JK Rowling and The Gestapo of Reddit mods if you don’t agree

Deconstruction of reality to appease and avoid hurting people feelings doesn’t make it real “science”.

Mathematics is an exact science but now is transphobic & racist because is difficult for some people and also because an integer number can be identified as floating-point in order to make 1+1=2 a fallacy.

Allison Mack joined Nxivm to improve her acting skills and “empower” herself, in the end she ended brainwashed and did the same to other people. The Far left act as a cult behind progressiveness and innovation just to get power.

It’s obvious we have our bias mine is Right and yours is Left, throwing accusation about being phobic or cist is the same tactic the Far Right used to condemn and dehumanize people saying they were possessed by the devil and satanic, your side is using the same tactics, I’m sure the higher ups know but the followers are oblivious and genuinely believe that they’re improving the world.

If you really want to engage on conversation stop throwing that kind of statements and start real dialogue, unless you’re here for another reason?

@YuriGagarin “Just because you said so doesn’t make it true.”

“The mainstream media said so, therefore it’s true.”

do you even hear yourself lol

Seeing as you asked for a source I’ll give you one: A thorough article which addresses how transgenderism has no basis in biological reality, based on what we do know for centuries.

Transgenderism is based on bogus, pseudo-scientific nonsense championed only by Communist, degenerate freaks and they’ve managed to convince perfectly decent people because of how effectively they weaponized altruism and empathy. In truth, you’re just consigning people to more confusion and pain when you peddle this crap.

Transgenderism, at least as we understand it today, was peddled by Dr. John Money, (who coined the term “gender),” who came up with the ridiculous idea that sex is a spectrum. In the mid-1950’s, after one of two twin boys had their penis destroyed in a botched circumcision, he decided to prove his hypothesis by having him raised as a girl. He believed sexual stereotypes were a result of nurture over nature and this would “break the gender binary” (or some such Leftist schizophrenic nonsense) and erase biological distinctions.

Long story short, the experiment was catastrophic failure. The child in question grew up still being drawn to masculine hobbies, and it got to the point both parents eventually told him the truth. Not only that, but John Money was sick pervert who sexually abused both boys for “research” and both developed mental health issues as a result. Both of them committed suicide. John Money is hailed as some sort of hero in the “scientific community.” No justice in this world.

Also, it’s worth noting that that some (but not all) transgenders, especially MtF, are just porn-addicted perverts. There’s this sexual fetish known as autogynephilia, which is when a man gets off by sexually fantasizing himself as a woman. Causes behind autogynephilia might vary, but the most common today would most likely be a guy watching far too much porn to the point he begins imagining himself as the woman instead of the man.

So there's recently been some debate around whether frequent pornography use can cause transgenderism.

So, who better to look to for an answer to this question than the biggest transgender Youtuber, Contrapoints? Let's listen to their story of how they became transgender. pic.twitter.com/zK5Z3MdoI9

— Not Pax (@CathAnimeAvi) October 2, 2021

Is this proof that porn causes transgenderism? I believe there are other factors work, depending on the individual, but what probably starts off as curiosity ends up developing into a full-blown obsession into trying to make this fantasy into reality. If there’s any modicum of truth to this, than the entire argument behind transgender activism falls apart: It’s basically a “civil rights movement” for deviants. Utterly embarrassing for those who invested themselves into it.

cis people can be perverts too so it doesn’t proove shit you little whore

Also how do you explain that trans was a thing waaay before porn was? huh? Fucking little retard

@YuriGagarin The forums allow people to have differing opinions, and all are allow/encouraged to share that.

But they don’t allow direct name calling like you just did in your last two posts.

The fact you went to name calling when you had nothing to add shows so much about you, and that everything you just claimed someone else is, is really a reflection of what you yourself are…. intolerant!

Scalp collected.

Eh, J.K. Rowling again, huh? I’m gonna put it that way, I have long since stopped following her case because her opinion was just being mismanaged and overbloated purely because of her fame.

Back when I stopped following it, my personal view was : J.K. Rowling is not transphobic herself but she did speak openly in support of people who actually were. Whether it was because of unawareness or on purpose, I do not know. That, however, was years ago at this point. I can’t even remember every reason I’ve had for building this worldview.

My problem with ‘Woke people’ is not neccessarily due to who they claim to champion, but why and how. People these boards often call SJWs and “Wokes” are people who are progressive without an end goal in mind, just continuously pushing because what was before was obviously bad and the ideas of free love, tolerance, etc. are obviously ‘superior’ in their eyes even if they only worship it on paper.

John Money’s case was mentioned. In the mid-2010s, John Money would actually be used by transgender people to *support* their opinion. Why? Because his research, if it can even be called that, proved that there was an inherent awareness about one’s gender in relation to social pressures and one’s apparent biological attributes. David Reimer, born Bruce Peter Raimer and raised ‘Brenda’ Reimer (why he chose to not return to his birthname, I don’t know, perhaps because of its similarity to his enforced girl-name) proved that doing X or Y didn’t change how someone inherently perceived themselves. That there was a self-awareness, constant, and inherent aspect to one’s perception of gender, meaning Money’s argument about it being primarily a social construct was flawed. Back then, that would be used to support transpeople’s case and cause.

But nowadays, it is rightfully used to discredit various aspects of gender theory, because the very language around such matters changed. ‘Choose to identify’ appears often, ‘Gender is a social construct’ appears all the time. The progression continued, it has been hijacked. Did anyone believe there could be gay or trans conservatives in the late 90s? And yet now there are gay, black, trans people who firmly disagree with the stances of people who claim to champion their cause, because it is hijacked progress without an end goal in mind. The goal was always to just make life easier for minorities to the point it wouldn’t be crushing them, but instead we’re getting what we have *now*. People who achieved sensible levels of help and acceptance fell off the wagon, because the wagon is taking them more and more in a direction that’s not sensible.

Maybe half a decade ago you’d hear neurobiology research in regards to patterns of brain functions in people with gender dysphoria being much more similar to those of the gender they identify as rather than the sex they were born with (supporting the ‘Brain of gender X in body of gender Y narrative), but now to even admit there’s any difference in brain functionality between women and men is borderline bigotry.

In regards to ‘number of genders’, people who strongly support the total abolishments of traditional views of gender will often claim that there’s plenty of communities with more than two genders (or gender roles; call them what you like). To an extent, this is true; Native Americans had their two-spirit people and several Asian cultures have 4 to 5 genders, meaning there was something in Abrahamic religions, Christianity included, that might’ve surpressed our view of such things taking place all throughout history. But it’s worth studying the *context* of what these additional genders or gender roles are.

More often than not, there will be… Man, woman, male performing female social roles, female performing male social roles. So, similar to binary transgenderism.

Occasionally there will be a gender for people who are so stuck inbetween they cannot really be ‘fit’ into the male-female binary, like two-spirit with Native Americans or Bissu in the Bugis society in Indonesia. It’s worth noting those are nearly always described as both tied to intersex characteristics (when any gender normalization surgery was obviously limited to nonexistent), and described as the rarest (meaning if you accept the gender as mental, such ‘inbetween-ness will be exceedingly rare compared to other gender roles). And all of those are long term social roles, not a 21st century proposal by a teenager who believes they need neopronouns. Not distilling gender to such minute aspects that somehow ‘Demiboy’ and ‘Demigirl’ are included as valid identities for nonbinary people because they feel kind of masculine/feminine but not quite enough to give up feeling special.

On the whole, I support transgender people and if they and their, cautious and competent, therapist believes transitioning is the best way for them to proceed, I’m all for it. I don’t even think all nonbinary people are nonsense, just maybe a big chunk of people, especially celebrities, who *claim* to be such. But the current form the USA/UK/Canada leftwing block is pushing some of these ideas, I can’t brainlessly support, especially given some of the circumstances it leads to and some of the information I’ve gathered.when trying to get a better perspective on the issue just because everyone was being so LOUD about it, I simply can’t brainlessly accept because it not only makes no sense and harms people, it’s contradictory to whatever scientific basis for the existence of the very people they claim to champion we have.