What are YOU doing to keep your feminist spaces TERF-free?

>tfw radical feminist
>i don't give a fuck about trannies

Is there something wrong with me?

>>8676061
Feminist robot:
>Men RAAAAAAAAAPE
Terf robot:
>Men in dresses RAAAAAAAAAPE

>>8676173
No, not really. That's all of us who are some idea of normal women want. Leave us alone and don't concern yourself over us. What you do for AFAB people is good enough.

t. MtF

I think cis women should step away from feminism and make the movement centered around men of color.

>>8676281
but feminism screws over mtfs, even when it's not terfs who are anti mtf personally it's still anti amab.

>>8676061
>implying the TERFs don't have a point
>implying transbians aren't scary
>TransDykes are an offshoot of Antifa whose focus is on suppressing the speech of women, mainly lesbians. They participate in regular Antifa flashmobs, sometimes in pastel uniform (“Pastel Bloc”) but also target Women’s Rights events, and Lesbian spaces.

>TransDykes are heterosexual men who identify as transwomen. They consider Lesbianism a form of fascism because female homosexuality excludes male-bodied persons. But any woman who publicly acknowledges the existence of biologically female human beings is their enemy, especially Feminists, who want to abolish, not celebrate, the sex stereotypes that transwomen identify with.

https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2017/06/27/transdykes-the-anti-lesbian-antifa/

>>8676329
>anti amab
>affecting passing transwomen with all of their documentation changed

Not so sure I agree.

this place is infested with those crackhead dykes who get charged with domestic violence every other weekend, but blame the mtf bogeywoman as if theyre the ones beating all the other lesbians. lesbians are fucking scary and TERFs are even scarier. playing at being men when the world needs less aggression and a little more sense and compassion

>>8676345
because fuck life until transition

>>8676061
Not having feminist spaces?

>>8676360
^

Most TERFs are rapists and all lesbian spaces that don't strive to be trans inclusive are always huge rape hives.

>>8676386
i find most lesbians intimidating, but ive been friends with quite a few nice dykey lesbians and they always seemed to have bizarre attitudes towards their partners that put me off. very possessive and honestly yes there are probably transbians just like this: its a male or dominance type of interacting, but it always just made me feel scared to consider they might be physically aggressive and/or violent with their s/o. there are probably more dykes than transbians acting that way. even when i hadnt transitioned i wouldve never treated a woman that way, let alone a male partner.

>>8676343
>>implying the TERFs don't have a point
It's pretty obvious from the rest of your post that you are one yourself, or at least a fellow traveller, so it's really no surprise that you'd think that.

File: L6NbwXf.jpg (103KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 1366x768px

>>8676362
If you had a "life before transition", you shouldn't have transitioned in the first place.

>>8676431
rofl at kneejerk trutrans thought police

>>8676431
what is your deal? boys doing worse at school and being held to stricter gender roles is fine because muh trutrans tm are somehow exempt?

>>8676438
>unironically using "trutrans" as a derogatory thing

Go away trender

>>8676450
>shouldn't have transitioned
trenders don't get that far

>>8676431

I mean, what constitutes a life?

In keeping one's spaces free of feminists, one inherently keeps TERFs out.

>>8676700
T H I S
H
I
S

File: That was his expression for 90 of the movie and _9c92c58458c139857c044993dcd4406c.jpg (27KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 500x500px

My feminist spaces are TERF-exclusive. No libfems allowed.

>>8676173
Genuinely curious, so how do you define radical feminism? What do you think the most important issues are? Do you "not give a fuck" about trans people because you disagree with the common TERF stances, or do you just not think that there's enough of us to warrant it being a huge issue? If I'm an FtM, would you consider me a man or a woman? And how do you feel about the trans women who otherwise agree with radical feminism/support it?

There was a radfem blog I used to get into debates in the comment sections on, and mostly she posted about porn and BDSM. But one day she said, "I don't really see what the big deal is about trans people," and got completely mobbed by other radfems yelling at her. I didn't see what the outcome of it was, but it was clear there's extreme pressure in radfem circles to hold a particular view about trans people.

>>8676343
Antifa in general are worthless scum that deserve nothing but extermination. Why are you surprised?

>>8676850
I wonder if there are /pol/tards who ban libnazis from their nazi spaces too.

File: 1465545134345.png (138KB, 350x350px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 350x350px

>>8676173
>Is there something wrong with me?
yes, being a radical feminist

>>8676942
>yes, being a feminist
FTFY

>>8676329
wrong
feminism stands behind trans women as much as cis women

>>8677551
>feminism stands behind trans women
[citation needed]

>>8677557
>all of my coworkers are feminists
>they all love me and invite me out to dinner/parties/etc.

??? sorry about your life anon

>>8677573
Yeah cause they pity you lmao

>>8676422
not him but i can see that a lot of radfem views hold water. i don't consider myself a radfem because i don't put much faith in "socialization" but they're right about a lot of stuff.

>>8677578
You should get out more anon, I think you'd be less bitter and wouldn't have to resort to things like this.

>>8677573
>anecdote trumps reality

>>8676850
>TERFERF
I can get behind that

File: 1420574740488.jpg (19KB, 384x288px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 384x288px

>>8677600
It might as well be all that matters, as far as I'm concerned. All of the ones I know are chill and stay away from the crazy.

Here's your (You) I guess.

if we want to get rid of them just let the muslim shitposters take over the board

>>8677587
what kind of radfem views do you think make sense? that all men are predisposed to rape? that gender is completely a social concept, constructed by men to oppress women?

>>8677615
Enjoy your feminist tranhag friends while their radical pals are pushing bathroom bills and ending trans healthcare while increasing gatekeeping.

>>8677600
Calling your own anecdotal experience "reality" doesn't mean it trumps otheres' anecdotal experiences. At least post some statistics before you try to dismiss others' claims as anecdotal.

>>8677627
Not them, but most feminists I know consider TERFs to be completely incompatible with their beliefs, it's not like they agree on everything but the trans issue. TERFs are basically to feminism what ancaps are to anarchism.

>>8678197
#NotAllFeminists

>>8677573
>all my coworkers represent the whole feminism
Kek

>>8678197
TERFs are to feminism what Islamists are to Islam.

File: feminism_explained.png (14KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 640x480px

>>8676918

Modern feminism is a joke, there is no need for it. TERFs shouldn't even be a thing since ALL feminists have a deep hatred for men and white people.
Ask /pol/ to educate you

>>8676946
>yes, being a female
FTFY

>>8676173

Well, you think you're any kind of "ist", which is a flaw. But on the other hand, people generally grow into (and ideally out of) that sort of stage, and it's a bit silly on some level to say that something almost everybody does is wrong.

Anyway, no, you're not a radical feminist. You think you are but you're not. If you try to prove that you are you'll just end up finding out that nobody knows what a radical feminist actually is well enough to establish that you are. Nobody fully agrees on this sort of thing. Saying you are one is just like saying you've accepted Jesus or something; it's purely faith-based. It's also like wearing goth clothes to rebel against mainstream society or against your parents or whatever, in that it's more of a personal statement and fashion choice than it is a matter of real principle.

It's a joke and you (presumably) take it seriously, and that could be claimed as being something wrong with you.

>>8679152
>tfw /pol/ is actually better at feminism than /lgbt/

>>8676061
TERFs are stupid, but better than Trans including radfems.

>>8676061
Why the fuck do you assume that we're feminists. Fuck off with that ideological bullshit

>>8679771

Being a radfem is about a couple things

First and foremost, it's about actually going out and trying to change things. If all you do write feminist literature or talk about feminist ideas online, you aren't a radfem.

Secondly, it's about being *radical*. The things you're trying to change aren't just baby steps. You're not saying "slow and steady wins the race", or "if we take this bit by bit, people are going to accept it more". You're working to make major changes, and not compromising.

With that said, the question arises- are there any real radfems in America who work in America? I don't think so. Anymore, the feminist issues are more socially based than legally, and are much smaller in nature than they were in the past.

So the American idea of a radfem has simply become an angry woman. There aren't issues that require radicals anymore.

There are radfems in places like Asia, the Middle East, or Africa- places where women are seriously disadvantaged and considered second class citizens at best

>>8684072
No.

The "radical" in the name has literally nothing to do with being "radical" in the sense of "making major changes." The word "radical" comes from the Latin word for "root" - the idea behind "radical" feminism is to find the ROOT cause of the oppression of feminism and address it, e.g. LE EBIL PATRIARCHY.

So no, you're not a radfem. They wouldn't consider you a radfem (especially if you don't address the Evil Infiltrators(tm), e.g. trans women). They would consider you a libfem who got lost on the way to some inclusive Fourth-Wave meetup.

>>8684072
>>8687571
Feminism has no definition.

>>8676061
Trannies aren't women so all feminists should be TERFs

>>8676329
So it should. Trannies will never be real women.

>>8676362
Don't transition, delusional

>>8692618
kys

I don't even agree with TERFs, but it's clear they are the least deluded of all feminists because they don't let the equality agenda meme them into believing lies like that men and trans won't rape them, and they definitely won't let it meme them into putting women in dangerous positions to satisfy some faggot jobless communists ideological agenda.

How can other feminists even compete with their common sense?

>>8676061

terf feminism is the only real feminism, desu.

>>8696155
No I won't censor the truth. If you don't like it and want to pretend men in drag are women please return to tumblr from hence you came.

File: most-people-rejected-his-message-traps-shut-up-are-gay-18040995.png (170KB, 500x521px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 500x521px

>>8696866
The TERFs are also 100% correct that transwomen aren't women, sorry hon.

I'm not saying we can't call a transwoman Shirley, let her dress up in dresses, and call her a her, and avoid constant taunts of HURR UR MENTALLY ILL AND A MAN.

However, they are physically and mentally different from women. They are also physically and mentally different from men, but they're also physically and mentally different from women. Yet, they get nothing but hate for saying the truth, when everybody acts like it's the truth and you have tons of people refusing to date transwomen that would date women, but these people lie and say transwomen are the same as women because they're lying dishonest virtue signallers afraid to confront popular opinion.

>>8696893
>I'm not saying we can't call a transwoman Shirley, let her dress up in dresses, and call her a her, and avoid constant taunts of HURR UR MENTALLY ILL AND A MAN.
But we shouldn't.

>>8696893
The problem is when TERFs start demanding special privileges for cis women over trans women.

>>8696893
>transwomen aren't women
literally semantics
Like I seriously do not care one way or the other, but you guys need to realize that you're just using the word "women" to mean two different things. They want the word "women" to mean those who identify as female, and you want it to mean those who are biologically female and I couldn't give a shit except that seeing you people argue over it makes me want to eat lead.

>the current year
>being any kind of Feminist
Women are literally not equal to men, because they are not identical to men, or to each other. It makes no sense to talk about people being equal or unequal because people are not numbers. People can only HAVE things that are equal such as legal rights.
If you just say "women should be equal to men" without clarifying, that's dogmatic and you're following a cult.

>>8696966
>literally semantics
No, it's literally fact, you pathetic tumblrite.

>Like I seriously do not care one way or the other
If you didn't you wouldn't reply.

>but you guys need to realize that you're just using the word "women" to mean two different things.
There's only one right meaning.

>They want the word "women" to mean those who identify as female, and you want it to mean those who are biologically female and I couldn't give a shit except that seeing you people argue over it makes me want to eat lead.
The only thing that should make you want to eat lead is the fact that the former of the two stances exists.

>>8696893
>transwomen aren't ciswomen
FTFY

>>8696996
God damn.
If I ever like have a stroke or something and come out of it feeling as strongly about semantics as you do, I would genuinely consider killing myself. I'd feel so fucking stupid.

>>8697007
>>transwomen aren't women
Factually corrected.

>>8697013
>the truth is semantics
Hello SJW. A man is a man and a woman is a woman. Just because someone is mentally-ill and dresses in drag doesn't mean them calling themselves female is a matter of semantics. Kill yourself.

>Why do you guys care about semantics so much

Says the people trying to redefine a word used for thousands of years with direct equivalents in almost every language even in cultures that acknowledged trans.

Telling how the terds dive into the semantic argument and drop the actual on-topic debate.

>>8696893
Terf

Exclusionary

I.e. You want the outing and removal of all amab trans people from women's spaces, no medical care for amab trans issues, no medical care for trans children, no amab trans women in women's colleges (and no men's colleges)

Etc etc etc

And sure in theory it's okay, I didn't want to fuck with women's spaces myself

Until I got fucking raped and they told me there are no men's shelters, and I got molested in a bathroom and couldn't fight the guy off because I had been on hormones for years, and then I was in a bathroom in Disneyland and little boys fucking screaming that there was a woman in the bathroom is unsettling (also happened six flags)


I'd much rather you act like an asshole and have everyone see it and shun you then the behind the back lobbying they do to ruin lives

>>8697048
I don't think you know what semantics even is.

>>8697104
I don't think you even know what a woman is.

>>8697093
>no medical care for trans children
Encouraging children into trannydom is child abuse.

>>8697093
>I'd much rather you act like an asshole and have everyone see it and shun you then the behind the back lobbying they do to ruin lives
Tell this to the trans community. Oh wait, they do both of those things.

>>8697190
Depends on who I'm talking to. For instance, if I wanted to have a discussion with you, I would take "woman" to mean a biological female, and we could proceed from there. However, if I were to talk to some radical mtf person or something I expect they'd want me to take "woman" to mean someone that identifies as female or something along those lines, and similarly I'd oblige them for the sake of the conversation. In general public, I take almost all instance of "woman" to mean biological female unless the context points to anything otherwise.

I am not interested in the sounds you make with your mouth, or the symbols you type, just what you're trying to communicate to me. Contrast that to you, where if I were to suggest we use a definition of "woman" alternate to yours during a conversation, you'd throw a little fit and insist that we define the word the way you want to and I bet if I agreed you'd take some sad little victory in it.

>>8697252
>I would take "woman" to mean a biological female
Yeah because that's the actual objective meaning of woman.

>However, if I were to talk to some radical mtf person or something I expect they'd want me to take "woman" to mean someone that identifies as female or something along those lines, and similarly I'd oblige them for the sake of the conversation.
Why would you enable far-gone delusionals?

>Contrast that to you, where if I were to suggest we use a definition of "woman" alternate to yours during a conversation, you'd throw a little fit and insist that we define the word the way you want to and I bet if I agreed you'd take some sad little victory in it.
You seem rather mad about the fact that men in drag aren't actually women. Speaking from first-hand experience?

>>8697266
>Yeah because that's the actual objective meaning of woman.
Semantics
>Why would you enable far-gone delusionals?
I dunno; I think you're sort of a far-gone delusional and I'm enabling you, just trying to be fair to both sides, you know?
>You seem rather mad about the fact that men in drag aren't actually women. Speaking from first-hand experience?
You're misconstruing my dislike for people obsessed with semantics for me being particularly interested in the definition of "woman". Though this is a specific form of it, what you're basically engaging in is associating your opponent with an extreme other because they happen to disagree with what you are doing. Essentially, you and people like you are the reason that Google fired Damore, the reason that we can't have a conversation about how ridiculous the hysteria over the word "nigger" is in modern society. It's associating any deviation with the entire other side, and it prevents critical discussion on important issues, and that I am a little bit peeved about. The definition of "woman", though, I really don't care.

>>8697266
>>8697299
Should have said "I'd be willing to enable you", since we haven't actually engaged in the hypothetical discussion I mentioned above.
Actually, on that note, that answer was a little bit of a joke answer, so let me give a more serious one. I don't know if me agreeing to the definition for the sake of a conversation really counts as "enabling", and if it does it seems like it's to a very small extent, particularly since I would probably do some talking about semantics similar to what I'm doing now. So I guess I wouldn't enable them, because I would end up giving them the same talk I'm giving you now, which I view as non-enabling.

>>8697299
>Semantics
No. It's a fact. Why does reality scare you?

>I dunno; I think you're sort of a far-gone delusional and I'm enabling you, just trying to be fair to both sides, you know?
There's nothing far-gone or delusional about not calling men in drag "women". Nice "No you!" there, SJW.

>Essentially, you and people like you are the reason that Google fired Damore
Lol no, Google fired Damore because they're a bunch of virtue signalers who think diversity quotas matter more than hiring people with actual skills for the job. The same kind of people that would support the same crap you are right now by pretending "woman" is a matter of semantics.

>The definition of "woman", though, I really don't care.
If you didn't care you wouldn't be trying to argue about it.

>>8697335
>No. It's a fact. Why does reality scare you?
Could you define the word "semantics" for me real quick?
>There's nothing far-gone or delusional about not calling men in drag "women".
I agree; I meant your obsession with semantics. See the followup I wrote.

Google fired Damore because we are at a point where ideologically many people are unable to tell between slight deviations from their views and complete rejection of them. It's why you see idiots like Zunger engage in strawmanning and misrepresenting Damore's points, because engaging in what he's actually saying would disallow them from painting him as being fully in the opposition party, which they've already decided is "problematic" and wrong. For reference, when I say you are similar to those people, I don't mean for your views on semantics, I mean the way you seem to need to paint me as being on the extreme other side because I disagree with you.
>If you didn't care you wouldn't be trying to argue about it.
Seriously just bare with me for a second here, man. Even assuming that there isn't such a thing as procrastination or engaging in acts that I don't particularly care much about because I can't sleep and it's 1AM, there are two things I could be concerned about here:
1) I want the definition of "woman" to mean "a person who identifies as female"
or
2) I want people to shut the fuck up about semantics because I think it's one of the most meaningless ways to engage with almost any issue ever.
You think I care a lot about one of these, but it can't be both for reasons that should be super obvious. If you honestly think it's the former, then you are just taking the least charitable interpretation possible of my viewpoints and arguments, in which case why should I even engage in conversation with you, when it's going to be completely pointless because you'll just assume the worst of everything I say?

Why do we want to make feminism terf free and not just throw out feminism for some real form of gender equality that doesn't hate trans people...and a guess men too.

>>8697369
>Could you define the word "semantics" for me real quick?
Debate about the meaning of a word. Could you define "Woman" objectively please?

>For reference, when I say you are similar to those people, I don't mean for your views on semantics, I mean the way you seem to need to paint me as being on the extreme other side because I disagree with you.
Nobody who isn't a socjus cretin would even entertain the idea that "woman" means anything other than biological woman.

>1) I want the definition of "woman" to mean "a person who identifies as female"
>2) I want people to shut the fuck up about semantics because I think it's one of the most meaningless ways to engage with almost any issue ever.
The fact that you even think it's a matter of semantics indicates the former.

>in which case why should I even engage in conversation with you, when it's going to be completely pointless because you'll just assume the worst of everything I say?
Because dabbling in these delusions is not healthy. You are defending and enabling an agenda.

>>8697398
Why do we want to enable the delusions of the mentally ill and not treat them instead?

>>8697508
>Debate about the meaning of a word
Great, thank you. I'm going to ignore the other nonsense, because I think the point is pretty clear and you've already made it obvious that you're going to interpret everything I say with the least charitable view, making it useless for me to continue talking to you. So, in lieu of a full response, I'll just ask you to think about this:
Is "woman" a word?

Night, faggot.

>>8696996
>The only thing that should make you want to eat lead is the fact that the former of the two stances exists.
Only the first stance is correct. The second thing we have the word "female" for. Without the first:

- trans women cannot describe their experience
- intersex people cannot describe their experience
- cis people who experience changes to gender identity due to traumatic brain injury cannot describe their experience
- fuck, even cis people can't describe their identity without inherently tying it to anatomy (although they might think this makes no difference to them)

Without "female" as a distinct term, we're only stuck without a handy way to say something like "a person with XX chromosomes and eggs" or something like that.

>>8697194
Raising me as the wrong gender over my repeated protests as a child was harmful, but at least it was well-intentioned on the part of adults who didn't know any better. Deliberately not allowing a child who insists of their own volition that they are not their assigned gender to transition is the abusive thing.

Of course we should not "encourage" children. In the case of any ambiguity, it is far safer to wait.

But some of us were NOT ambiguous. At all. I asked to transition at 10. If I were 10 today, I'd like to believe asswipes like you wouldn't have the power to obstruct my transition.

>>8697299
I see where you're coming from, but I don't think this is just semantics. Brain injuries can literally change someone's gender identity and the social role they play in the world; that's what terms like "woman" and "man" really mean, because no one checks your chromosomes or genitals before using them. They really are distinct terms from female/male, and TERFs really do insist on using them contra what the science indicates, i.e. incorrectly.

>>8697539
A woman has XX chromosomes and your ideology can't ever change that fact.

>>8697553
>Only the first stance is correct.
Lol, not it isn't.

>using the propaganda term "cis"
Post discarded

>>8697553
>Raising me as the wrong gender over my repeated protests as a child was harmful
Gender isn't real so raising you as your actual sex isn't wrong. Pandering to your delusions was harmful, especially since over 80% of children who experience "gender" confusion grow out of it.

>but at least it was well-intentioned on the part of adults who didn't know any better.
Oh, they knew better, which is why they didn't enable your illness.

>Deliberately not allowing a child who insists of their own volition that they are not their assigned gender to transition is the abusive thing.
No, humouring mental illness is abuse. Deal with it.

>I asked to transition at 10. If I were 10 today, I'd like to believe asswipes like you wouldn't have the power to obstruct my transition.
Welp, you truly are mentally ill if you think a ten year old has the maturity to decide that. People not indoctrinating children into child abuse just because nutters like you encourage it isn't being an asswipe, sir. You are the asswipe, and you'll never be a woman. Accept facts and not delusions.

Guys, guys...get a fucking room if y'all love each other so much. Jebus fucking Rice!

get hobbies

>>8697599
>people who let their mental-illness consume them
>having a life outside of being trans
Top kek

>>8697553
>Of course we should not "encourage" children. In the case of any ambiguity, it is far safer to wait.

In case of ambiguity it is safest to teach them about their options and allow them to express and explore themselves freely. Sure, we should not encourage them, but we also shouldn't take a pure "wait and see" approach when there is valid cause to believe a child may be trans but grows up in a transphobic society.

>>8677551
The bird is in love with its cage

>>8697830
No, we shouldn't indoctrinate them with you made up gender crap.

>but grows up in a transphobic society.
Oh please, the world panders to you nutters like nothing else. Fining and jailing people for "muh wrong pronouns", letting men in drag win Woman of the Year awards and compete in women's sports, being allowed to serve in the army despite having a mental illness.

Please shut the fuck because you have an insane amount of privilege. Unlike other mental disorders, trannies have their delusions catered to. A lot.

>>8697921
Your problem is that you think everything is ideological. You'd condemn people to a lifetime of misery because they don't fit into your precious ideology. Here's a clue, most things people do in life aren't ideologically driven.
You make a big deal about semantics, but you misuse delusion constantly. Actual professionals who deal with these things know what delusions are and trans people don't have them. Your ideology doesn't change that.
Also eff your chromosomes. If it were possible to change chromosomes, you'd just raise the bar and say that changing them doesn't count. Nothing a trans person does will satisfy your ideology.
This woman is not going to let you define her. Excuse me while I go use the lady's room.

File: cisDefinition.png (242KB, 1000x950px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 1000x950px

>>8697589
>A woman has XX chromosomes
*Female.

No other species has "women." It's only a term that exists because we are a highly social and self-aware species.

>using the propaganda term "cis"
It's a perfectly normal prefix that means the opposite of "trans," shortbus.

>Gender isn't real
All the combined neurological evidence says otherwise.

>delusions
That's not what that word means.

>especially since over 80% of children who experience "gender" confusion grow out of it.
That's what diagnostic criteria are for. Conflating GNC kids with GID kids makes for trash data like this.

>Oh, they knew better, which is why they didn't enable your illness.
No, they fully admit they didn't know better. That's ALSO not what "enable" means.

>No, humouring mental illness is abuse.
Just calling something a "mental illness" doesn't actually tell you anything about the nature of the condition or how it should be treated. FYI.

>Welp, you truly are mentally ill if you think a ten year old has the maturity to decide that.
Literally everyone believes that a 10 year old has the maturity to decide that, since none of us raise children to be genderless blobs until the age of 18.

>you'll never be a woman
Thank god for modern science! The prospect was a death sentence with my dysphoria.

>Accept facts
I'll take science over your sociological moon theories, thanks.

>>8697603
Your fanfiction is boring.

>>8698006
>You'd condemn people to a lifetime of misery because they don't fit into your precious ideology.
Sounds like the people forcing kids into all this "muh gender" crap, especially when studies prove over 80% of children who have confusion about their sex grow out of it

>Actual professionals who deal with these things know what delusions are and trans people don't have them.
The medical community has been coerced into pandering to you people because you whined and whined about how totally sane you all were until they gave in. No facts. No breakthroughs in understanding your condition. Literally feels before reals.

>If it were possible to change chromosomes, you'd just raise the bar and say that changing them doesn't count.
It doesn't. If changing chromosomes were possible it'd just show the disturbing lengths you people would go to live in your delusions; that you'd rather change your fucking DNA than fix your illness. You are that bent on living a fantasy. And yeah, nothing could possibly go wrong about manipulating DNA in a still living being.

Fun fact: Most of the base that trans "science" is built on (besides feelings) is the studies of John Money, a pedophile who made a boy with a botched circumcision be raised as a girl and made him have sex with his brother and the poor kid killed himself when he got older.

>Your ideology doesn't change that.
>Nothing a trans person does will satisfy your ideology.
It's not an ideology, it's facts and ethics. If that offends you then I'm sorry you feel that want.

>This woman is not going to let you define her.
Who is this woman you speak of? It's not you so I don't know who you are referring to.

>>8698331
>especially when studies prove over 80% of children who have confusion about their sex grow out of it

That's a lie based on an intentionally faulty sample. The kids tested were not all trans, but simply gender non-conforming. They didn't "grw out of" gender confusion. They were never significantly uncertain about their gender to begin with. The people conducting the study and the parents of the children simply forced them to participate out of fear they *may* be trans, without any real signs of that being the case.

>>8698331
>that you'd rather change your fucking DNA than fix your illness.

If sex is the same as gender, and thinking you're the "wrong" gender is an illness, wouldn't changing your chromosomes fix the illness? :)

>>8698040
>It's a perfectly normal prefix that means the opposite of "trans," shortbus.
Cisgender is a propaganda term that only exists to normalise transgenderism by trying to say normal peple aren't normal but merely just "not trans". Trying to define people by their non-trans status to make transgenderism more prevalent even though they make up less than 1% of the population.

>All the combined neurological evidence says otherwise.
Only trans-enablers believe in the "identify as" meme. Real science doesn't agree with your feelings.

>No, they fully admit they didn't know better.
Oh, so you "enlightened" them on how they were ignorant bigots who have no place in the current year? Gotcha.

>Just calling something a "mental illness" doesn't actually tell you anything about the nature of the condition or how it should be treated. FYI.
We know the nature of the condition, but you cretins didn't like it so whined and had tantrums until you got your way instead.

>Literally everyone believes that a 10 year old has the maturity to decide that, since none of us raise children to be genderless blobs until the age of 18.
No, our children are raised like children, they develop their own likes and dislikes, and all the sane ones accept their own sex. Plenty of ones that don't at first do grow out of, but now you leeches are encouraging them to cave into their delusions just to boost your egos at the sake of the child's wellbeing.

>Thank god for modern science!
Modern science can't make you a woman, only a man with mutilated junk and a body full of harmful chemicals.

>I'll take science over your sociological moon theories, thanks.
LOL. If you actually took science over sociological theories you wouldn't be on this board denying you were mentally-ill. It's pathetic how self-unaware you types are.

>Your fanfiction is boring.
If it was wrong then there'd be no "t" in this board's name

>>8698043
Truly a sane, mentally-stable individual. Thanks for proving how sane you are.

>>8697093
> I got molested in a bathroom and couldn't fight the guy off because I had been on hormones for years

Great point, we better let 6'4 transbians with penises not on hormones into womens rape crisis shelters then.

>>8698355
>we should have height restrictions and mandatory blood tests before admitting people to women's shelters

hmm

>>8698340
No, you just think it's a lie because it goes against your narrative. You can't be "gender non-conforming" because gender doesn't exist. Boys don't have to like super-macho stuff and you people push this meme that they do so any male who is even slightly in touch with their feminine side ends up thinking their trans because that's the narrative you pushed. Girl liking boy's stuff? Perfectly fine. Boy liking girl's stuff? Nope, time for the hormone replacement therapy for you. Not really a surprise either given how much more MtFs there are than FtMs. Almost as if society has actively been shaming one sex for simply existing for the last decade or so.

>>8698344
>If sex is the same as gender
It's not the same, it doesn't exist. It was a pointless term that basically meant "the likes and preferences typical of males and females", which already dumb because plenty of men like girl's stuff and plenty of woman like men's stuff. Then it got bastardized by puritans who were afraid of their kids seeing the word "sex" so they turned gender into a synonym for it. Then SJWs and your kind got your hands on it and bastardized it again to mean "What I identify as".

Playing Frankenstein and changing your DNA to suit a delusion's needs is highly unethical. And a chromosome change won't fix many of the inherent other mental problems that come with the disorder.

File: giphy.gif (375KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

375KB, 480x480px

if there were only some simple way to keep tall strong people with male hormones out of womens shelters

>>8697093
>and couldn't fight the guy off because I had been on hormones for years
Almost as if HRT is bad for you...

>>8698362
>You can't be "gender non-conforming" because gender doesn't exist. Boys don't have to like super-macho stuff and you people push this meme that they do so any male who is even slightly in touch with their feminine side ends up thinking their trans because that's the narrative you pushed.

I just... told you that the study you are citing lumps in kids who act outside of gender expectations get lumped in with trans kids. This is anti-trans cis researchers pushing this, not trans people.

>>8698362
>Playing Frankenstein and changing your DNA to suit a delusion's needs is highly unethical.

What's the delusion?

>>8697093
>I took hormones until my muscles withered away and I couldn't defend myself from a molester

>Clearly, what needs to happen is women's shelters need to open their doors to me at the expense of the safety of the women within.

>>8698373
>This is anti-trans cis researchers pushing this
I like how any information that doesn't come from trans-enablers doesn't count to you. It's almost as if transgenders hate facts or something...

>>8698378
The delusion that you think you are the opposite sex.

>>8698387
>The delusion that you think you are the opposite sex.

And if you can change your """""""""""""sex""""""""" how are you still delusional for believing your are that sex?

>>8698387
lmao read a biology book past 6th grade i don't have time for this bye

>>8698394
Because you changed your DNA to live a lie. You are that bent on your living in your mental illness you'd rather change your DNA than fix your head.

>>8698397
Biology doesn't agree with you feels before reals social science, bub.

Although given how much worse SJWs are getting and how much more authoritarian you guys are I wouldn't be surprised if future textbooks are changed to suit your agenda.

>>8698418
>Because you changed your DNA to live a lie.

How's it a lie if it's true? Seems almost like your category of "sex" is a made-up social construct. Your thoughts are illogical in the literal sense of the word. I strongly advise you to see a therapist because you might actually be delusional.

>>8698423
>How's it a lie if it's true?
You weren't born that way. You manipulated your DNA which is extremely unnatural, unethical, and likely very dangerous.

>Seems almost like your category of "sex" is a made-up social construct.
>social construct
Here comes the tumblr jargon...

>I strongly advise you to see a therapist because you might actually be delusional.
You guys are really good at projecting your own problems, aren't you?

>>8698433
>You weren't born that way.

Okay, so it disagrees with your fee-fees, gotcha.

>You guys are really good at projecting your own problems, aren't you?

Have you seen a therapist? Like, ever?

>>8698438

Sorry about your dick.

Stay away from lesbians

>>8698438
>Okay, so it disagrees with your fee-fees, gotcha.
This is literally transgenders and SJWs reacting to science proving them wrong in a nutshell. It's why you were even pandered to for decades in the first place.

>Have you seen a therapist? Like, ever?
Have you ever seen one that didn't enable your delusions?

>>8698460
Look, I have worked as a psychiatric nurse, I studied philosophy in university and I personally know a few professional psychiatrists. I have seen around 4 different psychiatrists myself because my insurance forced me to. All of them agreed that I do not show the sign of any delusional beliefs. You, however, show a limited capability of rational thought and empathy, which makes me think you either have a Cluster B personality disorder or you suffer from delusional thinking. Give me one reason why you shouldn't see a therapist other than it would hurt your ego.

>>8698475
Yeah, because if they told you anything other than what you wanted to hear you'd try and get them fired.

>You, however, show a limited capability of rational thought and empathy
No, because if I lacked rational though and empathy I'd encourage people to go into a downspiral of madness because would make some SJWs praise me.

>Give me one reason why you shouldn't see a therapist other than it would hurt your ego.
Give me one reason why you shouldn't just admit you have a mental-disorder and your kin have manipulated the medical community and society into pandering to you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b3Gr3QjkZs

>>8698493
Look, I won't humor someone further who has obvious psychiatric issues and you should get help instead of arguing with strangers on the internet. If this continues you will end up in a mental hospital or jail. If not that, you'll overdose on drugs or kill yourself. You might just be the type to be at risk for that. I won't answer any further posts.

>>8698504
>Look, I won't humor someone further who has obvious psychiatric issues
I'm glad you know see things my way. :^)

Also lol
>I won't humor someone further who has obvious psychiatric issues and you should get help instead of arguing with strangers on the internet. If this continues you will end up in a mental hospital or jail. If not that, you'll overdose on drugs or kill yourself. You might just be the type to be at risk for that.
You can't be this self-unaware. You're literally describing what happens to trannies.

>>8698348
>We know the nature of the condition
You obviously don't.

>>8698387
>I like how any information that doesn't come from trans-enablers doesn't count to you. It's almost as if transgenders hate facts or something...
I like how any information that doesn't come from trans-haters doesn't count to you. It's almost as if haters hate facts or something...

>>8698418
>much more authoritarian you guys are
Who's the authoritarian? You'd ban HRT, surgery, legal name/sex/gender changes for trans people, and probably get them declared legally incompetent and force them onto antipsychotics to keep them doped up for life.

>>8698447
Different anon, but
>Sorry about your dick.
Don't have one.
>Stay away from lesbians
Not interested.

you should all die.

>>8698493
>Yeah, because if they told you anything other than what you wanted to hear you'd try and get them fired.
Projecting much?
> if I lacked rational though and empathy I'd encourage people to go into a downspiral of madness
That's you and what you're doing.
>your kin have manipulated the medical community and society into pandering to you.
>>>/x/

>>8698758
P S Y C H O
S
Y
C
H
O

>>8698719
>You obviously don't.
I know it's a disorder and you don't, so keep being in denial, sire.

>>8698734
>no you!
Just the level of maturity and intelligence I'd expect from something who things playing dress up makes him a real girl.

>>8698745
>Who's the authoritarian?
You and your hivemind
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/18/de-blasio-fine-businesses-wrong-gender-pronouns/
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/court-orders-dad-to-start-treating-his-11-year-old-daughter-as-a-boy1
http://dailysignal.com/2017/06/19/canadians-face-hate-crimes-using-wrong-gender-pronouns/

>You'd ban HRT, surgery
Nothing wrong with banning harmful things. Do you think Ice (the drug) and child prostitution should be legal too? If you don't, you are an oppressive authoritarian who hates freedom.

>legal name/sex/gender changes for trans people
You can change your name but you literally can't change your sex and gender isn't real.

>and probably get them declared legally incompetent and force them onto antipsychotics to keep them doped up for life.
Nope. You sound paranoid though. I suppose that's to be expected from someone who's built their entire lifestyle on their mental disorder.

>>8698761
>Projecting much?
The truth isn't projecting. As you have proven in this thread, this board, this site, the internet and the entirety of real life, trannies hate the reality of their disorder.

>That's you and what you're doing.
Do you call anorexic people fat? If you don't, you aren't rational and lack empathy.

>>>/x/
Nice denial, bub, but it's literally the only reason your kind have been enabled for so long.

>>8698887
>Nothing wrong with banning harmful things.
>but you literally can't change your legal sex and legal gender isn't real.
t. authoritarian in denial

>>8698905
>facts are authoritorian
Lol, next your gonna say it's authoritarian to say someone objectively can't become a dog.

Mental illness is a hell of a drug.

>>8676061
terfs are nothing but bullies who want to blame a small amount of people for the issues women face. When the reality is that trans have nothing to do with women's rights abuses globally.

Because they can not change the world with their online shit posting; they lash out on a group of people who the world do not care about and in many cases also abuse. Rather than take real action and get laws and policies changed.

Protesting and picking on trans individuals is not going to get laws and policies changed. terfs need to understand what real feminism is about and stop acting like children.

>>8698982

no, they're people that care about the oppression on women and aren't willing to accommodate a tiny minority of loud angry mentally deranged males that want to claim female status for their own purposes.

makes perfect sense from a social justice/utilitarian perspective. Trannies(mtf) shold sit down, STFU and help women become less oppressed. not the other way around.

>>8698982
>When the reality is that trans have nothing to do with women's rights
I'm glad you agree :^)

File: Crying Grin.jpg (41KB, 600x477px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 600x477px

>>8698982
>terfs need to understand what real feminism is about because they need to include men in drag

>>8698997
terfs focus too much energy into something that will not resolve problems.

>>8699007
there was no statement about including trans. Focusing on "men in drag" is not going solve real women's issues.

>>8699004
gets it.

>>8699079
>terfs focus too much energy into something that will not resolve problems.
Like how trannies focus too much energy into hack surgeries and hormone poisoning that won't resolve their problems?

>there was no statement about including trans. Focusing on "men in drag" is not going solve real women's issues.
It's exactly what he was implying.

>gets it.
Same guy, man.

>>8699007
So this has been too dedicated to be pol. Is cislesgen really this autistic? What's wrong with TERFs? What made them so insane?

Unironically, this is why I advocate for the eventual genocide of women. Once we have artificial wombs, we won't need these insane "people" to muck up society and we can succeed with nothing but men and women (male). Cis women are insane garbage ruining the planet, and trans women are the next step in the evolutionary chain. I await the arrival of Trap Hitler to put the womyn in the ghetto.

>>8676254
No, "Men RAAAAAAAAAAAPE" is a TERF thing too. Normal feminists don't hate men.

>>8698997
>Trannies(mtf) shold sit down, STFU
Who's oppressing who here?

>>8699730

men are oppressing women. you are a statistical outlier and need to get out of the way.

>>8700585
>men are oppressing women.
Name one single way women are privileged above men.

Female privileges are countless.

File: terf.jpg (38KB, 500x460px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 500x460px

>>8699125
>gay shit

>>8699525
>Normal feminists don't hate men.
[citation needed]

The real question is what are we doing to keep women's spaces trans free?

>>8700585
>you are a statistical outlier and need to get out of the way.
No.

>>8701140
List your spaces please.

>>8698362
>Almost as if society has actively been shaming one sex for simply existing for the last decade or so.

Wait, aren't you supposed to be the radical feminist here?

>>8701704
Typical male behavior.
>why you are not welcome in female spaces

>>8699525
>normal feminists don't hate men
You don't hate men, just shut down meetings on men's issues and defame people who speak up about it as misogynists. Sure.

>>8703012
>>8700585
>you are a statistical outlier and need to get out of the way.
>>8698997
>Trannies(mtf) shold sit down, STFU
Typical aggressive male bullying behavior.

File: Billy Castro.jpg (28KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 480x360px

Honest question:
Are FTMs "welcome" in women's spaces?

>>8703283
There is no such thing as "women's spaces".

>>8703302
I asked for a list and haven't gotten one yet.

>>8703283
They were welcome in MichFest, the TERF womyn-only music festival.

>>8703378
Revealing.

>>8703283
generally yes

the core ideology of terfs is that trans women are men and trans men are women, so an ftm would just be a woman, probably one too scared to admit she's a lesbian or who just wants male privelage

File: 1461211519658.jpg (28KB, 500x634px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 500x634px

>>8703461
>probably one too scared to admit she's a lesbian or who just wants male privelage
Jeez

>>8703429
MichFest wouldn't even allow male babies. Those babies have too much patriarchy.

>>8703429
>>8703461
interesting, i wonder why ftms are fine with not only selling out their mtf sisters but also associating with misandrists who don't even recognize them as men

>>8699478
>Cis women are insane garbage ruining the planet, and trans women are the next step in the evolutionary chain.
Please actually kill yourself for real.

>>8698348
>Cisgender is a propaganda term that only exists to normalise transgenderism by trying to say normal peple aren't normal but merely just "not trans"
Is the term "heterosexual" defining normal people only by their non-gay status in order to make being a huge fag more prevalent even though homogays only make up ~3% of the population?

Grow a brain.

>Only trans-enablers believe in the "identify as" meme.
Not an argument.

>Real science doesn't agree with your feelings.
It does, though. Your gender identity can be changed via a brain injury. We know that gender identity is separable from natal sex and based in our neurology.

>so you "enlightened" them on how they were ignorant bigots who have no place in the current year?
LOL, no. They worked through it on their own. I barely ever discussed politics with them.

>We know the nature of the condition
Obviously not, since literally everything you post about it is wrong.

>No, our children are raised like children
All children are raised with an assigned gender role. You are in a poor position to deny this, since that's a critical part of radfem ideology.

>Plenty of ones that don't at first do grow out of
No, they don't. As has already been explained to you repeatedly, kids who are referred to clinics because their behaviour is outside of "normal" expectations are NOT THE SAME as kids who actually meet diagnostic criteria for a gender disorder.

I pointed this out in another thread; but you cannot cite John Money and his notorious failure in the experiment to raise a boy as a girl FROM BIRTH and then claim that we are somehow making kids trans. What are we doing right that Money fucked up? Pick one; you can't have both.

>Modern science can't make you a woman
I'm an FtM, dumbass. What else would be implied by, "the prospect [of being a woman] was a death sentence"? God, you're slow.

>If it was wrong then there'd be no "t" in this board's name
So is your identity consumed by being a lesbian? Since you're here.

i used to be fairly interested in radical feminism because it focused on the experiences that women have to deal with in the world, especially in relation to their male peers. children gendered as 'girls' are definitely treated differently than children gendered as 'boys'. that's how you become enculturated into gender roles and a particular habitus which encourages men (not trans women but men) to take for granted their experiences relative to women, often creating a sense of entitlement to women's time and labor.

what really bothered me though is the fact that most so called radical feminists have an almost pathological obsession with biology and the exclusion and harassment of trans women which is fucking ridiculous as trans women face many of the same shitty experiences that women do - because socially, they ARE women. I split from that shit cause I can't be dealing with people that won't for some reason listen to the experiences of people they don't deem 'worthy' of womanhood.

>>8703538
Oh, fuck off with the victim complex.

I've barely ever met a guy who would go to those things. Of the very few that do, they either go to a) protest by showing how stupid it is that they can get in, or b) are early in transition and continue to go for a year or two because they still have a ton of friends going or something.

If you're going to tell me that no MtF ever goes to some male-only thing early in transition/while still in boymode, I'm going to call you a liar.

>>8704556
>male-only thing
What is a bio-male only thing?

>>8704556
Yeah all those male-only colleges, quotas, music festivals, clubs, sports events and competitions, etc etc etc.

>>8704556
>If you're going to tell me that no MtF ever goes to some male-only thing early in transition/while still in boymode, I'm going to call you a liar.

What the hell are you talking about?

>>8703522
I'm telling you, you can detect these ideologies by how often their adherents use the word 'just'. Both TERFs and /pol/ neither one can explain literally anything without defaulting to 'just' somewhere in the sentence, because their ideologies require minimization of others' experiences. I've noticed this seems to be true of almost all radical ideologies. It's not necessarily EXCLUSIVE to them, but it's definitely endemic.

>>8705362
Lesbians aren't renowned for being grounded in reality.

>>8705357
>bio-male
Holy shit, 1999 called asking if your time machine broke down.

>>8705357
>>8705362
>>8705453
Did I ever suggest it had to be officially all-male, as opposed to being so in practice? Come the fuck on.

>>8705357
>male only colleges

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_colleges_in_the_United_States

>clubs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_traditional_gentlemen%27s_clubs_in_the_United_States

>sports events and competitions

Which ones aren't segregated by sex again?

>>8676061
By keeping my spaces feminist-free, by default they are also TERF-free. :3

>>8705515
I think you meant to quote me
>>8705296
at the top. I just put the bio prefix to be more clear about the space specifically being for biological males; didn't think it was a fuckin' issue.
I'm still not sure what you are referring to. Like a strip club or something?
>>8705530
>male only colleges
"As of March 2017, there are three private, non-religious, four-year, all-male college institutions in the United States."
"Three"
>clubs
"Historically, these clubs were exclusively for men,[1] but most (though not all) in the United States now admit women."
>sports events and competitions
I think that they meant in the audience, but either way:
https://www.transathlete.com/policies-college

>>8705530
>As of March 2017, there are three private, non-religious, four-year, all-male college institutions in the United States.

How many all-female college institutions are there in the United States?

>>8705588
37

>>8705515
>as opposed to being so in practice?
"i know the sexist institutions are all female and any male one gets slandered until it opens its doors to women, b-but it's still women who are kept out! somehow! muh in practice!"

>>8705615
Saying something in a mixing tone of voice doesn't make it untrue.

>>8705588
What this person said
>>8705597

and here's the fun top ten!
https://www.forbes.com/2009/08/13/womens-colleges-student-forbes-woman-leadership-graduate_slide.html

>>8705620
Correct, it's untruth is self-evident.

>>8705649
You aren't a girl. Don't presume to judge the validity of other people's experiences. You doing that is like me saying "Everyone is bisexual because I personally think both sexes can be attractive"

>>8705658
Not the person you're replying to, but earlier I asked you what you were referring to by these "in practice" male spaces and I am still curious.

>>8705658
>I can say whatever I want and it has to count as true, because chromosomes!

You seriously can't even be bothered to pretend to actually defend your fantasies?

File: 19437193_1397347703713871_4965560348313649152_n.jpg (129KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 1080x1080px

>>8676343
Get back in your woman.

>>8705554
I just haven't seen a single person use that terms in decades.

>>8705615
Holy shit, what does this have to do with anything? Jesus fucking christ, my comments had nothing to do with any kind of "discrimination," I was talking about activities that are de-facto male-only. Get over your victim complexes, you're as bad as the radfems. Fucking HELL.

>>8705803
That wasn't me, obviously. Are you guys THAT unable to follow a thread without post IDs?

WHY DID EVERYONE TAKE STUPID PILLS TODAY. Holy shit, I need to get off this board. It's been nothing but arguing with double-digit IQs all day.

>>8705891
Okay. Also, I guess you aren't the person I responded to here?
>>8705803
Either way, I am still curious about these de-facto male-only activities/spaces. Maybe I'm just stupid, but either way I genuinely am not sure what you mean.
>>8705902
Oh look it wasn't. Thanks. Wasn't really paying that much attention; chill out.

>>8705554
>but most (though not all) in the United States now admit women
Note that even the ones that don't are still under pressure to. There has been a one-way trend of them letting women in. None stop letting women in and no new male-only ones open, unlike female-only ones which do keep opening and don't move away from their gender-based membership requirement.

Because no doubt of the different levels of social acceptability excluding men and excluding women have.

>>8705905
DE FACTO, as in anything considered to be a "guy's thing."

Please go back and look at the post that started this nuttery: it was someone bitching about FtMs going to MichFest. I said that virtually no guys I've ever known would go to that shit unironically EXCEPT maybe a few early in transition/girlmode would go cuz they got dragged along by friends. How many posts does /tttt/ get from MtFs still in boymode about awkward shit they end up still doing with male friends?

Wtf at you people going off about "female colleges." Just wtf.

>>8705905
>chill out
Fuck you. I hate you people so much I can't begin to express it. The worst fucking part is that this is the BEST LGBT board on the internet and everywhere else is even worse. This autism is as good as it gets. God, other queers are the primary reason I wish I was cishet.

>>8705980
Wait, what people am I? The people going off about female colleges? I don't think I did that, though I did reply to a post about male-only colleges.
Anyway, since you brought it up let's meander back to the post and your reply:
>>8703538
>>8704556
So the first post takes issue with FtMs going to MichFest. The middle line in your reply isn't important, since the controversy appears to be around the last bit:
"If you're going to tell me that no MtF ever goes to some male-only thing early in transition/while still in boymode, I'm going to call you a liar."
Now when you say "male-only thing", we have to take that as the inverse of the female-only thing, i.e. MichFest. I don't know much about MichFest or the controversy surrounding it, but it appears to have been very specifically about biologically born women, and thus MtF exclusionary as a rule. So the corresponding male-only spaces should have the the inverse value and be FtM exclusionary as a rule (as well as MtF accepting, if you really want to be picky). Otherwise, there is no reason for a FtM to feel "betrayed" or whatever the first poster was trying to get at. Now, the spaces and activities that are specifically keeping FtMs out aren't really things that jump to people's minds, hence the confusion around your initial post. I was fairly willing to listen to your reasoning around spaces/activities that have an unspoken rule or something that disallows non-biologically male participants, but you don't seem to want to do anything but yell "de facto" at me instead of name actual FtM exclusionary activities/spaces, de facto or otherwise, that you believe MtFs have attended. I just want you to name some so I can get a feel for what you're trying to put across here instead of having to assume what you mean, because I can't trust my "double digit IQ".
"MtFs still in boymode about awkward shit they end up still doing with male friends?" like what? What de facto activities? I suggested strip club if that's one.

>>8705980
>>8706070
Text limit clipped me, but also I am honestly really busy right now (and for the next nine days), so I have already spent too much time on this, as might be evident by the zero-editing I did on the rushed text block above, and am going to try to get some sleep or at least study until I can. I will still check later for your reply, though, because I remain interested.

>>8676061
Well I start by not being a feminist

Hi its me a terf in your space

>>8705891
> I was talking about activities that are de-facto male-only.

How is that an acceptable analogy for something that has an explicit policy of keeping out natal males out?

>I don't get invited to the strip club by my guy friends which I wouldn't want to attend anyway and if I did I could

>this is equivalent to a massive number of institutions, groups and events that bar any male entry or even any male or trans female entry

>>8704537
>children gendered as 'girls' are definitely treated differently than children gendered as 'boys'.
I'm interested in this too, but feminism is a very bad way of examining it because of its insistence of seeing everything through a lens of female victimhood and its denial of anything that doesn't fit that narrative.

>>8704519
>Grow a brain.
You first. People only push the "cisgender" meme to normalise transgenderism and you know it. We don't have terms for people being non-schizo or non-anorexic. Don't play dumb.

>Not an argument.
Pro-transgenderism revolves around having no arguments, so you should be used to it.

>It does, though. Your gender identity can be changed via a brain injury. We know that gender identity is separable from natal sex and based in our neurology.
Gee, brain damage can cause mental illness? Who would have thought!

>LOL, no. They worked through it on their own.
Yeah, right. Their "own". Probably through socjus propaganda being peddled everywhere.

>Obviously not, since literally everything you post about it is wrong.
Just because it triggers you doesn't make it wrong, sweetie.

>All children are raised with an assigned gender role.
No, they are raised like normal. Only you cretins care about muh gender.

>I pointed this out in another thread; but you cannot cite John Money and his notorious failure in the experiment to raise a boy as a girl FROM BIRTH and then claim that we are somehow making kids trans. What are we doing right that Money fucked up? Pick one; you can't have both.
No, you guys do what John Money does all the time; encourage kids to go tranny. Don't deny it. There was even a thread up yesterday about there being special "gender daycares": https://archive.loveisover.me/lgbt/thread/8691159/

>I'm an FtM, dumbass.
Sorry for basing it off the trend (MtF is way more common). So correction to my statement: Modern science can't make you a man.

>So is your identity consumed by being a lesbian? Since you're here.
Can't be a lesbian when I'm (objectively) male, you delusional nutter.

Get the fuck out of here with the concern trolling.
You don't care about mental illness or the well being of Trans people. You're just trying to get rid of them under the guise of "helping" them.

>>8706176
As a third party passively taking this in, a lot of what you two are saying to each other is really pointless. You aren't citing any studies, you're linking only the barest of sources. What you're engaging in is a glorified shouting match via empty rhetoric or just plain insults. Please step up your respective fucking games (admittedly one of you is clearly making way more actual points than the other and more clearly engaging with the specifics of the conversation, but if I say who the other person won't listen to me when I say this and I would really like it if you two elevated your discourse instead of interspersing this thread with huge blocks of largely nothing).

>>8706175
i more or less agree (im the person you responded to) wrt female victimhood. it's not a direct relationship of victimhood it's a systemic antagonism which is internalized and carried out by all (both men and women policing both men and women). i do not consider myself a feminist first off because what does that word even mean and how can you 'be' a feminist? what I do believe in is a class antagonism which categorically creates 'men' and 'women' out of human beings. I believe, as a trans person, that transgenderism is a reconciliation of physical bodily dysphoria as well as social dysphoria with the social reality of gender and I believe it's important for trans people to have access to the resources which allow them to transition and in that respect do not believe in the biological determinism which so many radfems seem to believe in, though i understand how biology determines how a person is gendered and treated in this world obviously.

Terf is a slur intended to silence dissenters. Transgenderism is homophobia and misogyny.

>>8706570
>both men and women policing both men and women
This so much! Gender roles can't be properly examined and critiqued without keeping this in mind.

You want to make a thread about gendering and gender roles or shall I?

I agree that "biological determinism" is really how biology gets you assigned a gender role by society, and about transgenderism comprising both social and physical dysphoria.

>>8706588
Are FTT's lesbophobic and misandrist then?

>>8696872
RAS syndrome aside, this. When your movement is all about turning women into shittier me, men turning into shittier women really gon fuck you over.

>>8706663
That's different!

>>8710523
sarcasm I hope

>>8696893
You can be a woman without being female.

>>8713317
Male to FEMALEs are female.

File: cancer[1].jpg (49KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 640x360px

itt

>>8715251

ok, let's see you enter estrus.
>checkmate

>>8715355
>ciswomen who don't menstruate aren't women
/pol/science!

>>8715355
>>8715371
estrus isn't a thing in humans at all

>>8676173
I'm a tranny and feel we can handle our own work, unlike genetic women.

Your attention is not missed.

>>8715418
Finally, something I don't have to feel dysphoric about!