all 6 comments

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

No it's two men. The 'wife' is a transwoman. Transing the gay away is progress, folx!

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

Oh my bad. Yes transing away the gay, just as fun

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

But but- what about their gender identity? That should solve everything...

[–]automoderatorHuman-Exclusionary Radical Overlord[M] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

RIP Snappy, I AM THE NEW GOD!

Click below to view and/or archive snapshots:

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this sub if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Further proof that nobody, including TRAs themselves, really believes this gender-woo crap.

I mean, the BBC is all "TWAW!1!", right? And yet, their headline for this story is: "Nepal Registers First Same-Sex Marriage"!

Um... what? Wouldn't that mean that this is two men getting married? How the hell could it be "same-SEX" otherwise?

So, yeah, BBC (and all you other thugs enforcing the Transquisition): quit with the sorry-ass propaganda. Because it doesn't convince even YOU. The truth always ends up leaking out. Revealing you for the hypocrites (and liars) that you are.

But it HAD to be "same-sex" marriage in order to be a story at ALL, didn't it? Because if it was a same-GENDER marriage... it would have been legal already. As it ALWAYS HAS BEEN SINCE FUCKIN' TIME BEGAN. Yeah, because THAT'S what your oh-so-precious "gender" means, TRAs: N O T H I N G.

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

Spot on