you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]cant_even 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

...because those 'survivors' were #BornThatWay; right, bitch?

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

No matter how we wish to approach it, it isn't a good look.

If people are 100% born queer and there is no fluidity or influence, then it means that queer people are more likely to be child molesters.

If it's not that then it means that being sexually abused as a child is more likely to make children queer, or confused.

The issue is that there's likely truth in both of these angles. The real question is why the fuck is she trying to defend child molesters? Is she suggesting that because the victims are gay that means that it was OK? That's disgusting.

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

Sometimes people who have been sexually abused transition as a way of opting out of their own sex. It's a dysfunctional trauma coping mechanism, a kind of protective shield. If you've been victimised or preyed on due to your female biology, transitioning to male is a very attractive idea. Some kids who are abused also try to gain weight and become obese so their abuser will no longer be attracted to them.