i feel like the editing i had to subject the quote to so it fit in
the title makes it sound a little bit less gross (if that’s even
possible), so here it is in full:
After its crowning victory in Obergefell v. Hodges, the Blue
Egregore’s LGBT activist machinery wasn’t about to sit idle or quietly
disband, so instead adapted itself to the obvious next growth channel of
absorbing new neurotype-demographics into the “T”: specifically,
capturing a larger fraction of the ~5% (?) of men with intense AGP
(whose analogues in a previous generation would have been furtive,
closeted crossdressers), and the ~5% (?) of girls on the losing end of
female intrasexual competition (whose analogues in a previous generation
would have been anorexic).
I didn't notice the existence of trans people till the rightwing smear machine turned to focus on them after *Obergefell*, therefore they didn't exist until then.
Yeah, they have Miranda Yardley in their blogroll, which suggests that she’s neck deep in UK terf rhetoric as well.
MY has been the UK Terf community’s pet trans person they use as their crutch to tell themselves that they don’t actually hate trans people - look here’s one that tells them that their feelings are right! She pops up at UK terf events from time to time.
If you’re so lost in self-loathing that the UK terf crowd is your source of affirmation then that’s a really shitty place to be.
Trans people certainly became more visible after 2015. Might be related to several places removing the laws requiring for trans people to be sterilized. (im still sad that this only happened in the past decade in places or not yet, like in Belgium and Luxembourg).
Regular Transphobe Brain: Trans men are sad confused lesbians
Stellar Transphobe Brain: Trans men are straight girls who read too much gay manga
Galaxy Transphobe Brain: Trans men are uggos
I’ve noticed that a lot of people believe (or I guess pretend to
believe) that marriage is the be all and end all for LGBT rights.
There was a weird post on CMV the other day by someone insisting that
George W Bush was better for LGBT rights in the US than Barack Obama
was. His argument seemed to hinge on the belief that Bush’s support for
civil unions (but not marriage) basically covered everything that LGBT
Americans could possibly need. I didn’t revisit the thread so things may
have changed, but the last I saw he was resolutely ignoring any comment
that pointed out that civil unions do not have the same protections and
rights as marriage and that there are other rights at stake other than
marriage.
This person might be the same; they are focused on constructing a
weird, idiosyncratic argument and are ignoring any inconvenient pieces
of information.
I'll save my sympathy to those who cannot transition because those in power won't let them. I have little sympathy for those who could transition, choose not to, and in turn channel all of that busted mental energy into hurting other trans people.
She is clearly a villain—but there is such a thing as a sympathetic villain, and it's not as if our sympathy is a finite resource. It seems like she's hurting herself most of all, and it's just because of the brain poison she was fed by Blanchard and the rationalsphere. I can imagine how I might have turned out the same way if I had been born a few years earlier and read the wrong things in the wrong order.
Definitely a lot more sympathy for them. And not just people who cannot transition, but all trans people who we as a society did wrong and are still doing wrong. And the poor trans people who constantly hear us cis people talk about how cis is a slur, and we should hear blanchard out, urgh...
Seeing all the links thrown in to other obscure, long-winded blogs
makes this a great example of how Rationalists form relentlessly insular
subcultures and cliques that endlessly reference each other in a
miserable circlejerk.
i feel like the editing i had to subject the quote to so it fit in the title makes it sound a little bit less gross (if that’s even possible), so here it is in full:
I’ve noticed that a lot of people believe (or I guess pretend to believe) that marriage is the be all and end all for LGBT rights.
There was a weird post on CMV the other day by someone insisting that George W Bush was better for LGBT rights in the US than Barack Obama was. His argument seemed to hinge on the belief that Bush’s support for civil unions (but not marriage) basically covered everything that LGBT Americans could possibly need. I didn’t revisit the thread so things may have changed, but the last I saw he was resolutely ignoring any comment that pointed out that civil unions do not have the same protections and rights as marriage and that there are other rights at stake other than marriage.
This person might be the same; they are focused on constructing a weird, idiosyncratic argument and are ignoring any inconvenient pieces of information.
This is apparently by a non-transitioning trans woman, and I’m not sure whether to feel sorry for her.
Seeing all the links thrown in to other obscure, long-winded blogs makes this a great example of how Rationalists form relentlessly insular subcultures and cliques that endlessly reference each other in a miserable circlejerk.
Come for the transphobia, stay for the quotations from lesser known Charles A. Murray books
I thought I was on /r/GenderCynical for a moment
dafuq
someone needs to lay off the adderall