Garbage.Theory
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2020
Oh sweet merciful god that is sick.
Like, this might be “report to the authorities” sick.
Not that I haven’t owned second hand things but uhhhhgggg. I shuddered reading that.
Megathread Tranny Sideshows on Social Media - Any small-time spectacle on Reddit, Tumblr, Twitter, Dating Sites, and other social media.
- Thread starter Real Mayun
- Start date
-
🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Like, this might be “report to the authorities” sick.
Not that I haven’t owned second hand things but uhhhhgggg. I shuddered reading that.
Art Kassul
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2021
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2020
Late but I finally decided to watch The Closer just to see what everyone on Twitter was screeching about.
I’ve never heard of David Chappelle so this is my first time watching anything of his, and because of all the criticism I expected something a lot more... Extreme. I’m an autist so maybe there’s something I missed, but to me it seemed that he actually respects trans people but just wants them to stop screeching about pronouns, be able to take things with a bit of humor, and stop thinking they’re more oppressed than black people. Nothing he said came off as hateful, just exhausted/worried, but trannies tend to see genuine concern as hate so what was I expecting. Chappelle actually points out that trans people deserve basic human respect like anyone else, but I guess that will never be enough for them.
I’m baffled by this idea that you don’t need to watch something to understand it. The special was completely different than what I was expecting based on what I heard about it, and it makes me think that trannies really do consider themselves some protected class that should never be poked fun at or else anyone within earshot will go on a tranny-murdering rampage (even though Chappelle makes jokes about white/black/Jewish/gay/whatever people and no one’s accusing him of killing them). It also makes me think that trans people consider words to have this kind of power in the first place because they themselves will have a mental breakdown if someone says something slightly mean about them, so they assume everyone else is as easily affected, which is why they’re so hung up on comebacks and “owning” transphobes, or calling TERFs ugly. They think their words have power because they’re weak to the words of others, but well-adjusted people don’t operate like them.
Chappelle also makes a good point about how the trans community eats their own if anyone dare strays from the popular opinion, but that seemed to completely fly over their heads.
I’m baffled by this idea that you don’t need to watch something to understand it. The special was completely different than what I was expecting based on what I heard about it, and it makes me think that trannies really do consider themselves some protected class that should never be poked fun at or else anyone within earshot will go on a tranny-murdering rampage (even though Chappelle makes jokes about white/black/Jewish/gay/whatever people and no one’s accusing him of killing them). It also makes me think that trans people consider words to have this kind of power in the first place because they themselves will have a mental breakdown if someone says something slightly mean about them, so they assume everyone else is as easily affected, which is why they’re so hung up on comebacks and “owning” transphobes, or calling TERFs ugly. They think their words have power because they’re weak to the words of others, but well-adjusted people don’t operate like them.
Chappelle also makes a good point about how the trans community eats their own if anyone dare strays from the popular opinion, but that seemed to completely fly over their heads.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2021
Stonewall’s influence on BBC and Ofcom revealed
Stonewall’s influence on BBC and Ofcom revealed
The BBC Nolan Investigates podcast says the charity's work raises questions of impartiality.
www.bbc.com
Stonewall’s influence on BBC and Ofcom revealed - BBC News
archived 14 Oct 2021 20:42:32 UTC
Governments, Ofcom and the BBC have had their impartiality questioned after involvement in the lobby group's diversity schemes.
A number of high profile organisations have left Stonewall's schemes in recent months amid growing controversy about the influence of the group on public policy.
Stonewall says it works for LGBTQ equality and that it is "deeply disappointing" that this can still be thought of as controversial.
Stonewall operates two schemes which have come under scrutiny in recent months. The "Diversity Champions" programme is a service Stonewall provides to employers for a fee, to advise them on diversity and inclusion. The Workplace Equality Index is a public ranking of organisations, which is scored by Stonewall, and does not require a fee to enter.
The Nolan Investigates podcast sought information on the schemes under Freedom of Information (FOI) laws. The information contained within the documents revealed what the lobby group was asking organisations to do to improve their ranking on the Workplace Equality Index.
Some organisations, including the BBC, refused to release the information on the grounds that it could "have a detrimental impact on the commercial revenue of Stonewall".
Stonewall declined to take part in the series.
Ofcom 'scoring points'
The documents reveal that the media regulator Ofcom submitted rulings it had made against broadcasters to Stonewall's Workplace Equality Index, which awards points to organisations based on how well they are performing on LGBTQ equality.
Ofcom had initially defended the relationship with Stonewall, saying it only related to internal staffing issues, before leaving the Diversity Champions Scheme in August.
However, Ofcom continues to submit information to the Workplace Equality Index. Stonewall scores companies and public bodies based on how well they believe they are performing on LGBTQ equality.
For three consecutive years, the lobby group asked Ofcom to show evidence of work they had done to "promote LGBT equality in the wider community". Ofcom cited examples of action they had taken in response to complaints about TV programmes including Harry Hill's TV Burp and local radio stations.
In 2019, Ofcom told Stonewall "we have ruled on two instances where transphobic comments made in programmes breached the code". One such case referred to a radio presenter who said he would be uncomfortable with his six-year-old daughter changing in an environment where the changing rooms were not segregated based on sex, and described a "transfeminine person" as "him, her, him, it" - for which he had apologised on air.
The regulator also cited a 2016 judgement on a re-run of Harry Hill's TV Burp on the UKTV television channel Dave, in which the programme parodied a Channel 4 documentary called The Pregnant Man. Ofcom had found the programme was in breach of its broadcasting code.
Image caption,An extract from Ofcom's submission to Stonewall's Workplace Equality Index
Ofcom did not release the feedback it received from Stonewall.
Ofcom told the Nolan Investigates podcast that there was no conflict of interest in its relationship with Stonewall, despite "stepping back" from Stonewall's Diversity Champions Scheme after considering whether there was a conflict of interest.
Ofcom said: "Broadcast standards decisions are made by the Broadcast Standards team within Ofcom, wholly independently from any third parties. Our participation in the Stonewall Equality Index has no bearing whatsoever on any of our broadcasting standards decisions."
Ofcom will continue to submit to Stonewall's Workplace Equality Index scheme, saying it "is an effective way for employers to measure their progress on LGBTQ+ inclusion in the workplace".
BBC 'working closely' with Stonewall
The BBC did not release the information requested by Nolan Investigates around its submission to Stonewall's schemes.
However, the programme has raised questions about how close the BBC's Diversity and Inclusion department was to Stonewall. Diversity and Inclusion deals with internal staffing issues at the BBC.
Concerns have been raised for some time from senior BBC editorial figures about the risks of the relationship with Stonewall.
Stonewall played a central role in an internal BBC "LGBT Culture and Progression report" by "identifying strengths and weaknesses" for the
BBC with regards to LGBT diversity and practices. "Weaknesses" included the absence of an Allies programme. Allies programmes are set up with training from Stonewall when the organisations are Diversity Champions.
In January 2020 the BBC told staff they would "be working closely with Stonewall over the coming months in preparation for next year's [Stonewall] index".
The podcast reveals that a senior figure in the Diversity and Inclusion department described Stonewall as "the experts in workplace equality for LGBTQ+ people" in internal correspondence, in response to questions about the BBC's Allies scheme.
Concerns have been expressed about Stonewall being regarded as "the" experts, given the diversity of opinion among lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people over Stonewall's policies.
The department runs an "Allies training" course, which was set up in conjunction with Stonewall, to provide guidance to staff. In an Allies training meeting, BBC trainers used language and material around sex and gender which is contested. The "genderbred person" - a graphic used by groups like Stonewall to explain sex and gender issues - was presented to staff, with no alternate views presented.
The Nolan Investigates podcast understands that the Diversity and Inclusion department had a role in the drafting of the latest BBC News style guide around issues of sexuality and gender. The style guide sets a standard for the language used by BBC News, often in contested areas.
The document defines homosexuality as "people of either sex who are attracted to people of their own gender". This is similar to the definition used by Stonewall, and different from the standard dictionary definition, in that it defines attraction as based on gender rather than sex.
These definitions are at the centre of a fierce debate over sex and gender issues. The document was ultimately signed off by BBC News.
Sam Smith, an investigative journalist who left the BBC recently after working there for 25 years, told the podcast she thinks that some people within the BBC are frightened to speak out to say what they really think about Stonewall.
She also believes the relationship has had an effect on the corporation's output.
"How can it not have a chilling effect when it is writ large across the BBC that we are a [Stonewall] champion. I can't think of anything else that the BBC has done that's in the same ball park."
Image caption,The charity has campaigned for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights since 1989
She says: "The trouble is the impartiality element of this, for people who do not agree with Stonewall's campaigning position on the gender identity issue, it is not nice for an organisation to align itself with Stonewall and Stonewall's mission".
She said she had queried the BBC's use of "political" and "campaigning" language but was told "the BBC had checked this with Stonewall and Stonewall were fine they were fine with it and therefore the BBC was fine with it".
The BBC did not take part in the podcast. In a statement, they said that the BBC "acts independently in all our aspects of our operations, from HR policy to editorial guidelines and content".
"We are not a member of Stonewall, we do not take legal advice from Stonewall and we do not subscribe to Stonewall's campaigning. The charity simply provides advice that we are able to consider.
"As a broadcaster, we have our own values and editorial standards - these are clearly set out and published in our editorial guidelines. We are also governed by the Royal Charter and the Ofcom broadcasting code."
In a statement, Stonewall told the Nolan Investigates podcast: "It is completely normal and appropriate for charities to engage with public sector organisations to advocate for their beneficiaries to improve public policy. It is also completely normal and appropriate for charities to support public sector organisations through service provision.
"We are proud of work to support public sector organisations to create an inclusive workplace for their LGBTQ+ employees. Our guidance to employers supports them to understand the needs of their LGBTQ+ employees and create an inclusive workplace culture through their policies and wider activity."
The Nolan Investigates podcast also examines changes in the language used by governments across the UK after Stonewall requested changes, and looks at the advice provided by Stonewall to public bodies.
behindyourightnow
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 17, 2021
Unless you genuinely cannot afford it, every woman should get their bras fitted at a place devoted to it anyway, regardless of whether they are a 'specialty' size. It's worth it for a good fit. And someone who can buy a house in that area can afford it. He could probably afford someone to come to him.
It's amusing that apparently none of the women in his life have pulled him aside and told him he looks like this, except pointing downwards:
Probably 98% of the population is made up of 'TERFs' if you take the tranny definitions. Even people who would answer yes on all the surveys about supporting trans rights would baulk if you asked them if they approved of completely unrestricted self-ID or the idea that there's no such thing as biological sex. Which is exactly why big players in the trans lobby have admitted in their own documents to pushing through permissive self-ID laws quickly before anyone recognized what they were doing. After that, they're already in power and they can just scream "TERF!" at anyone who tries to question them:
The tactics are detailed in full within the handbook, including the instruction to “avoid excessive press coverage and exposure.” And specific reference was made to Ireland where, “activists have directly lobbied individual politicians and tried to keep press coverage to a minimum.”
O’Malley was right: the events of 2015 had been carefully managed. “In Ireland, Denmark and Norway, changes to the law on legal gender recognition were put through at the same time as other more popular reforms such as marriage equality legislation. This provided a veil of protection, particularly in Ireland, where marriage equality was strongly supported, but gender identity remained a more difficult issue to win public support for.”
It’s only now, six years on from the Irish Gender Recognition Act, that the public has been consulted. Not by the government, even now, but by The Countess, an Irish campaign to restore the privacy, dignity and safety of women and children in schools, workplaces, sport, changing rooms, toilets, hospitals, prisons and refuges. Opinion polling carried out for them by Red C – found that respondents were not impressed. Only 17% agreed with the 2015 law that allows someone to change their birth certificate as soon as they self-identify as the opposite sex. Rather more (34%) thought it should be permitted once a trans person has partially or fully transitioned through hormone treatment and/or genital surgery. But 28% felt that individuals should not be allowed to change the sex on their birth certificates at all.
Even younger people (aged 18-34) favoured no changes to birth certificates, as opposed to the laissez-faire approach that was pushed through parliament. Overall, men were more cautious than women — perhaps because they better understand what men can be like.
How the trans activists fooled Ireland
Politicians waved legislation through and the public isn't happy
unherd.com
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2021
Some good satire from Jane Claire Jones.
Prequel: A long time ago in a lesbian bar that no longer exists
Lesbians: We don’t have to treat you as women for sexual purposes, do we?
Many transsexual women: No, that’s cool
Nascent trans activists: Well, actually, if you don’t want to fuck us then it invalidates our womanhood and that is misgendering and it’s a human rights abuse and you should want to fuck us.
Lesbians: It’s a human rights abuse if we don’t want to fuck you? What the fuck?
Nascent trans activists: Yes, you should want to fuck us.
Lesbians: Even if you still have dicks?
Nascent trans activists: Even if we still have dicks.
Lesbians: Um yeah, sorry, we don’t do dicks. We’re LESBIANS.
Nascent trans activists: You are vagina fetishists with unconscious bias and are gatekeeping your vaginas. We are women and our dicks are women’s dicks. If you don’t want to fuck us, you’re bigots.
Lesbians: We’re not bigots, it’s just you’re male, and we fuck female people.
Nascent trans activists: LITERAL VIOLENCE. WE ARE WOMEN. YOU SHOULD WANT TO FUCK US.
Lesbians: Um yeah, we’re not really feeling that right now to be honest.
Nascent trans activists: TERF TERF TERF TERF TERF.
Lesbians: HEY PEOPLE! These people are pressuring our sexual boundaries because they say they’re women but the way they’re pressuring us doesn’t make us feel like they’re women…in fact, it makes us feel like they’re men and we don’t fuck men. We’re lesbians, we don’t fuck men. That’s the reason we did all the marching, so that was okay right? RIGHT????
(Nascent trans activists: TERF TERF TERF TERF TERF)
Lesbians: HEY PEOPLE!!! Could we get some fucking help here?
Rest of the LGB community and world: Did someone say something?
Lesbians: We don’t have to treat you as women for sexual purposes, do we?
Many transsexual women: No, that’s cool
Nascent trans activists: Well, actually, if you don’t want to fuck us then it invalidates our womanhood and that is misgendering and it’s a human rights abuse and you should want to fuck us.
Lesbians: It’s a human rights abuse if we don’t want to fuck you? What the fuck?
Nascent trans activists: Yes, you should want to fuck us.
Lesbians: Even if you still have dicks?
Nascent trans activists: Even if we still have dicks.
Lesbians: Um yeah, sorry, we don’t do dicks. We’re LESBIANS.
Nascent trans activists: You are vagina fetishists with unconscious bias and are gatekeeping your vaginas. We are women and our dicks are women’s dicks. If you don’t want to fuck us, you’re bigots.
Lesbians: We’re not bigots, it’s just you’re male, and we fuck female people.
Nascent trans activists: LITERAL VIOLENCE. WE ARE WOMEN. YOU SHOULD WANT TO FUCK US.
Lesbians: Um yeah, we’re not really feeling that right now to be honest.
Nascent trans activists: TERF TERF TERF TERF TERF.
Lesbians: HEY PEOPLE! These people are pressuring our sexual boundaries because they say they’re women but the way they’re pressuring us doesn’t make us feel like they’re women…in fact, it makes us feel like they’re men and we don’t fuck men. We’re lesbians, we don’t fuck men. That’s the reason we did all the marching, so that was okay right? RIGHT????
(Nascent trans activists: TERF TERF TERF TERF TERF)
Lesbians: HEY PEOPLE!!! Could we get some fucking help here?
Rest of the LGB community and world: Did someone say something?
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2018
The artist in questionSome Ayden Art. . Great attention to detail with all the scars & uneven nipples.Love the one in a wheel chair with the phallo
View attachment 2625022
That's a woman who hates being a woman.
THEY STOLE MY FORESKIN
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2021
Yeah looking back I wasn't expecting this much uproar when I posted that comment because others are thinking of the metropolitan areas of Brazil, where homophobia is more or less extinct, but in the more remote areas, at least in my social circle, this distinction is not really made, when I mean remote I mean places like this:
Like of course to someone from a big city the association may seem dumb, but this those around me and I also grew up hearing that teamsters (carroceiros, they're extremely common here) kidnap unaccompanied children, and I think you can't really expect these kind of people to have the same thought process as a city slicker. I mentioned in that comment in Portuguese that it's really hard to explain to someone who doesn't live here what is the kind of poverty and isolation that these people have to go through, so yeah of course it's common for us to have prejudice against femoids (am I using this word right?) because isolated and non-coordinated cases of pedophilia against boys mainly did happen very commonly at least where I grew up. Though maybe I'm misremembering this because I'm speaking from a "from what I remember" kind of place if you get what I mean, it's like maybe there were some cases that generated a lot of uproar and created this sort of "bogeyman"-style fear that I was talking about, I linked to a case where a car mechanic kidnapped and killed 17 boys which I remember caused a lot of discussion back then (https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_das_Chagas_Rodrigues_de_Brito)
The city where the crimes occurred look like this btw
So basically I was trying to explain why there's so much homophobia in Brazil at least from my personal recollection, of course if you think of the big cities I will indeed sound like a retard and maniac but those places have barely any homophobia to be begin with anymore (until like 10 years ago they also had hate groups targeting gays) unless you count those who do hate them but don't say anything
Thanks for listening to my TED Talk
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2021
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2017
That's five people out of nearly a hundred, though. Given that 1 in 9 women were sexually abused as minors, and that 82% of CSA victims are female, I guarantee you the statistics-- 1 in 20-- are about the same for straight men. I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts that you'd get the same result if you pulled up a list of 100 random straight men.
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2021
Overall, men were more cautious than women — perhaps because they better understand what men can be like.
How the trans activists fooled Ireland
Politicians waved legislation through and the public isn't happy
Aw, shit, shots fired!
...not a bad assumption, though.
Pope Negro Joe the XIIIth
AI Pope of Entropic Declesiastics/Ver. U+1F0ED
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2017
So women letting them in was the patriarchy?
Garbage.Theory
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2020
So many filters on this damn thing even Karl Marx is looking pretty.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2020
Those images gave me paranoid schizophrenia
behindyourightnow
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 17, 2021
To some extent, yes, since transwomen are men, and many women are trained from birth to give men what they want and to appease them at all costs. Transwomen take very canny advantage of that by using the tactics that will trigger most women's fear of men (like threatening violence and rape to any woman who steps out of line), which causes most women to suppress their own discomfort and stay quiet. Most of this happens unconsciously. The overenthusiastic acceptance and attention and constant fawning that transwomen get (that transmen do not) is a clearer sign of patriarchy than most things I can think of.
If only they knew that they could be cute as boys too. They don't need to be girls to be cute.
Pope Negro Joe the XIIIth
AI Pope of Entropic Declesiastics/Ver. U+1F0ED
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2017
I have heard this my entire life and have never met a woman like that. Maybe it's just where I live, I don't know.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2020
Idk about this whole patriarchy causing trannyism thing... patriarchs tend to be pretty based
Pic related: an "ebil patriarch" telling the troons to shut the fuck up
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2021
This Dyke reminds me of a really wealthy, heavily tattooed "guntuber" who was really into NFA Items (Machineguns, Rifles with barrels that are less than 16" and have an overall length of less than 26", Shotguns with a barrel length less than 18'' and an overall length of 28'', Hand Grenades and other bombs but I don't think he had any of those) named Zak Havok. He practically disappeared off the face of the earth a few years back and I think he used to do Bounty hunting or some shit or might have been one of those rent-a-cops who come grab you for minor bail violations.
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2020
Can you retards stop with the radfem conspiracy theories? I feel like we can't make fun of trannies anymore without having a bunch of roasties go "The patriarchy caused the trans epidemic because it forced people to confirm to gender roles!!1 Women are literally oppressed and brainwashed into serving men!! Literally the Handmaiden's Tale!!"
This isn't the Oppression Olympics thread. Stop derailing the thread with needless bullshit. Go to Ovarit if you want to sperg about the patriarchy. And while you're at it, go back to the thread's original roots: making fun of trannies.
This isn't the Oppression Olympics thread. Stop derailing the thread with needless bullshit. Go to Ovarit if you want to sperg about the patriarchy. And while you're at it, go back to the thread's original roots: making fun of trannies.
