all 10 comments

[–][deleted] 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Allyship should always be conditional. Anything else is just asking to be abused by the people you think you're allying with.

Trans people constantly abuse allyship. All the time, non-stop. I can't think of a reason to be their ally because they will turn on you and make outrageous demands of you.

[–]bopomofodojo 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Trans people constantly abuse allyship. All the time, non-stop.

Yup. They demand unconditional allyship so they can say whatever they want without question or confrontation. It means they cannot be held accountable for their actions or speech. You see the same thing with BLM, etc. as well, and it's a core component of wokeism.

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There is a hierarchy of conditionality, dictated by intersectionality and the "totem pole of oppression".

We really saw this succinctly laid bare last year in a single slogan: Black Trans Lives Matter

[–]Femaleisnthateful 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

What is it with 'social justice' movements propping up the worst men?

You'd think transactivists would be busily disavowing people like Chris Chan. I guess they can't do that, because that would mean having a conversation about who is and isn't 'trans' and what to do about predators and people with mental illnesses (which aren't gender dysphoria) co-opting trans identities.

[–]soundsituation 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

What is it with 'social justice' movements propping up the worst men?

They're propping up the worst men and women. I think it's because "social justice" is an attack on language and meaning. If words mean whatever you say they mean, or in the case of queer theory/"tucute" ideology, mean nothing at all, narcissists and psychopaths are going to take advantage of that because it's an opportunity to grab power and attention.

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They're propping up the worst men and women.

Even worse, when the pendulum inevitably swings back, these are the cowardly assholes who will somehow walk out of the shitstorm unscathed, smelling like roses.

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

It's not "conditional allyship" that is in play here, it is if people accept unconditionally the idea that someone can declare themselves into man- or womanhood. By not arguing the reality of the matter but arguing the state of allyship that is indicated by refering a rapist of one's own mother by their actual sex and not their claimed gender, the TRAs are attempting to enforce discipline, and the doctrine of no debate no discussion, on their allies sad pathetic dupes.

I suspect most people who accept claims of a trans identity at face value, ie "allies", do so until the "good fences make good neighbors" idea is breached. Women don't rape their mothers. Very few, very extremely messed up, men might.

To "revoke" this dudes' woman card is the right of anyone who uses pronouns because, as it turns out, they are the pronouns of the person using them and not of the person they are applied to. This is a simple matter of fact.

The pronouns I use in talking about someone else are my pronouns, and not theirs, just as any slurs I might utter about someone are mine and not theirs. My statements are mine. That is the reality even if no one wants to admit it, and that error is a major underpinning of trans ideology even if tras do not want to admit that trans ideology exists. The idea that a person is what they claim they are with no exceptions is an ideology, and only an ideology I suspect. I don't care if it is queer theory that says this, "identity politics" that says it or anything else, it is a flaw or a fallacy no matter what idiot came up with it.

I guess by denying the existence of trans ideology they are attempting to force discussion of their mental illnesses into the area of whether or not "trans people" exist in reality.

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The pronouns I use in talking about someone else are my pronouns, and not theirs My statements are mine

This is actually an amazingly poetic expression of the issue at hand. Well-spoken, and well-written!

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

Thanks! I think it shows the extend to which they, not just QT or TRAs but all authoritarians, are trying to manipulate us. I think the comparison between slurs and pronouns is important. No one thinks a slur uttered by someone is the target's slur. We all know slurs reflect on the slurrer and not the slurry. It's sort of the principle behind "sticks and stones maybe break my bones but words will never hurt me" which is now " ... but words are literal murder"-- as opposed to turning the name one grew up with and given at birth into a "dead name" which I guess we're not see as figurative murder or making them "former people" in the way the USSR did to people they found inconvenient.

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

What the fuck? He raped his own mother? This has to have been something recent; his family really is paying the price for not having gotten him professional help as a child.