Serious or satirical? Should peak a few people either way.

submitted by ChunkeeguyTeam T*RF Fuck Yeah from (i.imgur.com)

all 12 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 27 insightful - 1 fun27 insightful - 0 fun28 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The thing is? Even if it's 100% satirical... most trans-cultists would agree with this. Same-sex attraction is transphobic in their eyes. ALL sex-based attraction is. Which is to say, all sexual orientations are. But particularly homosexuality, given how entitled trans people feel to gay people's bodies (and identities). Only gender-based attraction is trans-approved. Because it essentially forces everyone to play along with their delusion that "gender identity" cancels out biological sex.

Curiously, though, trans people are themselves exempt from this otherwise-ironclad rule; it's never transphobic for THEM to pursue people based exclusively on sex, not gender. Cuz something something muh dysphoria (their insistence on "girldick"/"boypussy", TWAW, ad nauseum notwithstanding).

[–]Three_oneFourWanted for thought crimes in countless ideologies 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If people would legitimately agree with this, then it is no longer satire. The original intent may have been, but agreement from the insulted group would just mean that it is the legitimate opinion

[–]motss-pb 26 insightful - 1 fun26 insightful - 0 fun27 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

My guess would be satire because an actual TRA wouldn't want to reference same-sex attraction at all. Sex is the bad word that they want us to memory-hole and replace with gender. Their PSAs condemning same-sex attraction as bigotry come in two varieties.

  1. "genital preferences are transphobic"

  2. "genital preferences are valid, BUT ... "

In both, sexual orientation has been replaced by "genital preference". The second version is essentially a "rules for thee but not for me" clause. It allows them to reject people for having the wrong genitals, but rejecting a trans person because they're trans is transphobic.

[–]DropItLikeItsHot 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nailed it.

[–]SourDoude 14 insightful - 9 fun14 insightful - 8 fun15 insightful - 9 fun -  (0 children)

Wait a minute, you guys, that means opposite-sex attraction is homophobic...

OPPOSITE-SEX ATTRACTION IS HOMOPHOBIC!!!!1!1!!!!!!111!!!!

[We-are-fucking-under-attack.].png

[–]reluctant_commenter 13 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Where'd you find this one? Would love a source so I can show my straight friends.

[–]ChunkeeguyTeam T*RF Fuck Yeah[S] 12 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

It was on Twitter

[–]buhnahnuhbr3ad 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Lmao, where else?

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Where was the real picture taken?

[–]TiredTrendersSuper-gay 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If that isn't photoshopped, then I'm willing to bet its 100% serious. Posting something like this out in public and claiming it's satire, would be like punching an old person down a flight of stairs in front of a crowd of people and saying "it's just a prank, bro!".

Not to mention this sign doesn't look snarky enough to imply that it's mocking people who say and think that "SaMe SeX AtTrAction IS TwANsPhObIc". This poster looks exactly like the things you'd find on the gender infested reddit subs. They even got the trans color and black stripe in the correct spot too. Way too on point looking to come off as an actual jab towards those with this mindset. I'm gonna have to go with legit on this one.

[–]chandra 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I'd guess satire/false flag: to me, 'check your thinking!' reads too obviously like a thought-crime propaganda poster to be something someone would write unironically. Plus I don't think any TRA is going to outright say 'same-sex attraction is transphobic,' I think they're more likely to say 'saying you're same-sex attracted is a transphobic dogwhistle.' I.e. the former implies same-sex attraction at least actually exists, when in fact they believe that attraction is gender-based and the very idea of same-sex attraction is just transphobic rhetoric.

Or maybe I'm just splitting hairs.

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thing is if they hear the dog whistles often enough it becomes a megaphone.