosexual marriage as anybody else.

In UA's defense, no gay man is going to date him or marry him. Gay men have standards.

Bump, this is clearly a subject you are passionate about so I'm sure you have an answer.

You never see these language sticklers attack theater performers, cosplayers, and trick-or-treaters going "I will not acquiesce to your fantasies!! Somebody has to hold the line for what's real!! Society will decay!! Decadeeeence!!! ".

Gee, almost like that's not really the cause they're fighting for.
Almost like they're chicken-shittily ashamed to say what it's really about.

well, that's historically been proven to be false, and you know it.
and the only delusion here seems to be yours that you're entitled to tell people what they're "allowed" to be so you can hang on to your prejudices.

If UA wants to be a gatekeeper, he really only can honestly try to gatekeep manhood (which is still assholish), not womanhood, and you never see him go after trans men.


The anti-trans movement (particularly Jordan Peterson) infantilizes them as poor little dummies that have become brainwashed victims (I.E. Elliott Page).
Which is some obvious condescending chivalric misogyny.
And while while UA hasn't weighed in on trans men, he sure as Hell has defended Jordan Peterson.

Asked an answered. Single-occupancy dressing rooms, showers and toilets.

I have praised the refusal to capitulate, which the slack-jawed mongoloid faction insist proves I stand in defense of his entire being.

Then boy are you gonna love Vladimir Putin.

You sure do like your selective, superficial comparisons. It's almost like it's your entire thought process.

Says the guy who only goes pink hair deep.

Which would be compelling if hair color were the entirety of my argument, rather than an amusing side note. Stop white knighting them. The chick from Hot Topic doesn't see your WF posts.

Mmm, yeah, you bring in other stereotypes from depression-generation grandpas that got passed down to Ben Shapiro, and human centipede-ed to Critical Drinker.
Deep intellectual stuff. Very gripping.

Nope, white guy rules.

Asserting privilege without having to prove it is what white guys DO.

You know he is a man because he has never had clothing so complicated and hard to put on that you need help. You also know he is poor as he has never been fitted for a suit.