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

[horsegirl666]

Calm down, and tell us ur house.

Why do you get mad about me telling how it actually happened? And back in 2007 when this stuff happened sjw movement didn't even exist as it is today. What pandering points do you think you got from making character gay back then? Damn zoomers

Rewriting history to suit your own agendas is annoying even when it wasn't the trannies doing it.

 

[ComZet]

It gets a pass because it's not usually framed as the individual's right to put on a dress and perv out in girls' bathrooms.

It's a fight for the group's right to put on dresses and perv out in girls' bathrooms.

So it's rarely "I'm personally offended by this", and usually "that's transphobic and offends my entire group!". That's why they can find a thousand excuses for individual troons' despicable behavior: a single individual cannot speak for the group, so even if the group is full of disgusting people the sanctity of the group is preserved.

That's also why so many of those "this is why I left the transgender/LGBTQ community!" posts boil down to "(...) and then I noticed just how awful everybody around me was!"

The activists of yesterday saw the inability for a wheelchair-bound person to use the stairs so fought for funding to build a ramp alongside the stairs.

The activists of today fought for the removal of the stairs entirely because it offends the wheelchair-bound person.

 

[DumbDude42]

I'll never understand why pissing in a public toilet is so validating.

they get off on making normal people (mostly women cause men rarely give a fuck) feel uncomfortable

 

[AvocadoToast]

#GenderWooWoo keeps giving!

FTM Troon attempts to school Glinner with a poorly shopped beard.
View attachment 1309845
https://twitter.com/gnomeboy17/status/1263503050616057856?s=20

http://archive.md/M8sb2

"trans people just want to live their lives in peace/piss in the toilet they want"

This claim is incompatible with the reality that they're all losing their shit because an author liked a tweet that merely stated biological facts.

 

[Kirkorov]

im fucking wheezing, jesus i gotta stop smoking pot because it took me a good five seconds to see the 'shoop. now that i've seen it though i cant unsee it. jesus why not just fucking wait for the testosterone, if they're even on it at all? i've seen some impressive ftm beards, but it takes them years longer than biological dudes to fill in. i guess they're just impatient and eager to assure themselves they're not gonna be called a girl in the men's room if they go in

Without the shitty "Stamp a beard" app, she looks like a regular 'ol lesbian. Sorry champ, you're a GIRL and you look like a girl.

She's probably also like 5'4' and weighs 120lbs. I don't think there is enough testosterone in the world to make that chick grow a full lumberjack beard. She'd end up one of these Aiden's who have that wispy teenage stache for life.

 

[Ashen One]

She didn't. She's a modestly intelligent British liberal and was spewing dumb shit entirely on her own.

"I never said Hermione wasn't black" was her response to a exceptional and racist controversy over theater theatre casting. She never claimed she had jogger "representation", she didn't like when actual non-theater-going racists claimed they were protecting her artistic vision throwing a hissy fit about a jogger theater actress.

Agreed that Rowling says what she believes regardless of others, but she definitely could have handled the whole black Hermione thing better. She could have said something like "Hermione could be black. Her actions are what defines her, not the color of her skin." and most people (i.e. not the people who think race is everything) would have agreed. Race was never a thing in the story, but Rowling was so disingenuous about the whole thing.

"I never said Hermione wasn't black." is disingenuous because not only there is a passage in the books saying "Hermione's white face" (which, ok, could just mean "pale" as she was scared at that moment), Rowling personally picked the actors for the movies, every illustration in every cover of the books show the main characters as white and J.K. herself drew the characters way back in 1999 with a clearly not black Hermione. Sure, she never said Hermione wasn't black, but she showed the character as a white girl every time before the theater theatre "controversy" and was pretty ok with that.

That being said, I agree with her that Hermione could be black because it changes nothing in the story and the people who were losing their shit over that are retãrded. In the end the whole thing was a stupid controversy about a fucking Harry Potter play that isn't canon and reads like a bad fanfic. The only thing that's somehow less important than that is the new Twilight book from Edward's point of view.

 

[neverendingmidi]

Agreed that Rowling says what she believes regardless of others, but she definitely could have handled the whole black Hermione thing better. She could have said something like "Hermione could be black. Her actions are what defines her, not the color of her skin." and most people (i.e. not the people who think race is everything) would have agreed. Race was never a thing in the story, but Rowling was so disingenuous about the whole thing.

"I never said Hermione wasn't black." is disingenuous because not only there is a passage in the books saying "Hermione's white face" (which, ok, could just mean "pale" as she was scared at that moment), Rowling personally picked the actors for the movies, every illustration in every cover of the books show the main characters as white and J.K. herself drew the characters way back in 1999 with a clearly not black Hermione. Sure, she never said Hermione wasn't black, but she showed the character as a white girl every time before the theater theatre "controversy" and was pretty ok with that.

That being said, I agree with her that Hermione could be black because it changes nothing in the story and the people who were losing their shit over that are retãrded. In the end the whole thing was a stupid controversy about a fucking Harry Potter play that isn't canon and reads like a bad fanfic. The only thing that's somehow less important than that is the new Twilight book from Edward's point of view.

I didn't care because it was a stage play. I saw an Asian girl play as Eponine in Les Miserables. It didn't bother me. Plays/musicals/operas have 40 year women playing 16 year olds all the damn time, race is just another thing to skipover.

 

[Neko GF]

https://www.reddit.com/r/transpassi...le_for_the_kiwifarm_kulaks_doxxing_people_on/ (Archive)

What do Kulaks have to do with anything? Does he want to send us all to the gulags for making fun of him and his clique?

 

[Corn Flakes]

View attachment 1310131
https://www.reddit.com/r/transpassi...le_for_the_kiwifarm_kulaks_doxxing_people_on/ (Archive)

What do Kulaks have to do with anything? Does he want to send us all to the gulags for making fun of him and his clique?

When you're all commies, "kulak" is an insult.

For reference,

Kulak [...] was the term describing peasants with over 8 acres (3.2 hectares) of land towards the end of the Russian Empire. In the early Soviet Union, particularly Soviet Russia and Azerbaijan, kulak became a vague reference to property ownership among peasants, who were considered "hesitating" allies of the revolution. The kulaks were decimated following orders by Joseph Stalin, to guarantee collectivisation in the 1930s.​

I will, however, give them credit for a mildly creative nickname. We're all kiwifarmers, after all. And troons (among other lolcows) give us very large fields to harvest from. So it all adds up as far as I'm concerned.

My only question is: do we, as kulaks, get to wear nice hats?

 

[Lurk]

Fuck, took too long fishing out hideous troons and got ninja'd
Opened up transpassing for my evening guffaw at troons, and saw this honestly unremarkable picture with an interesting title:

Who knew that "laughing at ugly trannies" = doxxing.
Given the presence of a choker and the fried/thinning hair, I'm guessing this one is a guy but fuck knows.

Anyway, some more beauties

Burn it

Fucking hell lmaoooo

The dong certainly isn't helping, my mans

"Feeling euphoric with a face mask" Also, how is this guy only 26?!

You need to put the hat back on, that's one hell of an eighthead

 

[D.Va]

View attachment 1310131
https://www.reddit.com/r/transpassi...le_for_the_kiwifarm_kulaks_doxxing_people_on/ (Archive)

What do Kulaks have to do with anything? Does he want to send us all to the gulags for making fun of him and his clique?

A thousand-yard stare is not a smile

 

[remiem]

I mean, she was clearly pandering by making him suddenly gay. Remember, this came after the series had finished, and gay marriage was a hot topic issue, and this was a great way to get some free publicity. She acted all "surprised" when no one else realized he was gay, but it's such a load of bullshit, especially when you consider that she was already getting shat on by religious parents who saw her series as teaching witchcraft. If there was any hint of a gay character in it, those same nutty parents would have screamed about it years earlier. I don't buy that it was written in some "British" way and that the USA audience couldn't tell, because this reveal surprised everyone, not just the USA demographic.

Maybe she really did see Dumbeldore as gay when she wrote wrote the series, but she clearly knew that even hinting about it wouldn't be a smart move when she started publishing. It's not really that complicated. She wrote a book during a time when being gay wasn't socially acceptable, by the time she finished the series, that view had changed.

IMO. She could very easily have written him seeing him as such the thing is he's just not flamboyantly so, it's another way the LGBT-insanity end up being a laughing stock. How does one write a character whose secondary and have them be gay while never having a situation come up where explicitly stating or showing that they are? You literally can't. The howling rainbows of online don't consider representation valid unless it's in your face, constantly. They don't want a character with depth who happens to be (________), they want a (__________) whose a character and whose defining attribute is implicitly linked to their gender/sexuality and that it's constantly being brought up. Half the time they scream for representation but the representation they want is a character written as a over the top stereotype otherwise they aren't being gay enough to actually be called representation. Subtly is lost on them.

It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Dumbledore can be gay, be true to his character, AND be a good gay character. It's no issue because there's never a reason for him to ever bring it up. Imagine shoehorning in a scene to hammer home the point that this 150 year old man likes to bang dudes, it would be incredibly skeevy and awkward given it's Harry's story. He's dealing with things far more important than his sexuality and he isn't the one whose story is being followed. He is a well written gay character for that reason. However because she didn't have him riding a rainbow broomstick, decked out in pride flag robes, dispelling glitter, and going Yasssssss! Witch slay! her mentioning of it makes it 'pandering' and 'appealing to the left wingnuts'.

 

[💗Freddie Freaker💗]

Why do you get mad about me telling how it actually happened? And back in 2007 when this stuff happened sjw movement didn't even exist as it is today. What pandering points do you think you got from making character gay back then? Damn zoomers

Rewriting history to suit your own agendas is annoying even when it wasn't the trannies doing it.

In 2007 the SJW movement wasn't around, but gay pandering was pretty hip. Gay stuff started getting popular in the early 2000's with shows like Queer Eye, at least in the USA. Legalize gay marriage is a phrase I recall hearing often.

That being said, I agree people are making way too big of a deal about the Dumbledore is gay thing. It could be pandering or it could be an attempt to show that gays are normal people and taking it up the poopchute doesn't have to be their entire personality.

 

[Crunchy Leaf]

Fuck, took too long fishing out hideous troons and got ninja'd
Opened up transpassing for my evening guffaw at troons, and saw this honestly unremarkable picture with an interesting title:View attachment 1310095
Who knew that "laughing at ugly trannies" = doxxing.
Given the presence of a choker and the fried/thinning hair, I'm guessing this one is a guy but fuck knows.

Anyway, some more beauties
View attachment 1310108
View attachment 1310112
Burn it

View attachment 1310114
View attachment 1310119
View attachment 1310120
View attachment 1310121
View attachment 1310126
Fucking hell lmaoooo
View attachment 1310129
The dong certainly isn't helping, my mans
View attachment 1310133
View attachment 1310137
"Feeling euphoric with a face mask" Also, how is this guy only 26?!
View attachment 1310138
View attachment 1310143
You need to put the hat back on, that's one hell of an eighthead

‘No makeup do I pass?’ No, you don’t. Why do they do this? If you’re a troon, wouldn’t you want to be wearing a full face all the time?

 

[Mariposa Electrique]

Why do you get mad about me telling how it actually happened? And back in 2007 when this stuff happened sjw movement didn't even exist as it is today. What pandering points do you think you got from making character gay back then? Damn zoomers

Rewriting history to suit your own agendas is annoying even when it wasn't the trannies doing it.

Can you give us your name and address, so we can send you some free literature?!

 

[T0oCoolFool]

IMO. She could very easily have written him seeing him as such the thing is he's just not flamboyantly so, it's another way the LGBT-insanity end up being a laughing stock. How does one write a character whose secondary and have them be gay while never having a situation come up where explicitly stating or showing that they are? You literally can't. The howling rainbows of online don't consider representation valid unless it's in your face, constantly. They don't want a character with depth who happens to be (________), they want a (__________) whose a character and whose defining attribute is implicitly linked to their gender/sexuality and that it's constantly being brought up. Half the time they scream for representation but the representation they want is a character written as a over the top stereotype otherwise they aren't being gay enough to actually be called representation.

It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Dumbledore can be gay, be true to his character, AND be a good gay character. It's no issue because there's never a reason for him to ever bring it up. Imagine shoehorning in a scene to hammer home the point that this 150 year old man likes to bang dudes, it would be incredibly skeevy and awkward given it's Harry's story. He's dealing with things far more important than his sexuality and he isn't the one whose story is being followed. He is a well written gay character for that reason. However because she didn't have him riding a rainbow broomstick, decked out in pride flag robes, dispelling glitter, and going Yasssssss! Witch slay! her mentioning of it makes it 'pandering' and 'appealing to the left wingnuts'.

For the record, I don't care of Dumbledore is gay or not. I see the debate broken up into two main camps: Either you think she sucks because she didn't make Dumbledore a loud gay leather daddy, or you think people are overreacting because there is no way to make a non-obtrusive gay character in a children's book. I think both arguments are bad, especially the latter, because it really isn't hard to write a gay character in a subtle way.

J.K. Rowling showed both main characters and secondary characters having crushes, experiencing sexual tension, and building new romantic relationships without ever getting vulgar about it. J.K. Rowling could have easily done the same thing with Dumbledore. She could have done something like, make Dumbledore have photo on his desk of a dead husband that he mentions in passing, or someone could passively mention that Dumbledore dated some other professor back in his youth and that's why it's awkward between them, etc. There are tons of possibilities and ways to mention it without losing focus of the story or making it an SJW cringe fest. I would consider anyone who claims they can't write a gay character without it being loud and vulgar to be a bad writer.

That being said, I still maintain that this was nothing more than a publicity stunt, especially given the timing. People seem to forget that there was lots of bitching about the final book. There were lots of complaints that it was boring (Half the book was focused on being stuck in a forest), it felt rushed, and the ending was very cliche and underwhelming.

edit: clarity.

 

[Monolith]

My tip is take pics of your dog, without you in them.

 

[Unog]

Fuck, took too long fishing out hideous troons and got ninja'd
Opened up transpassing for my evening guffaw at troons, and saw this honestly unremarkable picture with an interesting title:
Who knew that "laughing at ugly trannies" = doxxing.
Given the presence of a choker and the fried/thinning hair, I'm guessing this one is a guy but fuck knows.

Anyway, some more beauties


Burn it


View attachment 1310120


Fucking hell lmaoooo

The dong certainly isn't helping, my mans


"Feeling euphoric with a face mask" Also, how is this guy only 26
You need to put the hat back on, that's one hell of an eighthead

This post is why aliens don't visit us, and makes God cry.

I regret entering this thread and I shall never return.

 

[NoReturn]

Fuck, took too long fishing out hideous troons and got ninja'd
Opened up transpassing for my evening guffaw at troons, and saw this honestly unremarkable picture with an interesting title:View attachment 1310095
Who knew that "laughing at ugly trannies" = doxxing.
Given the presence of a choker and the fried/thinning hair, I'm guessing this one is a guy but fuck knows.

Anyway, some more beauties
View attachment 1310108
View attachment 1310112
Burn it

View attachment 1310114
View attachment 1310119
View attachment 1310120
View attachment 1310121
View attachment 1310126
Fucking hell lmaoooo
View attachment 1310129
The dong certainly isn't helping, my mans
View attachment 1310133
View attachment 1310137
"Feeling euphoric with a face mask" Also, how is this guy only 26?!
View attachment 1310138
View attachment 1310143
You need to put the hat back on, that's one hell of an eighthead

The 26 year old and the 19 year old. What makes them age so fast!?

 

[Kujo Jotaro]

For the record, I don't care of Dumbledore is gay or not. I see the debate broken up into two main camps: Either you think she sucks because she didn't make Dumbledore a loud gay leather daddy, or you think people are overreacting because there is no way to make a non-obtrusive gay character in a children's book. I think both arguments are bad, especially the latter, because it really isn't hard to write a gay character in a subtle way.

J.K. Rowling showed both main characters and secondary characters having crushes, experiencing sexual tension, and building new romantic relationships without ever getting vulgar about it. J.K. Rowling could have easily done the same thing with Dumbledore. She could have done something like, make Dumbledore have photo on his desk of a dead husband that he mentions in passing, or someone could passively mention that Dumbledore dated some other professor back in his youth and that's why it's awkward between them, etc. There are tons of possibilities and ways to mention it without losing focus of the story or making it an SJW cringe fest. I would consider anyone who claims they can't write a gay character without it being loud and vulgar to be a bad writer.

That being said, I still maintain that this was nothing more than a publicity stunt, especially given the timing. People seem to forget that there was lots of bitching about the final book. There were lots of complaints that it was boring (Half the book was focused on being stuck in a forest), it felt rushed, and the ending was very cliche and underwhelming.

edit: clarity.

Ok can you guys take this discussion to a different thread? Whether Dumbledore is gay, and whether JK Rowling made him gay for woke points has nothing to do with trannies reeing, even if they're reeing over JK Rowling.