Erin Reed / Anthony Reed II / @ErinInTheMorn / @ErinInTheMorning / @ErinInTheNight / _supernovasky_ / beholderseye / realitybias / AnonymousRabbit - post-op transbian Twitter/TikTok "activist" with bad fashion, giant Reddit tattoo. Former drug dealer with felony. Married to Zooey Simone Zephyr / Zachary Todd Raasch.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
So he used to have braces for his teeth? If so then he must have stopped wearing his retainer, because if you do your teeth will probably start reverting to how they were pre-braces.
I think it depends on what the retainer is for. I had overcrowded vampire fangs as a teenager and the dentist removed the teeth below them and then I had a retainer to push the vampire fangs into the gap. Once that was done I just stopped using the retainer and it’s not like I grew new vampire fangs or anything.
 
No, these are things that were said to Tony - "Erin Reed" at the start is me having replaced his Discord username (InTheMorning#6375). I've edited the original post to make that clearer.
It's hilarious that he apparently thinks braces are a big deal, hugely inconvenient and painful, and as a result he hasnt gotten them - and yet he lopped off his dick and balls and had a fellow troon drill a hole in his taint that he has to stick stuff up twice a day. Truly a dizzying intellect.
 
I wonder, is Tony going to this: https://ourbodiesoursports.com/
Tony, go where there are women who disagree with him? It would be like voluntarily buying a one-way ticket to Dachau.

He has however whinged on Twitter that the US government hasn’t included sport in its changes to the Title IX regulations (archive):
F4B81E8B-8ABA-4EA8-BF0D-5A46DBF07588.jpeg
A2B631E4-EE0D-49C2-A982-B9C9E694CA74.jpeg
F4A26573-8312-4849-93D5-D08E3648147C.jpeg
33824BCC-1176-4CA1-A291-2345217AC8E6.jpeg

The bit of the document he cites where the government punts on sport:
75A5BB94-46FB-4296-8483-BC39B3C1BE07.jpeg

Bit baffling to me that these protections depend on the interpretation of the current executive rather than being written into the legislation, but then over here we have the GRA 2004 so hardly in a position to lecture anyone!

(Edit: For those unfamiliar with the GRA, it refers to “gender”, which is not a term with a customary definition in British law, nor is it defined in the Act itself. What does it mean? Who knows!)
 
Last edited:
The bit of the document he cites where the government punts on sport:
75A5BB94-46FB-4296-8483-BC39B3C1BE07.jpeg

Bit baffling to me that these protections depend on the interpretation of the current executive rather than being written into the legislation, but then over here we have the GRA 2004 so hardly in a position to lecture anyone!
That snippet sounds like it does exactly what Tony wants.

Title IX (education) and title VII (employment) both forbid discrimination in their respective fields based on sex.

The executive is responsible for actually enforcing that, so they get to decide how they direct their underlings to interpret it. Is it sex discrimination to keep males out of the women's sports? "Two women, one trans, one cis, only the male woman is kept out of women's sports, therefore sex discrimination."

It's stupid, but that's the question at hand.

Now this can always be resolved in the courts and then the executive can no longer claim ignorance about which was the intended interpretation. There are a few lawsuits bubbling up through the courts but no clue when we'll see those resolved. I think if they hit the Supreme Court, the troons will lose completely, but that might take awhile.
 
It's hilarious that he apparently thinks braces are a big deal, hugely inconvenient and painful, and as a result he hasnt gotten them - and yet he lopped off his dick and balls and had a fellow troon drill a hole in his taint that he has to stick stuff up twice a day. Truly a dizzying intellect.

That’s pretty typical for AGPs though, isn’t it? They want the magical transformation experience. They want the magic pills and the big one-time engineering project that will transform them into a woman. They have zero interest in things that require slow, unglamorous change with no fanfare (like braces) or anything that requires constant upkeep (like actually washing their hair and doing it nicely every day). Which is why you'll see many of them commit to huge transformational projects (breast implants, amhole installation, tracheal shaves) without bothering to pluck their eyebrows or even shave properly.

Same reason none of them can keep their rooms clean, and most of them can't hold down normal jobs. Anything that requires unglamorous daily work, without an immediate change that they can get praise and admiration for, is of little interest to them.

(Obviously, in reality an amhole actually is more work, with far less reward, than something like braces. But they don't conceive of it that way)
 
He has however whinged on Twitter that the US government hasn’t included sport in its changes to the Title IX regulations (archive):
View attachment 3418259
View attachment 3418256
Oh, god, I hope Tony and his followers do flood public comment for this, I want a bunch of dumb federal regulators to get peak transed since they're required to read them all.

Bit baffling to me that these protections depend on the interpretation of the current executive rather than being written into the legislation, but then over here we have the GRA 2004 so hardly in a position to lecture anyone!
Title IX was written in 1972 and was based on 1964 language extended to education. They weren't exactly foreseeing any disagreement about what sex and gender meant. (Also amusingly, that original insertion of "sex" into the 1964 language was possibly a poison pill to kill the entire thing by white supremacists and racists since they figured the "liberals" weren't yet liberal enough to want to extend civil rights laws to women. It didn't work.)
 
Last edited:
I too stared out the window after reading that... Just sheer amazement and grave concern, these are the retards we have to share a planet with?!

This is actually overlapping with my area of expertise and I can't even begin to sperg about how CRAZY FUCKTARD WRONG he is on this. I'm gonna spare you guys the diatribe about cellular metabolism but @Marvin is totally correct.

No wonder all these troons are so unhealthy. They're doing the most scary, retarded, shady shit to their bodies and never saying a word to doctors or getting any actual medical advice or treatment. A diet to "minimize your muscles" is fucking starvation and protein deficit, and it will make you mentally and physically ill very quickly. Amino acid (protein) therapy is incredibly helpful for a lot of people - did you know all your neurotransmitters are made from aminos? Guess what's not getting made on ur lil starvation diet, Tone? That's why you look not only super retarded lately, but shit miserable too. Be a man, eat a fucking burger.

Nothing about an amhole self lubricates (every patient I've known with one, besides pain/numbness, dryness and irritation are the most common complaints), and nothing about hormone treatment is reversible. Shit, I'm over here with permanent mast cell dysfunction after birth control pills, and I'm a true and honest woman.

The grooming is almost too much, those people are obviously severely mentally ill and in no shape for a rational conversation. I can't believe this is just indirect replies. I think I'd fucking blow an o-ring if I had to see everything he wrote in the Discord himself. Good work, @Geranium, I really wanna give you a medal today ❤️
I'd love a sperg. The more knowledge the better. It's a great redpill. What else do you know?
Tony, go where there are women who disagree with him? It would be like voluntarily buying a one-way ticket to Dachau.

He has however whinged on Twitter that the US government hasn’t included sport in its changes to the Title IX regulations (archive):
View attachment 3418259
View attachment 3418256
View attachment 3418257
View attachment 3418258

The bit of the document he cites where the government punts on sport:
View attachment 3418267

Bit baffling to me that these protections depend on the interpretation of the current executive rather than being written into the legislation, but then over here we have the GRA 2004 so hardly in a position to lecture anyone!

(Edit: For those unfamiliar with the GRA, it refers to “gender”, which is not a term with a customary definition in British law, nor is it defined in the Act itself. What does it mean? Who knows!)
I'm not fucking surprised he and other activists are pleased about this. Title IX being changed to allow males give Lia Thomas grounds to plea he's being discreet against. It is the end of women's sports. And since every women's organization, NOW, NARAL, etc, all support troons, this is a death knell.
That snippet sounds like it does exactly what Tony wants.

Title IX (education) and title VII (employment) both forbid discrimination in their respective fields based on sex.

The executive is responsible for actually enforcing that, so they get to decide how they direct their underlings to interpret it. Is it sex discrimination to keep males out of the women's sports? "Two women, one trans, one cis, only the male woman is kept out of women's sports, therefore sex discrimination."

It's stupid, but that's the question at hand.

Now this can always be resolved in the courts and then the executive can no longer claim ignorance about which was the intended interpretation. There are a few lawsuits bubbling up through the courts but no clue when we'll see those resolved. I think if they hit the Supreme Court, the troons will lose completely, but that might take awhile.
SCOTUS more or less ruled in favor of gender identity when they codified it as a basis for non discrimination. Title IX is naturally next.

Oh, @behindyourightnow The Pink Swastika discusses what you discussed in depth.
 
Oh, @behindyourightnow The Pink Swastika discusses what you discussed in depth.
The Pink Swastika is not a serious history. Lively and Abrams set off to show that “the gays did it” and, what do you know, that’s what they find. (It is based mainly on a post-war German book that was just one of a revisionist wave seeking to answer “How could Nazi atrocities have happened in good and pure and just Germany!?” Right up there with the myth of the clean Wehrmacht.)

The history of sexuality is not my field so I won’t hazard any book recommendations, but there is a transcript of an overview lecture by Geoffrey Giles (who is a specialist) on the US Holocaust Memorial Museum website. It’s good and short.
 
Yeah, I think it’s a bit of a jump from “some Nazis were gay and it wasn’t terribly important because authoritarian arseholes are often hypocritical“ to “Nazism was a conspiracy of butch leather-gays who threw the swishy gays under the bus.”
That would make a pretty good gay porn film though.
 
Anthony's reaction upon seeing that Roe V. Wade got overturned:
View attachment 3420977
Before I opened that, I fully expected to see Tony bitching about tranny "rights" as being connected somehow to abortion access, but I gotta admit that even I was shocked at how quickly he got right down to it. Not even a perfunctory "sad day for women everywhere" quip, just a statement of the news and immediately how it affects fetishists. Bravo, Tony. This was impressive even for you..
 
Condolences to US Kiwis who may now find themselves unable to get abortions.

That said, I do now wish to use this as a stick to beat Tony with. As we've discussed previously, Tony is obsessed with appeals to authority and having those in power validate his beliefs. I suspect that it is killing him that the highest court in the land has explicitly rejected his demands for "bodily autonomy" free from any kind of restriction:
bodily-autonomy.png

Tony may have been a PhD candidate but his reading comprehension is seriously 99th-percentile dunce shit. He cites Thomas's concurrance as meaning that contraception and same-sex marriage are next, as if Thomas is riding one of horses of the apocalypse.
thomas-due-process.png
I can't and won't comment on the politics of the court, but the reason why Thomas says that is because:
  • Those specific cases were cited in the case at hand;
  • Thomas disagrees with the "due process" argument (and repeatedly cites himself saying that in the past).
That's all a bit abstract, but taking a step back: Thomas's argument about "due process" is that it has been used as an arbitrary shield to give the protection of the constitution to things that cannot possibly be construed as being protected by the constitution.

And another step back: previous rulings used this device inappropriately in their decisions, effectively legislating from the bench, and so those decisions should be reviewed.

So what? Well, this is exactly the reasoning of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in overturning the High Court decision in Bell v Tavistock. Tony loves to cite the appeal judgement in Bell to, essentially, say: "The transphobes had a win but then some better judges came along and agreed with the trans!"

What actually happened is that the Court of Appeal said that the High Court had effectively legislated from the bench, using the power of the court to intervene in ways that are entirely inappropriate.

Honestly it just boggles my mind that Tony has spent the last 18 years trying to make himself out to be a political expert but he cares so little for actual politics. As in, changing things through majority support codified in new legislation, rather than relying on technocratic procedure.

Sorry, enough sperging from me, so picture time. He's making this stupid fucking argument still:
irreversible-damage.png

And the absolute brass neck of straight white man Tony "Erin" Reed, of the "Don't like pink? You must be a boy!" Party saying this:
patriarchy.png
 
more or less ruled in favor of gender identity when they codified it as a basis for non discrimination. Title IX is naturally next.
I'm guessing you're talking about Harris Funeral Homes vs EEOC or Bostock vs Clayton County?

That's not quite what they ruled. They ruled that it's discrimination to treat a male employee differently from a female employee. You can't fire a male for having a boyfriend if you don't fire female for having boyfriends. (I think the funeral home case was about uniforms, but it's the same idea)

Sex was still the operative characteristic; they didn't admit gender identity as a new protected characteristic, other than insofar as it relates to sex.

Trannies celebrated the decision, but they didn't really look closely at the reasoning. The reasoning ultimately sets them up to be fucked later on title IX.

When this comes to school sports, there's only two ways I can see this being interpreted.

Either 1) having separate male/female sports violates title IX because females get disproportionally more resources than objective athletic merit would justify; 2) females not having separate protected leagues violates title IX because they're not getting equal resources on the basis of their sex.

Either the Supreme Court will get rid of separate sports or they'll make them sex segregated.

Trannies don't like either of these outcomes.
Not literally everything needs to be in the constitution. Some very important things simply aren't constitutional issues, and sadly (or not), you just need to fight for them democratically, through the normal legislative process. I know, horrendously offensive that you actually have to persuade your fellow citizens to come to your side on an issue. Democracy is very transphobic.
women's rights destroyed, fetishistic rapists most affected.
Well y'know, how will the troons be able to pressure their 5'1" king transmen into aborting their little mistakes?
 
Back