[ home / overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / music / 777 / posad / i / a / lgbt / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Captcha
Tor Only
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)
Matrix   IRC Chat   Mumble
ReturnCatalogBottom

File: 1754964086260.png ( 185.67 KB , 640x1493 , 1754707928133.png )

 No.490905[View All]

>Theory is completely, laughably incoherent and contradictory from one position to the next
>Largely ignores most Marxist and Materialist Feminist positions on gender development
>Largely ignores the role of biological sex.
>Can't even answer basic questions in regards to the theory or identity
>Slippery slopes to absolutely absurd positions that again run contradictory to their standard positions.
>Arguments largely 1:1 the same as gay conversion therapy
>Response to any questions is just calling people "TERF"'s and crybullying like Zionists.
>No meaningful response to why if gender/sex is a metaphysical social role, why you can't be transracial or even transspecies, is furry a legitimate identity?
>Largely ignore the fact that huge amounts of Troons are in fact, predatory sociopaths.
>Largely ignore the rampant misogyny in the movement.
>Rampant hypocrisy in arguments (Noo you side with elites if you are anti-Troon, but also Troons are totally justified because US big pharma says so!)
>Ignores AGP and claim it's just a troonphobic myth by blanchard despite almost half of troons openly identify as it and it being one of the most popular fetishes out there among men.
>The insanely creepy way Troons usually talk about feminity, and they overwhelmingly dominate Bimbofication and other extremely degrading/humiliating women fetish communities.
>If Children are fully self aware, fully developed in self identity and in full self control and understanding of their self and their gender and sexual identity.. isn't this exactly what NAMBLA argues? It's also clearly absurd as dissociative disorders and personality disorders and dysphoric distorders are not even diagnosed in children generally for OBVIOUS FUCKING REASONS.
>Hormones are in fact, super dangerous to fuck around with https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44192-025-00216-3
>Can't even define what a woman or man is.
>Largely moves to actually reinforce gender norms in almost a parody way.
>Muh trans genocide despite it's been debunked repeatedly over the years. Brianna Ghey was literally also murdered over drugs.
and frankly, on and on, there is so many ways you can just rip on Gender ideology bullshit it's endless and that is kind of my point, why in hell has a position, that anybody who has any basic Critical thinking skills, can basically tear to shreads with complete ease, that is completely incoherent and relies largely just on gish galloping, bizarre claims usually about women, very fringe disorders that don't even function in the way they think it does and has no relevence (intersex) and then just crybullying, become like raison d'etat for like most of the Western left? It's honestly fucking cultish the way /tttt/ shit is treated by so much of the left, and watching my pretty autistic, gooner friends start trooning out, it literally exactly felt like they were sucked in by a cult, they even started talking like how you think cultists would talk.
What the actual fuck?
65 posts and 17 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.
>>

 No.492887

>>492870
>You're constantly getting horrified by shit that's been around for decades
Don't play dumb dude. There has never, ever been anything like the institutional capture by TRA's that occured in the 2015-2023 period.
https://americandreaming.substack.com/p/memory-hole-archive-sex-and-transgender
It was the idpol left and neolibs at their most fucking ideologically insane, trying to basically force a transhumanist movement on the rest of us.
Are you seriously going to pretend the 1990s and 2000s or even 70s were anything like the present with the Trans shit? Not even close. I'm actually older than you lot, I remember that literally even wearing a fitted shirt as a guy in the early 2000s would get you called a "Metrosexual faggot" by the majority of people and the media.
>>

 No.492888

Transgender shit distracts us from the movement. Big pharma won. The bourgeoisie literally beat us because of transhumanists. Fucking fifth columns. They despise the Soviets and have nothing to look forward to.
>>

 No.492889

>>492867
you're the horseshoe theory meme of stalinism-MAGA

hopefully ironic. Trans people are like 1% of the population and it's cis people that have turned them into this constant political talking point
>>

 No.492893

>>492889
Troons and their handmaidens that overtook institutions and tried to ramroad their shit everywhere. They did this. Troon shit was not just a fringe minority, it was the mainstream across the entire liberal academia, media and legal sphere.
>From the mid 2010s through the early 2020s, Americans were told over and over that biological sex was more than just male and female. A 2016 essay in Slate by trans activist Chase Strangio asked “What Is a ‘Male Body’?” His answer amounted to whatever one wants it to be. In 2018, a New York Times piece declared “Sex Is Not Binary.” A 2019 video from Teen Vogue featured a group of activists “debunking” the idea of biological sex along with the claim that “The body is either male or female.” Forbes took it further in 2020, proclaiming “The Myth of Biological Sex.” The once-respected magazine Scientific American leaned particularly hard into activist ideology, churning out articles such as “Sex Redefined: The Idea of 2 Sexes Is Overly Simplistic”, “Visualizing Sex as a Spectrum”, and “Here’s Why Human Sex Is Not Binary.”
>The erasure of sex didn’t stop there. In 2021, top medical schools in the University of California system and elsewhere began teaching that biological sex was a social construct no different from gender. Professors, fearful of being reported or losing their positions, scrambled to apologize for using transphobic language such as “male” and “female.” As one endocrinology lecturer anxiously stammered to his class: “I said ‘when a woman is pregnant,’ which implies that only women can get pregnant and I most sincerely apologize to all of you. […] I don’t want you to think that I am in any way trying to imply anything, and if you can summon some generosity to forgive me, I would really appreciate it. […] Again, I’m very sorry for that. It was certainly not my intention to offend anyone. The worst thing that I can do as a human being is be offensive.”
>In the language guides of medical bodies or journals such the American Psychological Association, scholars were told that terms like “birth sex” and “natal sex” were “disparaging” and “should be avoided.” Ditto Sage Journals, who went further to include “opposite sex”, which could give the problematic impression that there are only two sexes. The Council of Scientific Editors also advised steering clear of using “females” and “males” as nouns. And The Lancet outright cautioned authors against the term “biological sex”, which had joined the long list of things cultural leftists dubbed right-wing “dog whistles.” As a writer and editor who has worked in LGBT media since 2021, I was warned on multiple occasions between 2021 and 2023 to avoid using “biological sex” because it would alienate trans activists and potentially spark firestorms.
>Across the mainstream media and major institutions in the early 2020s, the words “woman” and “women” began curiously vanishing from articles about health, reproductive rights, and what were previously called “women’s issues.” In their place was a cavalcade of dehumanizing, politically insane, and utterly mystifying woke newspeak. “Women” were now “vulva owners”, “menstruators”, “uterus-havers”, “vagina owners”, “bodies with vaginas”, “egg producers”, “individuals with a cervix”, and “bleeders.” Meanwhile, “mothers” became “pregnant people”, “birthing people”4, “birthing persons”, “birthing parents”, “breastfeeding people”, and “chest-feeders.” Some organizations even found “vagina” to be too unenlightened, and took to calling the female genitalia a “bonus hole” or “front hole.” How charming.
This is only the tip of the iceberg. It wasn't MAGA that made people detest Trans Rights Activism, they did it to themselves by marching through the institutions then enforcing their schizo beliefs onto people tearing away the rights of other groups especially LGB and Women, eventually leading to them trying to mass groom children.
>>

 No.492897

>>492893
>The once-respected magazine Scientific American leaned particularly hard into activist ideology, churning out articles such as “Sex Redefined: The Idea of 2 Sexes Is Overly Simplistic”, “Visualizing Sex as a Spectrum”, and “Here’s Why Human Sex Is Not Binary.”
Biologist here, I'm gonna have to see some of these to make my own judgment. I lost my respect for Scientific American during COVID, but I don't recall them making egregiously unscientific articles about sex before that.
>>

 No.492898

>>492897
>>492893
Okay, had a look and it seems like all this idiotic bullshit was published after COVID. Guess whatever broke them during COVID made them decide to completely throw their standards out the window and prioritize mass-media liberal partisan drivel over science.
>>

 No.492900

>>492898
Either they comply or they lose their jobs. I don't blame them. Porkytranshumanists are scum.
>>

 No.492901

>>492887
>Not even close. I'm actually older than you lot, I remember that literally even wearing a fitted shirt as a guy in the early 2000s would get you called a "Metrosexual faggot" by the majority of people and the media.
I remember that too, faggot.

>Are you seriously going to pretend the 1990s and 2000s or even 70s were anything like the present with the Trans shit?
Post-op transsexuals could legally marry members of their birth sex in the late 1970s. They literally had marriage before gays did.

Every single thing you've been programmed to freak out about already existed by the mid 1990s. What you're describing isn't "trans capture," it's a cynical culture war media circus. The desired outcome isn't trans rights (legality of trans medical access was broader in the '00s than it is today), it's to keep workers fighting over irrelevant identity bullshit for another 10-20 years until the next thing comes or the public is already so thoroughly enslaved that these media circuses and moral panics become unnecessary. The actual outcome of these micro-issues is irrelevant to the powers that be.
>>

 No.492902

>>492897
>Biologist here
We've been over this before; no you aren't.
>>

 No.492923

>>492901
It is literally trans capture
https://americandreaming.substack.com/p/memory-hole-archive-sex-and-transgender
It wasn't TERFs and media doing all of this, it was Troons and their handmaidens.
You're doing the exact same thing as Liberals do when they say "Woke never existed, it's just a right wing dogwhistle", which is just blatantly not true. Because rightoids can be scattered in their criticism of something, doesn't mean their criticisim of that thing is 100% fake.
>Post-op transsexuals could legally marry members of their birth sex in the late 1970s. They literally had marriage before gays did.
And Women who interacted with them still had issues with Troons back then
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Transsexual_Empire\
I mean one of the most influential feminist texts of the 1970s.
Troons they just didn't have the mass institutional and academic backing they had in the 2010s and 2020s where they tried to basically systematically erase biological sex from reality and mass start invading every womans space they could while mass grooming kids.
>>

 No.492924

>>492902
You seem awfully disturbed at the idea of an actual expert weighing in on this subject.
>>

 No.492925

>>492924
You're not an "expert." You alternately identify yourself as "a biologist," "someone studying biology," "an aspiring biologist," and "someone interested in biology." You have no credentials, you don't do this for a living, I doubt that you even formally study it, you aren't any more of an "expert" than anyone else who periodically reads about it. Literal biology stolen valor.
>>

 No.492937

File: 1766781574837.png ( 11.41 KB , 161x161 , sad kirby.png )

>>492925
That hurts, anon.
>>

 No.494358

>>492893
Anon, you're delusional. It isn't troons whom are promoting "trans culture" it's cis people.
Also, trans education is denied to children in the US
>>

 No.494361

>>494358
>trans education is denied to children in the US
How can this be true when Americans are bombarded with trans shit via media nonstop?
>>

 No.494365

>>490905
Supporting trans is like how socialists support reactionary insurgents like the taliban, for the sake of anti-imperialism, for the sake of anti-capitalism. It's strategic, you don't need to agree with what you're supporting.
>>

 No.494366

>>494365
How is the Taliban reactionary?
>>

 No.494370

>>494365
If the working class hates trans people, then associating with them will make the working class want nothing to do with leftists. So strategically the rational thing is to ignore them altogether if we want to win over the workers to the left.

I personally know some cool trans people so I'm all for them living a good life. I just don't think there's a need to spotlight the issues of a very small group of people, we need to focus on what everyone can relate to.
>>

 No.494381

>>494361
Where? Outside of a few reality TV shows?
>>

 No.494382

>>494381
https://www.google.com/search?q=sissy+porn
>105.000.000 results
>>

 No.494383

Ignoring most of the arguments here and addressing OP. The theory is not all that contradictory, but it seems that way when you view trans people as a monolith.

There are a few different types of "trans" people. There are people who have dysphoria and transition to alleviate it, feeling it better matches who they are. That is legible to me.

And then there are the people in your example image, which are very much not the same people. Make no mistake, these people are not mentally ill. They are gooner degenerates whose entire persona revolves around their "girldicks" and "girlcocks" and calling lesbians transphobic for not wanting to suck their dick.

Unfortunately, the latter is winning the public perception.
>>

 No.494392

>>494381
Do you even use the internet? You don't see trap threads on 4chan, trans content creators on tiktok and youtube, not to mention the obvious gooner content?

It's for sure become normalized in the last two decades. Before that everyone had a visceral transphobic reaction to that kinda stuff, outside of cartoons on boards like /d/.

I personally believe the ruling class had more than a little bit to do with normalizing trans people, either to further divide people, shock them, or just because they like transhumanism. But then I look at asian countries that also have trans people and at least in China they don't seem to make a big deal out if it, I think part of it was organic too.
>>

 No.494393

Because they piggyback off of the beloved gay male community
>>

 No.494396

>>494392
>Before that everyone had a visceral transphobic reaction to that kinda stuff, outside of cartoons on boards like /d/.
This isn't really true at all.

Transphobia as a phenomenon is a newer invention. It used to just be gay panic - "oh, this looks like a pretty lady, WAIT A MINUTE OH NO A PENIS!!!" - like, there was no special category for trans hate back in the day, that's a more recent invention, people mostly were totally indifferent. All extreme reactions to this one way or another have largely been products of the prolonged media circus which has been ongoing for less than 20 years.
>>

 No.494416

>>494396
No I think that the term transphobia was just a name given to a social phenomena that had existed long before we actually gave a name to it.
>>

 No.494417

>>494416
No.
Unironically, the "social phenomenon" before "transphobia" was just homophobia/gay panic. The special categorization of it as something separate has been almost entirely a post 2010s phenomenon.
>>

 No.494421

>>494417
NTA but you're being obtuse.
Transphobia has always existed but it wasn't named so.
Trans were culturally lumped with gays/lesbians
>>

 No.494422

>>494392
>>494382
>Sissy porn
>Traps

Those are not trans.
>>

 No.494423

>>494421
>Transphobia has always existed but it wasn't named so.
>Trans were culturally lumped with gays/lesbians
Yeah because it was literally just homophobia.

The pretense that there is a special broad category for hating trans people specifically only really emerged after it became broadly socially unacceptable to be openly homophobic, and after the western MSM decided to cash in on a manufactured culture war over "trans representation" since gay marriage was already legal in the US. "Transphobia" as we know it today was basically created by marketers.
>>

 No.494441

>>494416

No, it was invented by Epstein as part of his culture war psyop.
>>

 No.494452

It's due to the decline of the church and state in shaping white people's identities.
White millennials, rightfully turned their backs on religion, nationalism and mass media but still needed institutions to shape their identity.
So they choose alternative sexuality to forge identities for themselves, this is why there's so many flavors of sexuality despite there only being 2 sexes.
So when you attack trans or other LGBT people you're not simply attacking a person, but the identity of millions of people.
>>

 No.495151

>>494452
If that's true why is every church in blue cities plastered with trans flags
>>

 No.495161

>>495151
Virtue signaling, perhaps?
Do you really believe DEI benefits minorities?
>>

 No.495165

>>495151
Because white people mostly go to those churches. You ain't going to see trans flags at black churches.
>>

 No.495176

>>490905
I used to think like that but the troon subject is more complicated than "manladies with beards" that conservatives stereotype it as. There are certainly some fringe elements like the tucute movement and the intersectional feminists but some trans girls pass so goddamn well and some men have the standards of manliness so strict that it really makes me wonder what it even means to be a woman or a man.

Also, that image really gives me the "fugly transwoman hangs herself" vibes. Conservative memes are always so gross and unpleasant to look at, they really reduce my will to live. I do wonder if they secretly jerk off to this.
>>

 No.495184

transhumanistism is bourgeois morality o algo
>>

 No.495208

File: 1774938050337.png ( 21.6 KB , 249x202 , d48139fe2f187923d9df027439….png )

Society's reluctance to critique gender ideology comes down to a collective spookening.

Instead of asking how divisions were constructed to distract from material reality, people just pick a side. Stirner would call this the tyranny of fixed ideas we've treated abstractions like identity categories and ideology itself as gospel truth, when really were just losing sight of our own interests and the power structures that actually benefit from keeping us fragmented and infighting.
>>

 No.495214

>>495208
>people just pick a side
It's funny that they only pick a side on wedge issues promoted by the establishment and never anything serious
>>

 No.495223

>>495208
The OP is not critiquing the concept of gender itself though, they're critiquing transgenderism specifically while supporting cisgenderism.
>>

 No.495227

>>495208
You're missing the meta, and are, dare I say, "spooked".
It's not really gender that's being internalized, it's identity, which is unfalsifiable.
Modern gender discourse ironically is more in line with Egotism than critiques of it are.
Identifying as a woman "pleases their ego" therefore it is true.
You can't make them believe otherwise, which is where you get all this goofy ideological mud wrestling.
It's when millennials and Gen Z try to make their beliefs sound empirically proven is when they get into trouble.
If they were smart they'd just tell CHUDs and MAGA transgenderism is real because we say so but they won't because they're spooked by science.
>>

 No.495237

>>495227
>Identifying as a woman "pleases their ego" therefore it is true.
Isn't the entire point of Stirner's psychological egoism that spooks are expressions of our egoistic desires that are confused for something greater? Also, capital T truth is a spook so the phrase "therefore it is true" kinda collapses this entire analogy. Yes, even relative "truth" is also a spook since it's merely an attempt to evade adressing the problem. Sorta like "There's no INHERENT meaning in life but you can create one! Hurray, meaning of life saved!"
>>

 No.495240

>>495237
>Isn't the entire point of Stirner's psychological egoism that spooks are expressions of our egoistic desires that are confused for something greater?
No, it's the opposite. His point is that we're denying our egoistical desires for something "greater" or in service of an ideal that is actively harming us in some way.
One example he gives is a peasant watching a police man arrest a burglar. An unspooked person would be happy because a burglar could potentially break into their own home so this action is "pleasing their ego" or serving them in a real constructive way.
A spooked person would be happy because "law and order" are being upheld. Which is spooked because often the state acts against the interests of a peasant, so this reaction is "spooked".
Both are reacting in the same way but by two completely different ideologies.
>>

 No.495252

>>495240
>it's the opposite. His point is that we're denying our egoistical desires for something "greater" or in service of an ideal that is actively harming us in some way.
Look, I'm a Stirnerite myself and I'm not even disagreeing here. I'm just saying that all people are egoists even if they're spooked, they just deny that they are. In order to not be spooked you have to be become your own master instead of delegating your decision-making to abstractions.
<Religion promises me this: “the highest good”; to gain this I pay no attention to any of my other desires and do not nourish them. —All your doings are unconfessed, secret; covert and hidden egoism. But because this is egoism that you do not want to confess to yourselves, that you conceal from yourselves, thus not obvious and evident egoism, consequently unconscious egoism, therefore it is not egoism, but slavery, service, self-denial; you are egoists, and you are not, because you deny egoism. Where you most seem to be such, you have drawn loathing and contempt upon the word “egoist”.
>>

 No.495269

OP was clearly cucked. There's no other reason someone would whine this much about such a small aspect of life.
>>

 No.495274

>>495269
transhumanist
>>

 No.495293

>>495274
That's some kindergarten-tier comeback.
>>

 No.495294

>>495293
Please stop bumping this retarded thread
>>

 No.495498

>>495293
the fact that theres a word filter for this exact word is not a good sign about this sites admin
>>

 No.495499

>>495498
What happened
>>

 No.495500

>>495498
<BAAWWWWW /LEFTYPOL/ IS MOCKING ME FOR MY IDPOL SCAPEGOAT OBSESSION
The site is just fine, classcuck.
Don't like it? Leave.

Unique IPs: 31
[Return][Catalog][Top][Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / music / 777 / posad / i / a / lgbt / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]
ReturnCatalogTopBottomHome