-The Seeds of Gay Doom- Russell T Davies and Doctor Who

PenseePansy · 2025-03-29T05:51:18+00:00

This was really interesting, not only from the perspective of someone with an abiding affection for Doctor Who (and dismay over it going so wrong), but also as a prominent example of how our LGB institutions-- and I think that Russell T Davies himself counted as one of those-- became trans-captured.

There must be many LGB activists like Davies who: 1.] just don't know how to stop fighting a war that they already won; and 2.] aren't merely pro-LGB but anti heterosexual. So, when trans came along, they saw what they thought was an opportunity to kill two birds with one stone: prolong the war against the Mean Old Straight People, this time in the name of gender.

Of course, joke's on them: most trans ARE straight people, the gay ones among them take being a closet case to a whole new level, and gender is what stigmatized same-sex attraction in the first place.

The other thing I thought worthy of note was the author's contention that, for Davies, this is all ultimately rooted in the homophobic bullying that he suffered as a child. No matter how old he gets or how successful (and powerful) he becomes, he's still reacting to that. Still feeling like a victim, still paranoid about when the next attack will come, still angry at the straight boys who tormented him... and still yearning to get his revenge. Not only on them, but on everything that they represent, heterosexuality included.

I find this theory very astute, and very plausible. It also adds a new layer to something which occurred to me recently: what I call "the legacy of the closet".

Even after all the progress we've made on getting LGB accepted by mainstream society, most of us gay and bi people still spend our childhoods in the closet. Maybe we're lucky enough to be able to come out during adolescence, but many still have to wait till adulthood, and either way, our most formative years are likely to be spent in hiding.

This, I am convinced, casts a long shadow. Even once we've come out, all those years of fear, secrecy, and shame don't just go away. They continue to influence us. And, often, cause us problems. In our relationships (where we may still struggle with shame), and in general (where we may be so reflexively guarded that we can't let anyone really know us). Or, as with Davies, continuing to play out the pain and trauma long after the actual cause has ceased.

I'd been thinking that this should be a specialty in the psychological field: "legacy of the closet" treatment for LGB people, based on identification of the factors involved and effective ways of addressing them. Originally, I saw this in terms of helping individuals... but now I see it in terms of helping us all escape this hole we've been plunged into, by getting LGB leaders like Davies to confront their own demons rather than taking out their trauma on society, and us.

PenseePansy · 2024-08-21T16:15:03+00:00

the "preference" of biological-male-with-a-biological-dick doesn't seem too hard to understand.

Certainly when it comes to what THEY'RE looking for, these women (regardless of whether they call themselves "non-binary", "gay trans men", or whatever else) on apps like Tinder seem to understand that "preference" pretty fucking well.

PenseePansy · 2024-07-23T09:09:19+00:00

Glad to see you again :)

PenseePansy · 2024-06-03T07:37:33+00:00

Yep, it's an eyesore... and such a pointless one. The rainbow is all that's needed! It stands for everyone who's same-sex-attracted. And we're the ONLY people who should be represented by that flag. Straight people need not fuckin' apply! So get your gross chevron the hell away from us!

PenseePansy · 2024-06-03T05:10:57+00:00

I can only assume that they must have a LOT of time on their hands. And I guess that, when you're committed to something like this, it takes a vast amount of time and energy to keep the realization that it IS utter nonsense at bay. Maybe that's what living with a delusion is like? Being in frantic denial 24/7? Sounds like hell! Could that explain why they're so intent on infecting everyone else with this crap? Misery loves company?

PenseePansy · 2024-05-30T08:03:06+00:00

I can't help thinking that it's as though these people have never experienced sexual attraction themselves. They really don't seem to have a clue about how it actually works.

PenseePansy · 2024-04-14T14:27:23+00:00

Yeah, I don't get why this doesn't go without saying. That "blocking puberty" = locking these kids into permanent prepubescence, i.e., early childhood. Developmental disability by design. How many people (particularly parents) think that THAT sounds like a good idea?

And even beyond the damage that it does to their reproductive systems, there's my main worry: what's it doing to their brains?

PenseePansy · 2024-03-28T03:58:17+00:00

Even aside from the lamentable online penchant for intolerance and groupthink, I suspect that this might have something to do with how just plain cluelessness about bisexuality is the default: specifically, the assumption that it requires being "50/50", and making no distinction between the sexes. Like, your attraction to them "should" be interchangeable. So when you express that you in fact see them as pretty damn different? HOW VERY DARE YOU. Bad bisexual! You're not following The Rules! Etc. Which is of course idiotic, especially since (from what I can tell) perceiving men and women in a decidedly apples-and-oranges way may well be the norm for us.

Another potential (and related) factor: that bisexuality is often misinterpreted as meaning "sexually indiscriminate", so you must be obligated to lust after the proverbial Anything That Moves. Which makes having any sexual preferences-- or, god forbid, aversions-- unthinkable. Equally moronic, but since biphobia tends to be more the rule than the exception, hardly surprising, unfortunately :(

PenseePansy · 2024-03-26T23:14:50+00:00

My apologies for taking so damn long to respond to this, 'Flutter. (I wanted to at the time you originally posted it, but my offline life has been in high gear lately.)

While it certainly isn't the case that I've opted out of relationships, I would like to say this: please don't get hung up on the sense that you need to have a "this-is-The-One" feeling in order to have a relationship. Sure, that's a common way to experience it, but it's not the only way. And it may not be YOUR way. The important thing is, do you want this person in your life? Beyond the level of friendship/acquaintance? For the foreseeable future? That's what matters, not whether it fits some conventional notion of how such a person should make you feel.

Maybe it's simply that you have the sense, counter to the standard construct of love (but not many real-life experiences of it), that there ISN'T just one person for each of us; rather, there are a range of individuals with whom we could have that LTR bond. They don't have to be "the only one in the WORLD!!!", you know? They just have to be the one you choose... and who chooses you :)

PenseePansy · 2024-02-15T04:07:23+00:00

ikr? What are we, three-year-olds? Who else would believe something so, well, childish?

I guess that the MILLIONS of girls/women who wear jeans are male now? Da fuq?

At least until they put a nightgown on, anyway! Then it's HEY! PRESTO! INSTANT SEX CHANGE 🙄

Good thing for these jerks that Kurt is dead, otherwise he'd verbally slap 'em so hard their moms would feel it.

PenseePansy · 2024-02-11T23:49:26+00:00

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.

PenseePansy · 2023-10-04T04:39:45+00:00

Welcome back! I wish I'd said that earlier... but I've been going through a lot, too, and am still struggling to get back to the modest level of semi-functionality that I had before. It's not because I didn't miss you! Or that I'm not glad to see you again! <3

PenseePansy · 2023-09-14T21:25:43+00:00

Have you noticed how often it comes down to this? Whether you'd date a trans person? Does that sound like the #1 concern of a genuinely oppressed/persecuted group? If they were really facing what they claim to be, it wouldn't even make the top 20.

PenseePansy · 2023-08-17T23:24:32+00:00

Who, somehow, can't see themselves as women and still acknowledge their attraction to men. Isn't that what's going on here? Because it sure looks that way to me.

I suspect that, while the reasons for this vary-- fetishizing gay men, yes, but also things like sexual trauma and what TV Tropes has dubbed Het Is Ew-- there's one overarching theme: what we might call gynophobia. Both trying to escape it... and having internalized it so deeply that this means disowning the femaleness of one's body altogether :(

PenseePansy · 2023-08-06T01:23:50+00:00

Or a dinosaur astronaut!

PenseePansy · 2023-07-12T22:09:35+00:00

Fair enough. And I don't suppose we ever necessarily will know, at least if we have to depend on the likes of The Advocate (still can't believe that this is the world we're living in, where I'd ever be typing those words...), should the facts that eventually emerge be deemed to make trans look bad.

Julien, do sometimes find yourself feeling as though you're living in some dystopian novel, too? :(

PenseePansy · 2023-07-12T04:01:44+00:00

I think it's because girls and women often (perhaps even usually) go the trans route in an attempt to escape misogyny: they think that not "identifying" as female means that they won't be treated-- and, especially, mistreated-- as female. So they're less likely to exercise the sort of caution that women normally do where male strangers are concerned. Sure, a man could have suffered the same fate in this situation... but for a woman? The risk is much greater. Yet transgenderism assures them otherwise. Because they're MEN now! That's exactly the kind of pernicious lie that gender-woo specializes in. And ruins lives with. Whether by destroying people's hard-won rights, their bodies, their sexuality, their connection to who they really are... or even getting them killed. It's just a variation on an all-too-familiar theme. That this denial of reality comes at a high price.

PenseePansy · 2023-06-22T06:03:54+00:00

As J.B. Priestley observed, "'Be yourself' is about the worst advice you can give to some people."

PenseePansy · 2023-04-15T07:01:05+00:00

dare you to know how it feels to be between two worlds

Oh yeah... we bisexuals wouldn't know a thing about THAT...

Not, of course, that you'd ever spare a moment's thought for US... or anyone besides your relentlessly navel-gazing, crap-poetry-spouting self...

PenseePansy · 2023-04-11T04:34:22+00:00

They rarely, if ever, date each other based on GENDER, though-- that's the point. Sure, t4t is not unheard-of... as long as that t is of the SEX that they're attracted to. Which is precisely what they deem intolerable (and deserving of death-and-rape threats/violence/cancellation) when anybody ELSE does it.

Meaning that THEY don't believe in this "sexuality is about GENDER not SEX!1!" crap either. So why the hell should we?

PenseePansy · 2023-04-10T22:22:29+00:00

This is what I always think. Notice that the kweers/'spicy straights'/hijackers of gay identity only emerged very recently... after LGB people had done the all the hard work of making it comparatively safe to be gay in the western world. Where were they all those years, when being gay in, say, the U.S., could well mean being locked up in a mental hospital, and/or jail? Were they calling themselves gay-- 'transbians', 'gay transmen'-- then? HELL NO. Because it couldn't be treated as a game back then.

And that's all that being gay is to them... a game. With gay people as mere pieces on a gameboard... for them to play with :(

PenseePansy · 2023-04-10T22:02:45+00:00

To paraphrase Syndrome in The Incredibles: "And when everyone is ~~super~~ special... no one will be."

PenseePansy · 2023-04-10T21:54:17+00:00

Yeah... this reminds me of how, in French, "vous" is both the plural and "formal singular" form of "you".

But of course such usage makes zero sense in English...

PenseePansy · 2023-03-07T01:07:35+00:00

I am now every gay man's ~~dream~~ nightmare

FIFY!

PenseePansy · 2022-12-31T23:43:26+00:00

I think we'd all agree that being torn limb from limb and devoured sounds preferable.

PenseePansy · 2022-11-26T06:57:58+00:00

Dear god... this is less withering sarcasm than simple statement of fact, isn't it? THAT'S what we've come to :(

PenseePansy · 2022-11-25T16:46:01+00:00

Yeah, I see your point-- this is something that I've been concerned about myself, actually, in a more overarching way: that our emphasis on biology could be misinterpreted and misused to mean women = baby machines and LGB = unnatural. Because the real physical differences between men and women have all too often been exploited for that purpose.

So that's a much more all-encompassing issue to be addressed. To restrict myself to the anti-same-sex-marriage arguments that you've predicted, here are some of my responses:

Yes, this is why a gay man, for example, cannot marry a woman (she won't ever turn into, or be a substitute for, a man), and therefore why same-sex marriage is a necessity.
Marriage being a human creation, it is what we say it is. In many U.S. states, marriage was once defined as being between a man and woman of the same race. Then the definition was changed to allow mixed-race marriage. This did not somehow invalidate marriage as an institution. Even the fundamental redefinition of marriage as being about the relationship between the people entering into it (as opposed to their familial/social obligations)-- the emotional bond they share-- became so seamless a part of what we mean by "marriage" that few today would believe it had ever been any different.
The existence of same-sex marriage has no effect on anyone else's rights: opposite-sex couples are just as free to marry as they ever were.
This is an invalid comparison, as transgenderism and sexual orientation (such as homosexuality and bisexuality) not only have nothing to do with each other, but are in fact antithetical. So concerns about indoctrinating children with genderist ideology should not be applied to matters based on same-sex attraction.
Same-sex marriage does not force speech or a credence, any more than the opposite-sex marriages of which one disapproves (for religious or other reasons) do. Just because a marriage takes place doesn't mean that you have to like it, or believe in it. You're free to do neither. Just the same as always.

PenseePansy · 2022-11-19T11:10:10+00:00

the arguments we make against gender theory can also be applied to marriage

This isn't evident to me. Can you please explain?

PenseePansy · 2022-11-16T14:05:07+00:00

So appreciate your kind words. And reminding me of those wise ones. I nearly gave up... but then somehow faced the people I thought had abandoned me... and thereby discovered that they never did, and never would. Which freed me from the hell of my despair... and has blessed me with what feels like a little piece of paradise... the one that I now share with them :)

PenseePansy · 2022-11-16T13:50:15+00:00

Thank you so much. They have. My hell was indeed temporary... because the people I thought had damned me turned out to be my saviors instead <3

PenseePansy · 2022-11-14T22:21:20+00:00

I just went through HELL! And I'm STILL IN IT! And I don't know if I'm ever getting out! Or if I even CARE ANYMORE!

Sorry... just had to tell someone. Cuz I seem intent on burning my bridges with everybody else.

PenseePansy · 2022-10-31T08:33:53+00:00

a FTM kid named "Finn"

Aren't they all?

Too right! They almost invariably christen themselves with precisely the kinds of male names that appeal to... women (and girls). This is what us female people tend to name our fictional characters, and our sons. Masculine but with at least a touch of fashionable androgyny, and in keeping with recent style-trends. Hardly ever you'll-never-hear-of-a-girl-getting-named-this ones like Richard, Gary, or Doug (unless they're so old-timey as to seem quaint, a la Oscar). "Transman" names are so redolent of a feminine sensibility that I have to laugh. Way to make yourself sound GIRLY, "bro"! :)

PenseePansy · 2022-10-29T08:07:47+00:00

I think this has something to do with the fact that: 1.] public figures outside the entertainment sphere are disproportionately men; and 2.] bisexuality is even more stigmatized in men than in women (probably because the latter are simply understood as straight).

So bi men are less likely to be out about it. And, if they are? The media generally just reports them as gay anyway.

PenseePansy · 2022-10-28T00:33:30+00:00

As a good Christian, she should accept and love them for who they are.

If this coach had been convicted of sexually assaulting 9-year-old girls, but states that he doesn't identify as a sex offender, should all good Christians be obligated to view him as not being a sex offender? In accordance with who he feels he is? Or does "who they are" mean something more than how one regards oneself in defiance of all objective fact?

PenseePansy · 2022-10-28T00:12:34+00:00

Yeah, it's not as though women have ever suffered any discrimination or hostility for dating each other! 🙄

(Should tell this lady-with-dudefeelz to google the term "corrective rape"...)

PenseePansy · 2022-10-26T03:53:00+00:00

We have offensiveness Bingo! (too bad it's the last thing that we want!)

PenseePansy · 2022-10-25T08:21:16+00:00

I was gonna say that the first part of the username ("annoying poof") checks out, then realized that-- with its display of the obligatory trans-homophobia-- so does the second!

Wonder how she'd react if a white chick like me donned blackface and sent her this version of her own tweet?:

Oh, you're a ~~man born with a dick~~ person born black? How... basic. You're doing Easy Mode ~~Masculinity~~ Blackness. Get on my level hun ✌️

And, to conclude with the eternal question: if she expects gay men to want pussy... why does SHE only seem to want dick? Which is the ONE AND ONLY THING that you'll ever have in common with gay men, lady.

PenseePansy · 2022-10-23T05:02:15+00:00

So this guy says he's straight (a straight woman, natch)... and yet also (SOMEHOW) "part of the LGBT community".

Exactly how the ever-lovin' FUCK do you belong among same-sex-attracted people when you're (ostensibly) a STRAIGHT LADY, pray tell?

It's like he knows he's a gay man... and yet he also somehow thinks that this equals "straight woman". Which is all KINDS of disturbing. Because this is the way that people thought of male homosexuality 100 years ago. And I never imagined, in my worst nightmares, that young people would be parroting this clueless bullshit from my GREAT-GRANDPARENTS' time :(

PenseePansy · 2022-10-23T01:36:45+00:00

I guess they've gotta keep frantically overhauling the LGB flag, cuz otherwise... they might have to, yanno, actually do something for LGB people! And where's the fun in THAT? Especially when you're straight. Better to just use us as a pretext for their precious self-expression. Particularly since the ostensible virtuousness means that you're not supposed to say, "DAMN that's hideous!!!" (though not to worry-- everyone's thinking it!).

PenseePansy · 2022-10-20T05:27:28+00:00

I was thinking this, too-- the problem is that these guys say they're straight. Which, according to the current regime, makes them contemptible.

Not that it's contemptible (weirdly enough) to actually BE straight, of course; in fact, you're scarcely allowed to be anything else, are you? Certainly not homosexual, or bisexual; no, the only form of gay or lesbian or bi permitted these days is a heterosexual claiming that as an "identity". That's the secret of TQ+'s success, I think: having straight people play us. Because society is much more comfortable that way. When we can pat ourselves on the back for being so open-minded that rainbow flags are everywhere, and you're free to openly have any sexual orientation... just as long as it's straight.

PenseePansy · 2022-10-18T06:19:13+00:00

You are forever bound to be gender nonconforming in the eyes of society.

Not if society stops believing in this "gender" bullshit altogether.

Fight this system, don't contribute to it.

Physician, heal thyself. Your gender-woo is contributing to the system that stigmatizes gay men (and bisexuals, and lesbians, and women as a whole). And when we try to fight this system? You call us bigots.

But it's not that we're bigots. It's that YOU are hypocrites. You love the very system that you purport to oppose. And you hate us for not sharing your dishonesty... and your confusion.

PenseePansy · 2022-10-17T02:00:40+00:00

Wanted to share my (shitty) recent experience with a brand of birth control pill, and also the place that prescribed them. (Even lesbians might find this relevant, since birth control pills are often used to treat hormone-related medical conditions, such as PCOS.)

The pill is Estradiol (aka Blisovi Fe 1/20), and I got it from Planned Parenthood. Yeah, I realize that I shoulda known better than to go there, what with them being all aboard the Trans Train now... but I don't drive, arranging transportation to my regular doctor's office was too much of a headache, and PP-- besides being in walking distance-- was willing to do an appointment via Zoom. So I put my reservations aside and went ahead.

Birth control pills aren't effective as contraception (what I was using them for) till you've taken them for a week. On day seven, the lower back pain which I'd been experiencing for most of that time (but dismissed because the doc hadn't said anything about this as a potential side effect) got so severe that it pretty much immobilized me. We're talking inability to stand, let alone walk, unassisted; even merely sitting up was a struggle. Just rolling over in bed felt like more than I could bear. Thank god u/MarkJefferson was here! What I owe that man... particularly for standing by me when I nearly passed out from sheer pain, thereby scaring both of us half to death.

Of course I quit taking those damn pills immediately, but it was still a good two weeks before I fully recovered. So, ladies: if your doctor wants to put you on Estradiol? Beware! NOT that you'd necessarily have the same experience, I hasten to add... but lower back pain is a recognized side effect, apparently. And if you feel even a twinge of it after starting the pills, DON'T just go on taking 'em the way I (like an idiot) did!

The other thing I wanted to mention was Planned Parenthood's role in all of this. Specifically how, even though I asked them to tell me about ALL side effects, this one-- (potentially incapacitating) lower back pain-- never even came up. And it makes me wonder if this might be the result of trans-capture: that Planned Parenthood is now so focused on "gender affirmative care" that they don't even know how to provide birth control anymore. Maybe they see Estradiol not in terms of contraception but of (ew) "titty skittles" for men-with-ladyfeelz, and can't summon up much interest in a boring "cis woman" who doesn't have special sparkly pronouns, and just wants the pills to keep from getting pregnant. How fuddy-duddy! Where's the fun (and queerness) in THAT?

Anyway, lesson learned: no more Estradiol OR Planned Parenthood for me!

PenseePansy · 2022-10-15T21:37:22+00:00

People like this really, really make me wish that they could be sent back in time to when being homosexual (or bisexual) meant that your employment, freedom (since it could well result in hospitalization or even imprisonment), and of course just plain physical safety were all very much at risk. When, in other words, it wasn't trendy. And didn't make you some magical sparkly unicorn. Quite the opposite, in fact. Think they'd still be demanding that everyone recognize their "queerness" then? PRESS X TO FUCKIN' DOUBT

PenseePansy · 2022-10-11T18:11:44+00:00

Lots of major offline events recently in my life (that's why I haven't been yappin' up a storm around here for a change)-- and u/MarkJefferson is here at my house even as I speak to help me deal with them. Yeah, a friendship born on this very sub is now going strong IRL. And that's something I will always be grateful to DTT for, cuz I truly don't know how I'd have gotten through all this without Mark... or this community as a whole <3

PenseePansy · 2022-10-11T18:02:03+00:00

I miss you too! But please take whatever time you need for yourself. Hope to see you back here feeling stronger and more TERF-y then ever! <3

PenseePansy · 2022-10-08T09:52:22+00:00

Yeah, it's not individuals-- or even groups of individuals-- that are the fundamental problem here; it's the very ideology of transgenderism itself.

PenseePansy · 2022-09-23T19:17:15+00:00

She's outraged that gay men consistently fail to conform to the fantasy she has of them, and instead just keep acting like... who they really are.

THE. HORROR.

PenseePansy · 2022-09-23T19:14:33+00:00

Though unfortunately not my talent.

PenseePansy · 2022-08-31T04:42:45+00:00

They also seem to always leave bisexual trans people out of it all too.

Pot: meet kettle. Cuz when do the trans-crowd themselves ever mention bisexuals? Other than when trying to use us as part of their homophobic smear tactics (like, say, here), NEVER.

Yeah, the CIA did this with the feminist movement, they sadly succeeded in dividing and conquering by splitting half from the political struggle. The same thing here, divide and conquer.

Guess you'd know all about that, what with your attempts to turn the B against the LG, huh?

PenseePansy · 2022-08-30T05:24:11+00:00

"How VERY DARE you hate us for being so hateful!1!"

PenseePansy · 2022-08-30T03:56:53+00:00

Oh the irony behind the comment about “cis” lesbians forgetting about trans lesbians.

If only they would ever LET YOU for ONE GODDAMN MINUTE

PenseePansy · 2022-08-30T03:55:03+00:00

You and your thoughtful, well-written contributions will certainly be missed. But I'm glad to have had the opportunity to make your acquaintance.

Hope to see you return someday, if and when the timing is right for you <3

PenseePansy · 2022-08-21T04:22:00+00:00

This is utterly delightful! A friend had shared it with me... and even with the grave threat that TQ+ presents (as well as the crisis that I'm now going through personally), it straight-up made me LOL for real :)

PenseePansy · 2022-08-20T14:22:08+00:00

Well, those with CAIS can't be female. By definition. Even though you'd never know it without doing their karyotype, or giving them an X-ray.

CAIS = Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome. Males whose bodies don't respond at all to masculinizing hormones (like testosterone) develop, from the time they're in utero, to appear female. But the key word is appear. Internally, their gonads are male-- instead of a uterus and ovaries, they have testes-- and their chromosomes are XY.

PenseePansy · 2022-08-17T14:26:24+00:00

No wonder we lost our right to abortion-- one of the main groups responsible for safeguarding it was too busy playing GODDAMN MAKE-BELIEVE

Enabling delusions and bizarre sexual fantasies... erasing women... doing Conversion Therapy 2.0 on LGB people... oh, and castrating/sterilizing CHILDREN...

Just HOW is any of this about family planning, exactly?

PenseePansy · 2022-08-17T01:59:30+00:00

Wish I had something to offer here besides encouragement and moral support... but I probably know less about anything tech-related than anybody else on this sub.

I do know something about politics, though, and can't help but wonder if this may have played some role in what happened with rDrama. In the sense that they didn't fully appreciate how "controversial" our sub is, you know? That there are all these trans-cultists-- plus their wokester flying monkeys-- gunning for us (to mix my metaphors yet again). They think that they like "drama"... but there's a world of difference between choosing to kick up a fuss for the fun of it, and finding yourself in fanatics' cross-hairs whether you like it or not. Maybe Snakes et al. found themselves with a political hot potato they were neither anticipating nor prepared for. And got cold feet. Particularly since, as I understand it, DropTheT has been trending lately... which would, of course, just serve to ramp up TQ+ frothing-at-the-mouth-ness even further.

Not that I've got the inside dope on rDrama or those behind it, obviously. But maybe something to think about, anyway.

PenseePansy · 2022-08-14T23:25:00+00:00

Yeah, I fucked this up didn't I :( :( :(

Please don't blame yourself for this! All you've done to keep this place going... we owe you so much <3

PenseePansy · 2022-08-14T08:52:31+00:00

Maybe there's nothing more to it than that his friend has now announced she's trans. Which automatically makes trans A-OK in Mr. Ice-Kagen's eyes. And, therefore, any criticism of it an attack on her (as well as, by extension, him).

Which is, of course, about the most sorry-ass argument (or should I say "argument") against our sub, and our position on the TQ+, that anyone could come up with. Because while this woman may be a friend of his, she's no friend of ours; we don't know her from a hole in the ground, or need to think well of her. Or her judgement.

Furthermore, I truly don't give a fuck whether any given genderologist is a "nice person". Even if true, that does nothing to redeem the ideology they're espousing. It remains false and poisonous to the core. And, when you get right down to it, that's really the only thing that matters.

PenseePansy · 2022-08-12T23:57:01+00:00

Except all the enemy has to do is misgender them and the futas will have a collective nervous breakdown.

Russian/Chinese/etc. troops: "Lookin' real MANLY there bro!"

UwU troops: "I feel unsafe! YOU WANT ME TO DIE!!! Transphobe! Bigot! TERF! REEEEE" (self-harming and frantic attempts to get the big meanies perma-banned from Reddit & Twitter ensue)

PenseePansy · 2022-08-12T23:36:24+00:00

Because AGPs really are very conventionally masculine in personality and interests, I think. Stuff like the military naturally attracts them.

That's what makes them AGP in the first place, apparently: they have an erotic-humiliation fetish, and, since they totally buy into gender-roles-- men are superior, women are inferior-- what could be more humiliating (thus hawt) for them than... 'feminization'? But this wouldn't work unless they actually knew they were (and identified as) traditionally-defined men, would it? Because womanhood isn't humiliating for women in their eyes; we have no superior status to lose, after all... there's no place lower for us to go than where we already are.

It's like a billionaire CEO dude paying for a dominatrix to call him a little worm. The only reason he gets a thrill out of it... is that he knows perfectly well he's actually not.

PenseePansy · 2022-08-12T13:08:33+00:00

How 'bout Latino and white? As so many people from Spanish/Portuguese-speaking countries (and their descendants) are? No, no-- they're all "POC"! Even the pale, blonde ones! Even if they themselves identify as white! Latino = brown IT'S THE LAW

PenseePansy · 2022-08-11T23:39:39+00:00

I'm glad that I asked before responding to anyone! Will certainly confine myself to what you've recommended here when and if I do.

And thanks so much for the new announcement/update (and keeping us all informed in general). Trolls already, huh? Jeez, don't these people have anything better to do? Can you tell if they're ideologically-driven TQ+ fanatics, or just no-agenda-beyond-mindless-destruction generic-troll types? Or maybe some of each? You mods have always done such a good job keeping the barbarian hordes at bay here that I have little sense of who they are, you know?

PenseePansy · 2022-08-11T06:01:16+00:00

People on TiA (now that they've joined us here in exile from Reddit) are asking what happened to this sub; is it OK if I tell them? At least as far as the in-a-nutshell version goes? (Went private/invite-only; moving the main sub offsite; will be public again on SaidIt, but restricted.) Don't wanna be a case of "loose lips sink ships" here!

PenseePansy · 2022-08-10T04:33:50+00:00

I think you’re mis-reading your classic case of the “which came first, the chicken or the egg” question. Gender Roles only came about because of man’s need to propagate his genes and impregnate and rape as many women possible.

I don't think that I'm misreading this. If gender roles came about in order to promote man's need to propagate his genes, why are they so often geared towards doing the exact opposite? Two examples: the prevalence of fathers refusing to provide financial support for their minor children following a divorce, and of men to become the most violent towards their wives/girlfriends during pregnancy. Both of these phenomena are characterized by men behaving in a way that actually DECREASES the likelihood of their genes being passed on (because his children don't survive). What sense does this make in "selfish gene" terms? None.

And I hope you're not saying that men raping women is good! Beyond the ethical/moral objections to this, though, how the hell does it work as a reproductive strategy? In most animal species, the offspring reach maturity within a matter of weeks or months (sometimes even less); many have no need of any parenting whatsoever. So a "quantity, not quality" strategy makes perfect sense here. But children need an ENORMOUS amount of care for an EXTREMELY long time; a man would do much better to invest his resources in a few of them than just run around impregnating women. Particularly by means of rape, which maximizes the likelihood that the woman will kill these offspring (either by abortion, or, in past eras, simply abandoning them to die of exposure). Again, this is counter-productive if successfully passing on one's genes is the goal, but perfectly in keeping with the imperatives of gender.

Gender roles, I'm convinced, are based on something else entirely: faulty reasoning. Just like the idea that the Sun revolves around the Earth, witchcraft is real... and people can be "born in the wrong body".

I don’t put that much stock in the concept that humans are so highly evolved as to be somehow an exception to this rule, we’re just another type of animal at the end of the day.

Oh, I don't put ANY stock in this concept, myself! That's not at all what I'm saying. It's not a matter of humans being "so highly evolved", or somehow not an animal species. It's a matter of how the element characterizing us-- for both good and ill-- is unique: conceptual intelligence. When comparing our species to any other, you have to factor this in. Only we can be shaped by ideas. And those ideas can be erroneous. Conceptual intelligence is a two-edged sword, really: on the one hand, it's the most versatile tool for survival that evolution has ever come up with... but, on the other hand, it allows us to make factual errors, and create artificial devices/conditions, which may well bring about our extinction in record time. So as to whether human intelligence makes us "superior": I'd say that the jury is still very much out on that one.

Which still wouldn’t explain this supposed prevalence of fathers raping their biological daughters since gender roles just serve to enforce man’s need to fulfill their reproductive imperative, and a heterosexual’s 1st degree relatives should automatically be excluded from the list of “viable sexual partners” for obvious reasons.

That's because gender roles are first and foremost devoted to reinforcing male superiority; this is often inconsistent with the welfare of his own biological children, and may in fact promote his neglect and abuse of them (quite possibly to the point that they do not even survive). Not that gender roles only threaten men's children; this ideology is destructive to people in general (though women most of all).

I think something else might be going on here… And if it’s not paternity uncertainty (I find it interesting that there are apparently zero cases of brothers molesting their biological sisters in comparison) I have to wonder… Tell me, do the majority of these father/daughter molestation cases take place when the daughter herself is prepubescent or is she usually a menstruating teen?

Oh, brothers certainly do molest their biological sisters; I didn't mention it because, during the period when their sisters are still children, so are most of these boys, and many aren't physically-mature enough to be sexually-predatory yet. This isn't true of fathers/grandfathers/uncles, obviously.

Most father/daughter molestation begins when the daughter is prepubescent, usually well before her teens. However, it will typically continue until he's forced to stop, usually because his daughter has gotten old enough to successfully resist and/or escape him.

PenseePansy · 2022-08-09T07:48:41+00:00

Who else is reminded of the perennial scorned-man's threat, "if I can't have you... no one can"?

PenseePansy · 2022-08-09T01:48:22+00:00

Can i get a poll that shows most gays are against this?

Probably not, given that the LGB are (and have been for some time now) under siege by the TQ+ Pod People (in an Invasion of the Body Snatchers remake that no one wanted). Our major organizations have been trans-captured; they now represent THEM, not us. And in fact make it their business to attack us at the bidding of their new masters. Gay and bi people (particularly lesbians) are mostly keeping their heads down, at least when in public, trying not to draw any more trans-fire than we already are.

Look at it this way, though: what is "trans" short for? Transgender. Meaning the belief that "gender" is of paramount importance, overriding biological sex.

Gender is where the stigmatization of same-sex attraction comes from. And if gender overrides sex... what happens to gay (and bi) people, whose very identity is based on biological sex? (Your own sex + that of those to whom you're attracted = your sexual orientation.) How can gay people resist pressure from straight people to fuck them, once "gay" has been redefined as "attracted to the same gender"?

Does this sound like something that gay people would support to you?

PenseePansy · 2022-08-08T08:37:40+00:00

THIS. Somehow, it's been decided that the claim of "trans-ness" automatically makes you special-- meaning interesting, compelling, attractive, generally exceptional, etc.-- and everyone else is now obligated to perceive you as such. But that's not the way this works, at all. "Specialness" of this kind, like beauty, exists in the eye of the beholder. You know that you're interesting, etc., only if people keep telling you so (implicitly and even explicitly) through their reactions. It's not something you can command of them: "I hereby order you to find me special!" And proclaiming that you've based your identity on a profoundly-regressive, cruel (responsible for more human misery than anything else we've ever devised), stupid ideology like "gender" sure does nothing to prove your OH SO ✨SPARKLY✨ credentials.

PenseePansy · 2022-08-08T08:08:55+00:00

You seriously need a flow chart to keep track of all the bullshit.

PenseePansy · 2022-08-08T06:05:58+00:00

While definitely an inappropriate and unethical grooming relationship, I don’t count this as incest so for me the point here is moot.

I consider it incest because it's driven by the same factors as with incestuous fathers (see below).

Question, is Grandfather or Uncle heterosexual incest more common than father/daughter?

Hard to say; it's my impression that father/daughter is the most common. Which, yes, contradicts the Westermarck Effect... but there are other factors at play here, specifically cultural ones. Never forget that being the one species to possess conceptual intelligence means that our behavior is shaped not only by evolution and biology, but also by ideas. Including ones that are wrong. In both sense of the word. As well as destructive and, sometimes, just fucking stupid. Like the "trans" train wreck! And, indeed, "gender" as a whole. That's the ideology underpinning the incestuous abuse of girls. Which leads me to:

The father/daughter cases being as common as you tell me is what really astounds me, why isn’t the Westermarck Effect working on these men?

Because something else is working on them, and it's stronger: gender roles. The ancient, pervasive system of sex-based stereotypes which classify "female" as inferior and "male" as superior. Female people are seen primarily in terms of the value given them by male people; since most male people are straight, this is fundamentally sexual. Most men don't extend this rule to their daughters, of course... but, unsurprisingly, quite a few do. Because that's what girls are for, in their minds (and it's one logical way of reading gender roles, tbf).

Which is the basic reason why I hate gender-woo. And everything that arises from it. Because this is the original evil ideology. Whether anyone tries to disguise it with colorful, New! Improved!^TM packaging or not.

PenseePansy · 2022-08-08T05:35:06+00:00

I'm not sure if "homosexuality", per se, exists in any species other than our own, you know? I mean, same-sex sexual activity certainly does... but does ANY sexual orientation? That entire concept seems like an inherently-human thing. I don't know that I'd even say that bonobos have it, and they seem more human-like in their sexual behavior than any other species I can think of. Calling them "bisexual", or the majority of animals "heterosexual", just seems weird to me.

Maybe it's because, in all other animal species, sexual behavior is instinctive. They don't need to be taught about "the birds and the bees". They know what to do; it's programmed in them. Not so for us. Children are famous for their oddball, spectacularly wrong-headed notions of where babies come from. All we have is our sexual orientation to guide us (at least if we're not asexual)-- and that's only a matter of the sex/es we're attracted to; it tells us nothing about how to act on that attraction-- and what we manage to learn (or figure out). Otherwise, nature's left us pretty much on our own, as far as sex is concerned.

PenseePansy · 2022-08-08T01:53:58+00:00

Easy to do, isn't it, when so many of 'em use the same names? Dudes-with-ladyfeelz seem to gravitate towards "Sophie"; ladies-with-dudefeelz are notoriously fond of "Aiden" (to the point that a popular synonym for "gay transman" is now Gayden).

Somehow the former never opt for the kind of androgynous/boyish names (like Alex, Adrian, Cameron... or Aiden) that women actually tend to favor, and the latter rarely sport unstylish (yet clearly-masculine) ones a la Jeffrey, Gary, or Doug. Why, it's almost as though (gasp!) they continue to act in accordance with the gender-role they were originally assigned! SO WHAT WAS THE POINT OF THIS FUCKING "TRANSITION" THEN???

PenseePansy · 2022-08-08T00:49:50+00:00

Longtime LGBDropTheT member here. Not at all convinced that we're a minority-- our sub was around 20K strong when Reddit axed it (for not kissing the T's ring).

So of course all you see online is LGB support for the TQ+... cuz the tech overlords ban everything else!

PenseePansy · 2022-08-07T23:41:15+00:00

I realize my voice might be relatively unpopular here,

Not with me! I may be on the left while you're more right-ish, but I look forward to hearing from you, whether or not I agree. Your thoughts are usually interesting, and your writing is always a pleasure to read. (Plus we both share a certain fondness for another reptilian gentleman...)

PenseePansy · 2022-08-07T21:36:36+00:00

Homosexuality meanwhile not only isn’t harmful to any outside parties (unlike inbreeding) but it also actually helps our species and planet by mitigating overpopulation and being spare hands to take care of all those orphaned and abandoned children out there. (I’m pretty sure this is the exact reason why being gay even exists as an orientation in the first place)

I doubt that this is the reason why homosexuality exists, actually. Not that I disagree about it being a functional product of evolution-- this seems clear enough to me-- only about what makes it so.

I don't think that could be mitigating overpopulation, because, for most of human history, there just weren't that many people-- in fact our species was nearly wiped out more than once. The explosion in Homo sapiens's numbers took place far too recently (in evolutionary terms) to have driven the development of homosexuality.

Basically, I think that homosexuality is just one example of how, for an intelligent social species, "sex" will naturally come to be about much more than just reproduction. It will have other meanings: social; emotional/psychological. And these are, in their own way, just as important. They can also contribute to the species's welfare; they can help it survive.

You can see this principle in action throughout the animal kingdom. The less intelligent a species (like, say, insects), the more sex is strictly-reproductive; it has no other meaning for them. Then look at one of the two extant species most closely-related to us: bonobos/pygmy chimps (Pan paniscus). Their entire social structure is shaped by sexual behavior... most of it non-reproductive (and often same-sex). What purpose is it serving, then? It's being used to diffuse tensions which, among our other closest relatives (chimpanzees, P. troglodytes), cause regular-- often violent-- conflict. Bonobos rarely fight, and therefore rarely inflict the serious, sometimes fatal, injuries on each other than chimps frequently do. All because of sex having meanings for them well beyond the reproductive (important though that is).

And if this is true of a species far less intelligent and complex than our own, I think that it must go double for human beings.

PenseePansy · 2022-08-07T20:22:13+00:00

Where the fuck is there suddenly such a big increase in (heterosexual) incest? Isn’t it still one of the rarest things in the world? (Not counting cousin marriages)

I don't know about a big increase, but no-- it isn't esp. rare, and never has been... unfortunately. At least if we're talking about fathers (and even more particularly stepfathers) preying on their minor daughters. Also other male adults in a girl's family: uncles; grandfathers. When you're talking about incest... that's the prototypical example of it. Which, being male/female, really does fly in the face of the idea that there's any great aversion to it based on reproductive considerations. (And of course, with a stepfather, genetics aren't even a factor.) The aversion in contemporary culture is mainly because it's child molestation, and in a context where the child is even more vulnerable than usual-- because the man molesting her is someone whom she's emotionally, and legally, dependent on; one of the very people she has a right to look to for protection. It's a terrible betrayal of a child.

PenseePansy · 2022-08-07T13:12:06+00:00

Oh, for sure! It's strictly a thought-experiment at this point, of course. But I like how it puts everyone on equal footing. Asexuals included :)

PenseePansy · 2022-08-07T10:13:05+00:00

Well, it's not terribly complex-- esp cuz it's based on my understanding of epigenetics, which is rudimentary at best!

See, I thought that, since sexual orientation seems so inherent, it must be genetic in origin. So let's imagine, for purposes of simplicity, that just two genes are involved: one for attraction to women, and one for attraction to men. And everybody has both of these genes. But: epigenetics. These genes can each be switched on... or off.

So, for most people, at least one gene is switched off.

With the majority of women, it's the attraction-to-women gene; with the majority of men, it's the attraction-to-men gene. These are the heterosexuals.

For a smaller group of women and men, it's the reverse (gene for the opposite sex switched off). These are the homosexuals.

For another small group... it's both genes. That's the asexuals.

And, for the smallest group... it's neither gene; both are switched on. You guessed it: MY people-- the bisexuals.

But see how this theory accounts for everybody? Including asexuals? There are four possibilities here; you're one of them. A variation on a theme. The same as the rest of us.

So... what do you think?

PenseePansy · 2022-08-07T01:42:17+00:00

Hey, u/INeedSomeTime, I realize that this is slightly off-topic-- it's more about asexuality per se, rather than in the specific context of this post-- but something recently occurred to me about where it might come from. And how that could actually be the same place as the three sexual orientations. So this would explain all of them, as naturally-occurring forms of fundamental human sexuality. And mean that the existence of one inherently requires the existence of the others.

I've been wanting to run this theory of mine by you for a while now; would you be interested?

PenseePansy · 2022-08-06T19:15:37+00:00

How did I not see this??? Because, yeah-- you just know that this very scenario is playing out for real. ALL THE TIME. And if lesbians are managing to use this stupid Conversion Therapy 2.0 genderist ideology against itself? Then I say: good for them.

I also wonder, given how successful the TQ+'s "lesbian = woman who's exclusively-same-gender-attracted" con has been, if many young lesbians-- upon noticing their complete lack of attraction to "transbians"-- genuinely think that they must be "ace" somehow. Since there are these "women" they MYSTERIOUSLY just can't see in a sexual way at all! How else to explain it...?

PenseePansy · 2022-08-06T09:19:43+00:00

Because these dumbasses somehow don't get that "lesbian" is a sexual orientation. Meaning that it's fundamentally about SEXUAL ATTRACTION. Not just "liking" someone; not "appreciating them aesthetically" (lol WTF???). So, kids, if you aren't a woman who has, as they say, "pants feelings" exclusively for women? YOU. AREN'T. A. LESBIAN. Fuckin' DUUUUUH.

Are these straight chicks desperate to claim that oh-so-fashionable (for everyone except homosexual females apparently) "lesbian" label? And having to find a workaround for the inconvenient fact that pussy makes them go "EWWWW"? Or what?

PenseePansy · 2022-08-03T21:12:00+00:00

There’s a crucial difference between bisexuals and trans people here, though.

In order to date trans people, you must cater to their delusion, by pretending that you can’t perceive what sex they are. This is understandably a deal-breaker for pretty much everyone (“trans” people themselves included; most categorically refuse to date each other).

In order to date bisexuals... you don’t have to cater to, or pretend, anything. Because we aren’t pretending anything. Same as (non-trans) straight or gay people. So the only thing distinguishing us from straight or gay people here... is our sexual orientation. Which is, therefore, what we’re being rejected on the basis of. That straight and gay people find bisexuality/bisexuals distasteful somehow.

Well, if a bi guy refused to date gay men because he found homosexuality/homosexuals distasteful somehow... what would you call that?

To be clear, I’m not saying that, even if straight or gay people’s rejection of bisexuals is unambiguously motivated by the most virulent biphobia– “I won’t date bi people because they’re disgusting subhuman animals!!!”– it shouldn’t be treated as final; everyone gets total veto power in this area. Always. Whether I agree with their reasons or not. (And whether they even give any reasons or not; “because I don’t want to” is reason enough.) Would I like to see the no-bisexuals dating policy’s demise? Yes. But only organically, as a natural outcome of biphobia’s demise in society at large. And not because anyone is guilted (much less bullied) into it.

PenseePansy · 2022-08-02T23:10:07+00:00

I think that biphobia legitimately is different than homophobia, though of course they both have the stigmatization of same-sex attraction in common. When that's the focus-- and it often is-- biphobia and homophobia are indeed functionally-identical.

The thing is, each form of prejudice consists of two parts. The one that bisexuals and homosexuals don't share is the SECOND type of stigma: for homosexuals, that's lack of opposite-sex attraction; for bisexuals, it's lack of monosexuality.

The first stigma-type only gets us in trouble with heterosexuals. The second gets us in trouble not only with them, but often with homosexuals as well. Neither can understand a sexual orientation that includes both sexes. And therefore, to them... it often doesn't look like a sexual orientation at all. Hence the plethora of alternate explanations: "you're REALLY gay or straight, just confused, or screwed up, or a poseur, or a sex maniac", etc. Which are all just another way of saying: "you don't exist".

PenseePansy · 2022-08-02T20:48:54+00:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uy2-5uDpu5Q

PenseePansy · 2022-08-02T20:45:07+00:00

And it doesn't actually have anything to do with us, fellow bi person! Thank effin' god...

(Though of course that never stops the spicy straights from dragging us into their perpetual mirror-mirror-on-the-wall-who's-the-SPESHULEST-of-them-all quest anyway)

PenseePansy · 2022-08-02T09:36:09+00:00

Good question! I'm bi and I don't know either!

PenseePansy · 2022-08-02T08:18:22+00:00

I guess maybe it means something to people (like me) old enough to remember when this was truly unthinkable, you know? Generally-available LGB merch-- not restricted to either just one lonely shop in college towns, or "gayborhoods" in big cities such as San Francisco, NYC, and the like. Plus, gotta say: merch specific to bi people is still pretty thin on the ground! Sure, we get a certain amount of stuff... but it's dwarfed by the rainbows (and the goddamn trans colors, of course). No point marketing to us, I suppose, given that we don't exist and all!

So, while getting acknowledgement from the capitalist machine does mean something to me... I'm in agreement with you insofar as: it ain't much.

PenseePansy · 2022-08-02T08:02:51+00:00

It's about goddamn time! So glad that this exists... and so sad that it needs to :(

PenseePansy · 2022-07-31T00:36:42+00:00

In fact a large number of supposedly straight actress are known as bi in the industry. They could all be bi and just be massively over represented or they could just be screwing whoever is going to get them on.

First, this sounds a lot like the all-too-familiar "Biphobia: Female Edition" in a nutshell. That is: "women who call themselves bi actually aren't (cuz there's No Such Thing of course)-- they're REALLY straight, just slutty!" (As distinct from "Biphobia: Male Edition", i.e., "men who call themselves bi actually aren't [cuz blah blah blah]-- they're REALLY gay, just cowardly!")

Second, since the vast majority of power-brokers in the entertainment industry are men... how would being bi (as opposed to just plain straight) help a woman "sleep her way to the top", exactly?

Third, the whole "sleeping her way to the top" thing itself seems pretty dubious. Both because it plays on the aformentioned bi-women-are-sluts stereotype, and also the centuries-old "actress = whore" stereotype (which, along with the euphemistic term "casting couch", is a convenient cover for what's actually just good old-fashioned sexual harassment). Regularly being faced with "fuck me or you'll never work in this town again, bitch" doesn't make YOU ambitious; it makes THEM predators. And whatever you do about it... you lose. When the one paying the price in this scenario should, by all rights, be the fucking rapist.

Fourth (and finally): I suspect that bi (and gay, and lesbian) people actually do account for a high percentage of the acting profession. Because we grow up learning to act, don't we? Specifically, learning to act straight. And thus developing a sensitivity to people's behavioral cues. So we know how to pretend to be something we're not... and hide who we really are.

In fact, I think that there's a strong connection between being LGB and being "creative" in general. Not because of anything inherent about us; because of the stigma that being same-sex-attracted carries, and the internal conflict that this tends to cause. Creativity/the arts are a major way of trying to resolve that inner conflict. Sure, anyone can have this kind of talent-- that itself is no more common for us than for straight people-- but we're disproportionately likely to focus on and develop it. Because (thanks to homophobia/biphobia)... we're disproportionately likely to NEED to.

PenseePansy · 2022-07-30T07:46:02+00:00

Another vote for BiHorror!

PenseePansy · 2022-07-30T02:00:35+00:00

Ahahaha, your first mistake was thinking logically!

LOL which is to say... more like an actual lawyer than these weapons-grade dumbasses :)

But, believe it or not, that gives me some hope with regard to the following:

I think it's more likely they'll double down on gender ideology, and thus challenge Allison. Suing Stonewall would require them to take the stance that Stonewall's advice is garbage... which would require GCC to stand up for objective reality. And trans ideology still has a firm grip on all major social media networks.

But Rellie... your first mistake was thinking logically! (As a wise woman once said.) Or, rather, crediting GCC with having the capacity to do so! Here's what I mean: you laid out a logical reason why they wouldn't sue Stonewall-- one itself based on logic, in fact (i.e., that doing so would contradict support for trans ideology). The thing is, such a violation of logic would only bother (or even occur to) those who think logically, correct? Which, as we've already established, does NOT include those at GCC!

Perhaps the very thing which has caused GCC to do so much damage will also be our salvation in the end. Their hopelessness at logic. So they needn't ever recognize how wrong they've been in order to strike a blow against Stonewall. No, they may well do so still while thinking they're BFFs. Unable to perceive the contradiction. But serving our purposes-- and those of all gender-woo-rejecting people-- nonetheless.

And hopefully dealing themselves, as well as Stonewall, a death-blow into the bargain :)

PenseePansy · 2022-07-29T04:50:42+00:00

Not so far! But it seems a distinct possibility. (Disclaimer: not a lawyer, unless an affinity for legal dramas counts.) After all, Garden Court Chambers has to pay up now; doesn't it make sense that they'd try recouping the money that Stonewall has cost them from Stonewall itself?

PenseePansy · 2022-07-29T03:04:12+00:00

Hopefully, Allison's courage here will lead to Stonewall being successfully sued by Garden Court Chambers. Into oblivion, with any luck :)

PenseePansy · 2022-07-29T02:52:04+00:00

Why can't trans people have a space simply for themselves? That wouldn’t deny their existence lmao

But then where would they get that sweet, sweet validation???

Which only goes to show what parasites they are, doesn't it? The tick needs the host... but the host doesn't need the tick. They need our validation... but we don't need theirs. Or anything else that they have to offer.

PenseePansy · 2022-07-29T02:42:21+00:00

Very well-put! Yeah, we're at the ludicrous place now where the only truly, AUTHENTICALLY gay people are... straight. Because "queer" has been deemed the "gold standard" for gayness, and claiming "trans" identity automatically makes you the queerest queer who ever queered. Maybe due to the fact that "queerness" is fundamentally a performance-- all about getting attention, and people's reaction to you-- whereas homosexuality is just... an inherent characteristic; part of who you are... regardless of how it's expressed, or whether anyone notices. And since straight people have decided that "gay" needs to be ✨FABULOUS✨ (with rainbows comin' outta yer ass) 24/7, well, that's just not good enough.

Makes me wonder if this might be the real-life equivalent of what Hollywood used to do with gay characters: have them played by indisputably-straight actors. Because the audience was only comfortable with a "gay person" when they knew that they weren't REALLY gay at all. And it was, in fact, just a safely-straight person... pretending. I often sense something similar where the enthusiasm for TQ+ is concerned. It's gay people as imagined by straight people. Just like "trans" is women as imagined by men (and vice-versa).

PenseePansy · 2022-07-28T22:55:17+00:00

As an American, I feel that the situation here is rather different than in most of the western world. We have a much stronger far-right element, both because it controls one of our two major political parties, and because religious extremism (notably among those who seek to convert others) is a lot more prevalent here. So while there's certainly widespread support for LGB people... there's also widespread (and often deeply-ingrained) opposition to us. I know that the mainstreaming of the former (and a media awash in rainbows every June) can make it easy to forget about the latter. But there's always something-- such as the current SCOTUS, now gearing up not only to overturn Obergefell, but to make "sodomy laws" a reality once again-- to remind us :(

PenseePansy · 2022-07-27T03:09:21+00:00

Yeah: all the same-sex-attracted people together, which means homosexuals (of both sexes) and bisexuals (of both sexes)... and nobody else.

Seriously, how hard is THAT to understand???

PenseePansy · 2022-07-25T02:23:38+00:00

2-year-olds think in "trans" terms because they think in gender terms: pink-is-for-girls/blue-is-for-boys, playing with dolls means you're a girl, playing with toy trucks means you're a boy, etc. They do that because THIS IS A CHILDISH WAY OF THINKING. Like believing in the Easter Bunny. Kind of cute when a wee tot does it... fucking DISTURBING when an adult does it. Because it's something that you're SUPPOSED TO GROW OUT OF. Not have grown-ups LOCK YOU INTO. So you'll never be ABLE to grow out of it... or grow up.

No wonder the trans-cult is so obsessed with little kids: they're the only ones who can truly buy the "gender is real, bio-sex isn't" party line-- because gender-indoctrination starts at birth, is perfectly-suited to immature/inexperienced minds... and THEY DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT SEX (in either sense of the word) EVEN IS YET.

PenseePansy · 2022-07-23T08:30:45+00:00

"Corporate needs you to find the differences between this picture and this picture."/"They're the same picture."

PenseePansy · 2022-07-23T06:59:01+00:00

Yup. Which is a form of gaslighting... "Pretend you're only attracted to women and not men!" What a weird inversion of the typical pressure to hide one's same-sex attraction.

Word. And of course the true irony here is: if the woman that he's married to actually did discover that she was a lesbian? SHE WOULD LEAVE HIM! "Guess what, honey? Turns out that we have something in common! We're both exclusively female-attracted... and feel that nothing less than a 'cis woman' will do! So buh-bye!" God, reading an account of it going THAT way would be sooo satisfying...

I wonder if any woman in this position has ever tried that? Or maybe claiming to have suddenly realized that she's a gay man? So, oops, now that you're a cute anime girl, hun, it's obviously not gonna work! Too bad! Now if you'll excuse me, I gotta go find myself a husband! [divorces his ass at the speed of sound]

PenseePansy · 2022-07-23T06:30:48+00:00

Yes, this really frightens me. How it's going to be used to further stigmatize lesbians, of course... and also as ammo against women's need for single-sex spaces/protection from male violence. Because if we women are just a bunch of brutal thugs ourselves, men must not really pose any threat to us, right? Hell, it might just as easily be the other way around! So when yet another dude-with-ladyfeelz is caught being predatory in the women's restroom, it'll be dismissed with, "well, that's just what you gals are like, after all!" :(

PenseePansy