you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]FlanJam 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Was pretty annoyed a couple days ago because I saw yet another cotton ceiling think piece on a (supposedly) lgbt media outlet. Its was kind of ironic how people in the comments were saying no one actually supports cotton ceiling... right under the article supporting cotton ceiling. I didn't want to make a thread about it cuz its just the same old crap, but I'll take this opportunity to vent lol.

The thing that annoys me the most is how people were saying the article was very nuanced and not cotton ceiling at all. So I read it and frankly, it said nothing insightful. Mostly the usual crap but with just enough ambiguity and plausible deniability to get away with it. Basically said "you don't HAVE to date trans women, but you SHOULD or else you're a bad person."

I'll give them the benefit of the doubt tho, I don't think they intend to push cotton ceiling. And I understand they're just trying to destigmatize the way trans people are viewed in society. But goddamn, their rhetoric is creepy and incel-y as hell.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It’s frustrating those articles are still coming out. I feel like people will preface it saying no one has to have sex with anyone, but then follow it by all these reasons you should question how you feel. It’s super manipulative and seems to almost only be directed at women.

[–]FlanJam 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's exactly how the article was like. It paid a little lip service to your right to refuse anyone, followed by multiple paragraphs telling you who you should date. They're saying it without actually saying it. And its so frustrating because I don't think QT has bad intentions, but they're so oblivious as to why their rhetoric is harmful.