TRAs Self-Destruct Language

submitted by GuacLettuceBacon from i.imgur.com

all 9 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]GenCritAllDay 19 insightful - 3 fun19 insightful - 2 fun20 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Gotta love how they can call us cis women and we're "allowed" to use their made up, preapproved term but when we use our own distinctions, such as bio women or natal women, they huff and puff about it.

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I am an OEM female

[–]sisterinsomnia 16 insightful - 2 fun16 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

TRAs are the ones who have the powers of naming. They rule the language, and the new words they have created are both lies (afab is not an actual process) and made so that it is impossible to talk about the group 'female people.' The group which faces sex-based oppression.

So afab would be the closest to that. But nobody is 'assigned' a sex at birth. This was done in the past for some intersex babies. Today most people know the sex of the child they are going to have before it is born. Sex is observed, not assigned.

And it is a term for sex we need, not something fuzzy such as 'gender assigned at birth'. I guess one might argue that visitors who bring pink balloons to celebrate the birth of a girl are starting the process of assigning her the female gender stereotypes and so on. But that is not helpful, and in any case a very tiny minority should not be allowed to demand total power over language as part of trans rights.

[–]sisterinsomnia 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I am not a cis woman. That is a made up term, states that the person is comfortable with their 'assigned gender' from birth, and, more crucially, states that this person has some weird woman essence in her head which just nicely happens to correlate with their female body, but the body itself is not at all the basis of how she defines her gender.

That is why we get cervix-havers and the rest of the shit: By ruling that nobody identifies with their bodies in determining their social gender. But I do, and I believe that most women and men do. Those gender definitions are invalidated and ridiculed when wokerati use ovary-havers and the other shit.

[–]GuacLettuceBacon[S] 12 insightful - 6 fun12 insightful - 5 fun13 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

Here's the breakdown:

  1. You inserted a flipped meaning that goes against everything the word "woman" originally meant. (trans = anti)

  2. Women is a description of natural birthright. Society never invented women.

  3. In language and law, society corrupts public perception of women, eroding the purity, value, and exclusive individuality of natural born women.

  4. The fact that you must clarify 4 disjoint 'subgroups' of women, shows the contradicting definitions shoehorned on to the original meaning of "women".

This corruption is beyond dangerous and dystopian.

I'm vegan.

"Vegan? You mean the kind who eats animal meat?"

No, vegan means I only eat food derived from plant products, no animal meat.

"So you're ok with eating animal meat which transitioned to planthood via green food dyes right?"

No.

"Wow, you exclusionary radical vegan, you don't understand REAL veganism!"

[–]Nona_Biba 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I wish AFAB and AMAB had never been popularized

[–]PassionateIntensity 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Every time someone uses them, argue against the terms (when you can do it without being banned).

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

Standard males and trans identified males. Or, males if you please.

[–]Hard_headed_woman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

How about...real women?

That works for me if I must add an adjective.