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

cuddle striker said:
Please enough with the tits. Muscle is what gay men want on a chest. There's a reason bears and flabs are less-desired in the gay scene, to the point that they're had to build an entire subculture (and even then, without the hair, nobody wants tits).

Most (not all, just most) gay men want a masculine guy. It's the reason you're gay. Even femme gay men have a harder time getting laid than a stacked dude. Twinks are not feminine, they're just men with a younger, sportier look.

All this talk about pussies is repugnant. I know that a lot of gay men date MtFs to "pass" as straight, internalized homophobia can be really strong. But if you're gay, you don't want puss.
I really empathize with lesbians here. They don't want dick. It doesn't matter what you staple to it, there are no magic words that will make a dyke want your dick.

At least the FtM are socialized as women and are less likely to get violent about it all.
Click to expand...
Pegtits, boypussy, himbo and so on aren't the language because secretly they are into girly bits. No, it's guys trying to be funny. Sure it's not that clever or classy humor but it's still humor. Taking common words that straight guys express their intrest in females and modifying to fit with guys, because expressing intrest in guys is gay. FtMs no need to ably.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Lt.Munchie, Aaa0aaa0, Circular Tyrant and 8 others
Yangon said:
But gender is whatever you identify as, so you don't need to have surgery to reassign it. And how is turning your penis into a neovagina "gender affirming"? I thought women with penises were perfectly valid, but now you're suggesting you need to remove your precious girldick to affirm your gender, you bigot?

Actually the first name made most sense - they were changing their genitals from one biological sex to another. Yes I know that you can't change your biological sex, but still the name was the most descriptive and common-sense one. But then they decided that sex is also a social construct and/or a spectrum and genitals have nothing to do with gender, so that name is probably considered transphobic now.

If they followed their own rules, they would call it something like Dysphoria Alleviation Surgery, which makes no reference to gender or sex.
Click to expand...
I dont have it on hand, but I remember seeing a screenshot of a Twitter user saying exactly that: that transgender surgery is transphobic because it implies penises can't be female and vaginas can't be male.
Also if we were really going with that logic, you can't call it dysphoria alleviation surgery either since that implies you need dysphoria to be trans and that's transphobic/truscum.
 
  • Like
  • Lunacy
Reactions: thermocline, Mrs. Adams, Dial M for Misgender and 6 others
72EC0452-E4ED-4F44-A246-B9647900D12E.jpeg
 
  • Lunacy
  • Like
Reactions: Lizard Pope, thermocline, Osyth Osyth and 15 others
Sothis said:
Do these people not realise that pressuring someone into having sex with them by threatening to out them as transphobic is rape? Weren't thesee the same people going on about how no means no several years ago?
Click to expand...
Considering that they think words are violent only when towards marginalized groups, I would say no. In these circles double standards are so usual that this is unlikely to raise eyebrow.

To more seriously and fairly, there seems to be quite alot of infighting about this. Even among true believer trans activists there is huge arguments over if not being attracted to trans is or isn't transphobic, as well as what people should do about it. All seem to agree at least aloud that not being attracted to a specific transperson is fine. This can been seen as sign of transphobia but even these nuts know not nobody is attracted everyone so it gets begrudgingly pass even from the extremists. The actual issue lies if you close of all transpeople, especially those you should be attracted to according to your sexuality (so lesbian should be attracted to transwomen but not transmen). Some think that people should just stop being babies, open their bodies and suck the uncomfortable feelings till they get over their transphobic "preferences". Other think that if people just studied their feelings they would notice that their preferences are unfounded and would happily have sex a transperson. Some think that right to say no trumps over transphobia in this instance but it's still transphobic if you reject someone just for being trans and you should feel bad, but don't feel obligated to have pity sex. Last group eather thinks it's not transphobic or it's irrelevant if it's transphobic, nobody owns sex, relationship or attraction to anyone for anyreason.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Lunacy
Reactions: Osyth Osyth, DrShithead, Officer Maggot and 6 others
Hopefully, a day will come when trans groups will be labelled as terrorist organisations:

Transgender-Identifying Activist Makes Homemade Bomb After Being Called ‘Sir’, Hints at Mass Murder

In what some suspect to be Ellison’s alternate account, a new Twitter user “Peony Brewster” declared that an individual named Phoebe had been visited by police on August 25, and “Her Account was Closed Down that Evening”. “Brewster”, whose tweets follow a similar syntax style as Ellison’s (e.g. randomly capitalizing some words), also tweeted that CID (Criminal Investigation Department) came to “Phoebe’s” home on August 26, and when “Phoebe” showed them the ‘Firecracker’, CID said they would return with a search warrant.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
  • Horrifying
  • Late
Reactions: DrShithead, PizzaOfLass, Norman B. Normal and 7 others
DoTheDrew said:
For all of you who didn't see it when it first ran in the UK: The Detransitioners. Sorry if it's a repost, but I thought it was relevant to the question.

Pull quote: "I want to work on accepting my body exactly the way it is now,” Ellie, pictured on the cover of this magazine, told me. “This is what should have been encouraged from the beginning."
Click to expand...

This might sound a little crazy, but I believe we are very well be on the transhumanism Rubicon, perhaps too late to turn back now. It's something I think everytime detransition is mentioned. Imo transgenderism a bunk medical idea that would go down the bin along with Nazi-style eugenics and lobotomy.

Yet we'll still have to deal with the aftermath - that you'll have women who do not look ostensibly like women, and (less so) men who do not look like men, not of a natural intersex conditions but because of artificial tampering with hormones. And this kind of alterations are not just troons things, sport doping and castrati came to my mind.

People will have to be accustomed to it in some way. It might open up for a more genderless society some terfs are talking about, and I can only wonder how will sexual attractions and making work in that era as our current way of determining sex without looking at their junk became obsolete.

But social norms always change, we aren't running in the plains spearing mammoths anymore. Medicine too is always changing and we have conquered so much of fatal diseases - by having people live extended through artificial means.

This won't be just sexual characteristics, soon we'll have genetic editing, or new chemical ways to alter human bodies. Those things will get used for nonsensical ideas (other than actual neccesity) and it'll left us with humans who may not look "human" anymore - but they are still very close to baseline human genetically. and they'll find a place in ever changing society.

Not that I agree with it, I just think of it as a somewhat disturbing (for most people) fate humanity will be in.
 
Last edited:
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Optimistic
  • Agree
Reactions: thermocline, Osyth Osyth, DrShithead and 12 others
Sothis said:
Do these people not realise that pressuring someone into having sex with them by threatening to out them as transphobic is rape? Weren't thesee the same people going on about how no means no several years ago?
Click to expand...
It was women saying "no means no", feminists.
These aren't the same people at all.

Deepland Bystander said:
This might sound a little crazy, but I believe we are very well be on the transhumanism Rubicon, perhaps too late to turn back now.
Click to expand...

I'm so in favor of any kind of strange body mod or medical procedure people want to do to themselves as consenting adults. Bring on the brain chips and exoskeletons and genetic mods and frankenpussies, sure.

But this whole thought-control about it, the misogyny and homophobia and manly violence, it's a bad look. It's doing the future no favors.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: thermocline, Bleeding Heart, Aberforth and 15 others
Deepland Bystander said:
This won't be just sexual characteristics, soon we'll have genetic editing, or new chemical ways to alter human bodies. Those things will get used for nonsensical ideas (other than actual neccesity) and it'll left us with humans who may not look "human" anymore - but they are still very close to baseline human genetically. and they'll find a place in ever changing society.

Not that I agree with it, I just think of it as a somewhat disturbing (for most people) fate humanity will be in.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't hold your breath on this one. Gene editing is nowhere near ready for prime time, and even if it was, about all we could do is correct known defects (cystic fibrosis). Anything else is unethical in the extreme.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Beetus Paw, janekop, Agent Abe Caprine and 8 others
Ethics hardly seem relevant. I still want to see a thread on a few of these "surgeons".

Anyway I'll add a bit. I don't know if we have this fellow yet, but apparently he's a style queen.

Screenshot_20200901-062848.pngScreenshot_20200901-063030.png200728_a.jpg

This reminds me of mother-in-laws who show up to a wedding in wild dresses to fuck with the brides.
Screenshot_20200901-064238.png

bonus: shade. I knew it.
Screenshot_20200901-065055.png

He seems lonely- there are no family or friends, only people he buys clothing from. It says he's a stylist/buyer/model, but then on his website he's a teacher.

I thought he was more wholesome at first, and almost didn't bring him here, and then I found this article.
Screenshot_20200901-063226.png

Yes, women define themselves by their looks, I'm sure.

 
  • Horrifying
  • Like
  • Islamic Content
Reactions: thermocline, greengrilledcheese, DrShithead and 31 others
Wallace said:
I wouldn't hold your breath on this one. Gene editing is nowhere near ready for prime time, and even if it was, about all we could do is correct known defects (cystic fibrosis). Anything else is unethical in the extreme.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't hold my breath for doctors sticking to ethics either. This always happens when a new medical techniques or fad has just been devised and we see a lot of them jumping on the train to cash out the next big thing even if the negative side effects haven't been understood OR the whole idea is questionable at best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aberforth, cuddle striker, US Marine Hyde and 4 others
Kind of sad I missed the peak of the crazed FTM discussion. In my experience, they’re always catty, misogynistic, and mentally fucked.


I don’t have much experience interacting with TIMs, but I definitely have seen a lot of TIF arguments that always devolve down to “I’m more of a man than you,” which is funny because the vocal ones always seem to be neurotic females with several personality disorders. Always on a cocktail of SSRIs.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: adderall, Osyth Osyth, DrShithead and 22 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back