Megathread Tranny Sideshows on Social Media - Any small-time spectacle on Reddit, Tumblr, Twitter, Dating Sites, and other social media.

That makes me laugh. Doesn't pee in hours!

In university, I'd have 3 hour long lectures. You didn't often see anyone to get up to pee. Those were often followed by 15 min to get to your next class, despite it being a 20 min walk across campus.

Welcome to the crazy world of holding one's bladder like an adult
 
"She is going HOURS at university without peeing"! "I did not notice". This is what normal parents of people with kids in uni halfway done with medical studies are supposed to do, notice their legally adult offspring's urinary habits. How could she not notice? I hope Mum doesn't beat herself up too much about this.
A med student who can't even think of using a pee bottle should be dismissed.
 
The "daughter" who totally exists is probably like six foot tall anyway, just go in the men's if you're afraid of being murdered by the TERFs hanging out in the ladies, nobody will care. Campuses are full of weirdos. "She might get raped!!!!" How many rapes do you think happen in the men's rooms of medical schools during class times?

Millie is still posting as of 5AM UK time:
1648103225600.png

1648103236078.png
 
"Queefs" are the least of a troon's worries. From a thread on one of our recently discovered lolcows:
a2c2530b-9888-4a77-9de4-9844d2fec0ca-jpeg.3100456
So is this the dumb shit I'm supposed to expect in my womens spaces for the sake of "inclusivity"?

In the same space we might be trading birth trauma stories we've also got to listen to some dude go "Shitting out my vagina is a real drag, am I right girls?"
 
Last edited:
Millie is still posting as of 5AM UK time:
View attachment 3103154
Definitely a real mother! We all know moms these days have time to stay up at night 2 through 5 in the morning and be extremely online.

Also that second tweet is disingenuous as fuck. Trannies aren't literally controlling the government, schools, NHS (not yet) but that's a literal fucking technicality because you know all the non-trannies in those institutions are pandering to them like their life depends on it. Don't pretend that trannies are "going against gender roles," if anything they're doing the fucking opposite by grotesquely obsessing over what it means to be a woman and a man and going to these absurd lengths that all end up firmly cementing gender roles even more. Signs do not literally stop predators but you're fucking dense if you think predators arent just going to play pretend girl and walk into the bathrooms willy nilly.
 
There was a "loaded question" and "attack" at the Supreme Court hearings:
View attachment 3103225View attachment 3103232
Sen. Blackburn's questions were really in bad faith though, I just listened to that bit of questioning earlier today and I feel much less like Jackson avoided answering it because she doesn't know what a woman really is and more because she knew that answering it in any way was just going to open her up to more attacks one way or the other. When Blackburn tried to go after her for writing in a college paper that judges have "personal hidden agendas" which isn't even a controversial opinion, just an uncomfortable truth she really just embarrassed herself. It showed that she was not going in there with any sort of intention of allowing Jackson to win her over, she was just going to try to set her up with questions that didn't have answers that would alienate a significant part of the Senate she needs every vote she can get, and asking her what a woman is was obviously just one of those.

The way I see it, Jackson had three options.
  1. "An adult human female"
  2. "A person who identifies with a woman"
  3. "I don't think that this is the appropriate time and place to hash that out"
1 would have made me very happy, but it would have cost her at least a few votes from the Democrats and probably wouldn't win her a single Republican vote. 2 would have made me very upset, but it would have cost her what few Republican votes she might get, possibly some Democratic votes, and probably wouldn't sway any Democrats who weren't already on her side. 3 Made me feel annoyed, but probably didn't cost her any votes or gain her any votes. Tactically she made the right choice, though I can still wish she went with #1.
 
Sen. Blackburn's questions were really in bad faith though, I just listened to that bit of questioning earlier today and I feel much less like Jackson avoided answering it because she doesn't know what a woman really is and more because she knew that answering it in any way was just going to open her up to more attacks one way or the other. When Blackburn tried to go after her for writing in a college paper that judges have "personal hidden agendas" which isn't even a controversial opinion, just an uncomfortable truth she really just embarrassed herself. It showed that she was not going in there with any sort of intention of allowing Jackson to win her over, she was just going to try to set her up with questions that didn't have answers that would alienate a significant part of the Senate she needs every vote she can get, and asking her what a woman is was obviously just one of those.

The way I see it, Jackson had three options.
  1. "An adult human female"
  2. "A person who identifies with a woman"
  3. "I don't think that this is the appropriate time and place to hash that out"
1 would have made me very happy, but it would have cost her at least a few votes from the Democrats and probably wouldn't win her a single Republican vote. 2 would have made me very upset, but it would have cost her what few Republican votes she might get, possibly some Democratic votes, and probably wouldn't sway any Democrats who weren't already on her side. 3 Made me feel annoyed, but probably didn't cost her any votes or gain her any votes. Tactically she made the right choice, though I can still wish she went with #1.
Well, yes, all the questions are pretty bad faith or worse, I doubt she could actually lose any Democrat votes from anything she says though.

She did at least say to ask a biologist rather than a gender studies professor. (Personally I would have said to ask a "trans activist" on Twitter and perhaps listed a few of those that "Millie Corner" chose to follow on her first day on Twitter.)
 
Signs do not literally stop predators but you're fucking dense if you think predators arent just going to play pretend girl and walk into the bathrooms willy nilly.
Signs do nothing to stop predators but culture around the signs definitely can. If everyone knows that a male doesn't belong in female bathrooms then if someone looking like man going there will get nasty looks, women will feel uneasy and not go, woman might yell, men will call them out before going in, men will response to woman yelling and most importantly the predators know they most likely will get caught. Sometimes this can result awkward moments to really manly looking women but as they are rare and usually it's more stays in awkward than actual problem territory.
 
I like this one cause it's true and circles back to trans people whining that they're not representative in health care.

Stop becoming grifters and computer programmers and get into science. Become a leader in genetics, biology, surgery or whatever and show us why we are wrong if all these cis scientists are just against you.

Stop focusing on swimming in a girl's league, running a female domestic abuse shelter and using one bathroom over the other.

"Do better."
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20220324-011226_Twitter.jpg
    Screenshot_20220324-011226_Twitter.jpg
    422.2 KB · Views: 221
There was a "loaded question" and "attack" at the Supreme Court hearings:
View attachment 3103225
Look, I sympathise with Jackson because even if she were a secret Farmer, what the hell is she going to be able to say in public when all her Tranny enablers are watching her? Black Women are notoriously pro-Terf but they know that the side protecting them is also troon-infested and sometimes you gotta play the cards close to the chest. They want a troon-friendly judge, and once Clarence leaves SCOTUS is going to be absent an Actual Black Person (TM)
 
"Millie" is still responding!
1648109788666.png


All despite saying she was going to bed hours ago, guess she had to keep checking due to her now 32K likes constantly notifying her:
1648109990335.png


But she's so brave and inspiring:
1648110095213.png1648110170569.png1648110241972.png

There was only one reply suggesting parts of it seemed fake and it got lots of other replies like this:
1648110559898.png1648110582106.png1648110602712.png1648110610851.png

edit: elsewhere:
1648112785038.png

1648112834356.png
 
Last edited:
Todays BRAVE and STUNNING parent hops on and creates a brand new Twitter account to debunk J.K. Rowling's genocide propaganda:
View attachment 3102539View attachment 3102541View attachment 3102542View attachment 3102543
View attachment 3102551
View attachment 3102549

Every single account they followed on their first day on Twitter:
View attachment 3102565View attachment 3102567

Thread if you want to check out any of the many troon profiles in the replies: https://twitter.com/MillieCorner2/status/1506759003606503426
Well hello Colin Montgomery, nice alt you've got there....
 
Someone so young they think the 80s were like the medieval mists of yore
A 27 yo co-worker recently explained to me how the early 2000's workplace was some kind of hellscape of sexual harassment and racism and she knows this because she learned it at university, from people who have never worked in the private sector, in 2014. :story:
edit: elsewhere:
1648112785038.png
"You know who else thinks women don't have big hairy penises? Vladimir Putin :smug:"
 
When I see "bottom surgery" pics like the ones above, I'm always reminded of the patently false and divorced from reality claims that troons make, re:going to the gyno and the dr not being able to tell it's a front hole and nothing more.

Apart from birth defects or genital mutilation, there is no way any natal female out there has a box that looks like that.:cryblood:
They interpret "did not cringe" as "believed that was an actual vagina." It is the same as when they say things like the cashier "couldn't tell they were trans" because they called them "ma'm," when in reality the 19 year old worker just didn't want to get yelled at and be the victim of a witch hunt driven by a desire to get them fired led by an autistic pizzaface.
 
Sen. Blackburn's questions were really in bad faith though, I just listened to that bit of questioning earlier today and I feel much less like Jackson avoided answering it because she doesn't know what a woman really is and more because she knew that answering it in any way was just going to open her up to more attacks one way or the other. When Blackburn tried to go after her for writing in a college paper that judges have "personal hidden agendas" which isn't even a controversial opinion, just an uncomfortable truth she really just embarrassed herself. It showed that she was not going in there with any sort of intention of allowing Jackson to win her over, she was just going to try to set her up with questions that didn't have answers that would alienate a significant part of the Senate she needs every vote she can get, and asking her what a woman is was obviously just one of those.

The way I see it, Jackson had three options.
  1. "An adult human female"
  2. "A person who identifies with a woman"
  3. "I don't think that this is the appropriate time and place to hash that out"
1 would have made me very happy, but it would have cost her at least a few votes from the Democrats and probably wouldn't win her a single Republican vote. 2 would have made me very upset, but it would have cost her what few Republican votes she might get, possibly some Democratic votes, and probably wouldn't sway any Democrats who weren't already on her side. 3 Made me feel annoyed, but probably didn't cost her any votes or gain her any votes. Tactically she made the right choice, though I can still wish she went with #1.
I've noticed if you say "adult human female" troons try and correct you that it's "adult female human" but don't like it when you correctly define what a female is.
 
A 27 yo co-worker recently explained to me how the early 2000's workplace was some kind of hellscape of sexual harassment and racism and she knows this because she learned it at university, from people who have never worked in the private sector, in 2014. :story:

"You know who else thinks women don't have big hairy penises? Vladimir Putin :smug:"
My grandmother talked about sexism at work and she joined to the work forse at 1950s. She did talk about sexual harassment her female coworker experienced because she wasn't allowed wear pants. They worked in a tax department and had a fairly strict dress code that included a dress or a skirt for the ladies. The coworker wanted pants but their boss said it was inappropriate. Thing is she wanted the pants because a part of her job was inspecting ships and the guys made her climb ladders before them so they could peak under her skirt. Still no pants and what I gathered from grandma it didn't stop her from doing her job nor that the guys did anything beyond having a little looksies. Seemingly everyone treated it as guys being cheeky rather anything serious and even for the women the issue was being annoyed rules that didn't allow her put stop it without fuss.

I think that kinda puts it into perspective. Now days this wouldn't happen witch I don't exactly see as negative but otherhand when it did the girls were completely able to handle it without drama or trauma.
 
Back