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

FOUND something fascinating. The first sex change was actually performed in 1903, using the penile inversion method (something the media claim was invented in the 1950s!). On a 'pseudohermaphrodite', this person had a strange appearance from what is listed in this 1903 medical journal. Fascinating as fuck honestly.
Oh and within the notes pages, it claims that someone had done an operation similar in the 1880s. (wow)

I warn it's a fairly big article but is so interesting and there's some images, that are sorta gross but quite eye-opening.

I have re-formatted it into paragraphs for easier reading!

The patient was referred to me February 28, 1903, by the family physician living in one of the suburbs of New York, and gave the following history;

E.C., aged twenty years, born in New York State, of Irish parentage; father and mother both living, also four brothers and four sisters, all of whom, as far as she knows, are strong and well and normal in every way.

Patient has never menstruated; was strong and well till four years ago; weighed 120 pounds, but has gradually lost flesh year by year, and now weighs only 99 pounds.

She was educated in the public schools and graduated from the grammar school two years ago ; has a weak stomach and occasional attacks of indigestion.

She has never had any girl love affairs or been attracted passionately by any girl, but has been attracted by boys; says that "that thing" (the clitoris) began to develop to a noticeable degree when the hair began to develop on the pubes, fourteen to fifteen years of age; played with it some at that time and experienced pleasurable sensations therefrom; has erections at times and at first feels that it is pleasant, but eventually dis appoints and annoys her; wants to get rid of “the growth.”

In deportment the patient was somewhat shy and modest, and gave the impression that she did not care to reveal the facts she had stated, but was determined to get relief, and had decided to go through whatever ordeal was necessary to secure it. She came to my office alone, and heavily veiled to conceal the growth of hair upon her lip, face, and chin. In appearance she showed feminine taste in dress, which was neat and in good style.

PHYSICAL EXAMINATION.

- Height, 5 feet 17 / 8 inches.
- Weight, 100 pounds at present.
- Gait, feminine in character.
- Voice, feminine, with occasional male tendency.
- Hair growth on the head coarse, abundant, and black; eyebrows black and heavy, meet between the eyes
hair on upper lip well developed; on chin well developed; also strong growth in front of ears to angle of jaw. Growth is sparse between angle and chin. Chin is square and jaw heavy, otherwise face is female type; features are small; eyes are brown.
- Arms not well developed, hair growth abundant.
- Hands medium in size ; fingers square and strong , with large joints .
- Neck larger than normal for a female.
- Mammary Gland . No mammary development; neither fat nor glandular tissue, strictly male type.
- Areola dark brown and about 14 inch in extent from nipple. It is encircled by small black hairs.
- Abdomen. Longitudinal hair line well developed from one inch above umbilicus to pubic hair, which is very thick. There is no transverse abdominal hair line.
- Spine .No deformity. Lower Extremities. Hair growth excessive.
- Pelvis flaring . Measurements : Interspinal , 271 / 2 cm . ; inter crestal , 281 / 2 cm . ; external conjugate , 18 cm .
- Heart, normal.
- Lungs, normal.

On examining the genitals the enlarged clitoris with prominent glans, as shown in Fig . 1, obtruded itself and became erectile on the slightest touch.

It was surrounded with a corona of hair and surmounted on the mons veneris with a luxuriant tuft.

An excessive growth of hair covered all the surrounding parts and ex tended down on to the thighs.

The clitoris measured three inches in length and three and a half inches in circumference.

The fore skin could be drawn forward on to the glans , but retracted strongly in erection.

The clitoris was restricted in its action as in chordee hy a broad frenum, which reached from near the glans down to the under surface of the symphysis and disappeared with in a little opening one - quarter of an inch in diameter, the urogenital cleft.

A narrow strip of mucous membrane ran along the free border of the frenum as in cases of hypospadias . The clitoris was impervious and the meatus urinarius could not be discovered. Below the introitus was a broad perineum reaching to the anus.

The vaginal opening took a Peaslee sound readily to the depth of four and a half inches and the caliber of the canal seemed to enlarge at the distal end . Under bimanual manipulation with finger in the rectum no internal generative organs could be out lined except a cord - like extension from the upper end of the vagina.
(my note - the fuck?)

The patient insisted that “the growth” was a great annoyance, that it made her different from other girls, and she wanted it taken off. When asked if she preferred to be made like a man or woman, said decidedly "a woman.” Accordingly she was sent to the Polyclinic Hospital, and the operation was done March 11, 1903, in the presence of the class and some invited guests.

View attachment 1899624
Fig . 1 . (ABOVE) - Appearance before operating. The round black spot below the clitoris shows opening to vagina. From its upper border a strip of mucous membrane extended to the glans along the free border of the frenum. Mucous membrane covered the median line of perineum for two inches toward the anus; shows light in the picture.

Operation .
— With the patient under ether and the parts shaved and sterilized, by a little steady pressure I gradually insinuated my little finger into the urogenital cleft to its full length and then the index finger, being careful to dilate* rather than tear.
(*first use of the word dilate in relation to neo-vag?!?!?!)

At the depth of two and a half inches a strong constricting band of dense, resisting tissue was encountered, through which my finger was forced with difficulty. With the tissue put upon the stretch by bearing down with this finger strongly on the perineum two lateral incisions (one on either side) were made with scissors from the outer edge of the canal to and including the constricting band . The depth of these incisions went only through the vaginal sheath.

By firm pressure first with one finger in the urogenital cleft and then with two these incisions were torn deep into the tissues, resisting strands being snipped as they presented. In this way the caliber of the cleft was enlarged to a diameter of two and a half inches.

At this juncture the meatus urinarius was searched for and discovered just under the internal border of the symphysis pubis, and a catheter passed, demonstrated the position of the bladder and the presence of urine.

View attachment 1899664
Fig. 2. (ABOVE) — The clitoris after removal, the skin having been dissected.

The skin adjacent to the vulva was so harsh and bristled so with hair that it was not available for filling in the lateral gaps in the mucous membrane of the vagina.

The only apparent resource was to allow them to fill up by granulation, when suddenly the thought occurred to me, Why not use the skin covering the clitoris? This was soft and delicate and free from hair.
It was therefore decided upon.
A longitudinal incision was made along the dorsum of the clitoris and another along the ventral surface, and a circular incision just back of the corona of the glans.

These flaps were carefully dissected off down to the base of the clitoris and left attached. The base of the clitoris was transfixed inside the flap with chromic gut and cut away. ( Fig .2.) The flaps of skin with their bases still attached were drawn down into the urogenital cleft and stitched in position on either side by catgut sutures, care being taken to make them reach in as far as possible by dragging down the skin upon the mons veneris and abdomen and holding it in place by firm straps of adhesive plaster passed around under each thigh.

The clitoris measuring three and a half inches in circumference, afforded two flaps, each one and a half inches wide, growing broader at the base.
These together with the anterior and posterior strips of membrane of the cleft made a vaginal canal of goodly proportions. The strip of mucous membrane on the under surface of the frenum was saved, drawn up and stitched to the stump of the clitoris.

The purpose of this was to give support to the urethra and maintain its normal position. It also made a vestibule beneath the stump of the clitoris. The stump was covered with the skin from the mons as it was drawn down by the adhesive plaster.

View attachment 1899665

Fig.3. (ABOVE) — Glass tube in place during convalescence; the
patient's hand holds the tube. (First dilation!)

There was considerable hemorrhage from the lateral incisions, but no large vessels were incised, and what hemorrhage occurred was controlled by applications of adrenalin chlorid. The vaginal canal was packed moderately full of iodoform gauze, sufficient pressure being made to smooth out the skin flaps and bring their entire surface in contact with the underlying tissue.
(
my note - exactly like SRS today, fascinating)

A self - retaining catheter was inserted into the bladder.

The dressings were removed on the fourth day and a glass tube substituted in the vagina to maintain pressure upon the flaps and secure its calibre, as shown in Fig .3.

The entire wound healed! by first intention and the patient left the hospital at the end of four weeks .Fig. 2 shows the exact size of the clitoris after being stripped of skin and removed.

View attachment 1899663
Fig .4. (ABOVE) - Photograph three weeks after operation.

Fig .4 shows the condition at the end of four weeks. The vagina closed snugly, but readily admitted two fingers and permitted of further dilatation by slight pressure. Later digital and specular examinations revealed a small cervix at the head of the vagina, which took a small sound to the depth of one and three - quarter inches. A small gland could also be made out on the left side, but it had more the feel and shape of an enlarged lymphatic, although it may be a rudimentary ovary


---
TLDR - Penile inversion of a hermaphrodite in 1903. That's one for the history books.
That is truly fascinating! I think this might be a better fit/a good cross-post for the SRS surgeons thread here -- just my two cents.

Based on the medical history the report contains, such as it is, my guess would be that the patient was a genetic male (XY) intersex person with internal testes, as that would explain the virilization of the micro-penis (that ain't no clitoris, hoss) at puberty. (If anyone has read the novel Middlesex, the main character in it has 5-alpha-reductase deficiency, an intersex condition that only occurs in biological males, and which is basically the exact condition as what's described in this SRS patient above.)

Other than the fact that this person was indeed intersex and none of the troons who claim to be actually are, it's crazy how similar the surgical procedure is to today's stink-ditch-installation (right down to the ball hair conundrum and fact that the surgeon has no idea what he's doing and is totally winging it). Reminds me of Kevin Gibes' semi-recent tweet storm about how SRS today has become ULTRA-ADVANCED HIGH TECH! lol
 
it's crazy how similar the surgical procedure is to today's stink-ditch-installation (right down to the ball hair conundrum and fact that the surgeon has no idea what he's doing and is totally winging it). Reminds me of Kevin Gibes' semi-recent tweet storm about how SRS today has become ULTRA-ADVANCED HIGH TECH!
After Jazz Jenning's srs went horribly wrong there is a scene in the 'I am Jazz' tv show where his butchers Ting and Bowers argue with each other about what to do in front of Jazz. They both ruined his genitals (which were already stunted & useless because of puberty blockers & hormones) and both had their own new ideas how to butcher him further.

Srs butchers love to experiment on people - even underage kids. Jazz was 17 at the time of the surgery.
 
I agree and disagree with you, mainly on a few points. The person who is self harming is also harming those who love them. It hurts to see someone you love so intent on destroying themselves and becoming so selfish in their desire that they ignore or lash out when a loved one speaks out against it. They also use classic manipulative and gaslighting tactics to achieve they want. The person harming themselves, whether it be cutting or mutilating their body, starvation, bingeing or purging, gambling themselves into debt, wanting to chop off healthy functioning body parts, stop taking care of themselves, allow their living spaces to become so filthy and littered with trash, it all boils down to addiction. And addiction is most certainly a mental illness. You hear all the time of how someone completely changes in their desire to fuel their addiction. They go from an honest and caring person, to one who lies, steals, commits violent crimes and completely uses and abuses the people around them, and gives no shit about anyone else but themselves and whoever will enable them along.

And you don't understand, if we allow that people are allowed to harm themselves, remember physically it affects people too. Someone has to bandage the wounds if they are too severe, someone has to care for someone who's gotten so fat they can't care for themselves, someone has to call the ambulance so that you don't die from an OD, someone has to take care of you while they try to save your life. The person you just robbed for that money for your next hit certainly will be affected by your self destructive lifestyle. The family will certainly be affected when you mercilessly take their innocent relative's life in a callous disregard for others just so you can harm yourself.

And quite frankly, you remind me of Perro Loco, who ran Cannibal Cafe and now Dolcett's forum. He was certainly of the mind that as long as two people are consenting, who cares what happens? And lo and behold, we have the Armin Meiwes case (who so famously posted on Cannibal Cafe after he killed Bernd Brandes, hoping to find another willing victim). Oh who cares that Bernd got butchered because he consented to it? Never mind the fact he had to take schnapps, sleeping pills, and cough syrup to get over his very normal reaction of being killed then cut up like a hog, and ultimately eaten. Who cares, because he got to live out his fantasy of getting his dick chopped off. Then we have the Sharon Lopatka case, who willingly met with a man she met online and had a BDSM relationship with, who's ultimate goal was getting tortured and murdered, and that's exactly what happened (Perro Loco also knew both of them). Do these sound like sane people to you?

I get at a point, some people can't be saved, but at the same time, it so profoundly affects the people who know them and care for them. And could you really stand to watch your loved ones slowly (or quickly) killing themself? To see them emaciated, grossly obese, covered in sores, track marks all over them, amputating healthy body parts, and see themselves dying or being horribly mutilated/deformed for their addiction? Our goal as humans are to survive, and when we see people who go against that, it's heartbreaking, and is a mental anguish for most people.

So yes, if it truly didn't affect anyone else, then I'd say "whatever, do what you want." But that's the exact problem, because though these people are too self absorbed to realize, the people around them are heavily affected by it. For all that we laugh about trannies on here, I am truly heartbroken that these mentally ill people are self harming themselves because of the fucking ideology which wants them to live in a fantasy world that doesn't correspond to reality. Instead of being taught to love themselves for how they are, they are being told it's wrong, and they must transition or else they'll kill themselves! They guilt and silence people from speaking out against it. And these mentally ill people are so drunk on the flavoraid, that despite the horror of the reality they've inflicted on themselves, they try to diminish their suffering, and encourage others to do the same.

To end this, no we shouldn't allow people to actively self harm. This let's them believe it's "a lifestyle" "it's natural" "don't you dare judge me!" "you can't possibly know what's best for me because you're not me!" This is why people will wake up to what's naturally wrong and goes against our natural and survival instincts. It might take a while, but once something truly shocking happens, there is a severe backlash, because we realize it's not healthy nor should be encouraged, and is killing us.
My argument is that the opposite, being oppression, is even worse still. The fundamental problem is when you decide for others what's best for them and force them to comply.

It might be bad for you to eat a snickers bar, but would that make it okay for me to slap it out of your hand? At what point to we draw the line?

If we take your reasoning to its logical conclusion, then it becomes morally justified to forbid certain foods, to prohibit the sale and consumption of alcohol, to force people to exercise, and so on.

We currently live in a society where sick, twisted people impose their will upon us. They will send you to jail and ruin your life for smoking cannabis or for homeschooling your kids (both of which are illegal where I live). Bureaucrats, some of them well-intentioned, decided to prohibit these activities, for "our own good". Wouldn't you much rather live in a society where you, yourself decide what's best for you? And if people you care about choose to partake in activities that you deem harmful, why do you need the state to intervene? Currently the state is intervening on behalf of the crazy people, can't you see that? We've seen cases where the state has intervened to deprive people of the custody of their children for refusing to let them "transition". The state has unilaterally decided that evil is good, and we are powerless to resist.

You are suggesting that the state should intervene to prevent men from chopping off their dicks. But the state is already intervening, except they're not on the side of sanity. The same powers you propose to use for good are being used to enforce the use of "correct pronouns" and to irreversibly damage children by giving them exogenous hormones.

Ponder this quote by C.S. Lewis:
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”
 
I don’t really buy the concept of “emotional labor” (it seems to boil down to not being an asshole) but whenever I see people complaining about it they are usually talking about people from an outside group.

Thread has moved on from this but I just want to clarify that “emotional labor” like so many others (“triggered” comes to mind) has been warped in the collective imagination to mean something completely fucking different than the original intention of the term. Emotional labor actually refers to the internal work people do to manage their feelings and expressions as a part of their paid employment; the classic example is flight attendants, who are trained to be cheerful, polite, and unfailingly courteous to a population of customers who we all know can be the worst people on earth. The concept applies to anyone doing (customer) service or caregiving work, where their own needs and feelings have to take a backseat to what the customer, patient, child, etc. needs. The effects of emotional labor, although not visible like physical labor, are draining and exhausting in different ways and can lead to burnout. If you care to learn more you can read the original book on the subject, The Managed Heart by Arlie Russell Hochschild.

The point of saying this is also to clarify that these dumbasses on Twitter and elsewhere saying “Pay me for my emotional labor” are actually saying “Pay me to acknowledge my broader life experiences which I refuse to otherwise share with you, I have no other marketable skills” and that’s not how this works, motherfucker, get a job.

Thx for coming to my TEDtalk.
 
Gotta disagree with you there man. I think every person should have the right to do harm to themselves, and any person should have right to do harm to them if they have their consent.

While I think trans-surgeries are abhorrent, and I wish they would never occur, I think it's very dangerous to give one group (e.g. a government) the right to dictate to an individual what they can or cannot do to their own body.

I don't think it should be up to any individual to tell another individual what they can and cannot do, as long as the actions of that individual does not infringe on the rights of any other individual. So let's say an individual wants to chop their dick off, as long as their surgeon does not lie to them and misrepresent themselves or the procedure, they should be allowed to do so.

For the same reason I believe people should be allowed to take anabolic steroids, performance enhancing or recreational drugs, they should be allowed access to euthanasia, etc. If any person commits a violent crime because anabolic steroids have made them aggressive, let's say, then prosecute them for for the violent acts they've committed. But as long as they're not infringing on the rights of another person, then just let them be.

I think the biggest crime when it comes to SRS, aside from surgeons lying, misleading their patients and providing improper care, is making the taxpayer foot the bill. Now that's coercive and infringing on the rights of the common person, and the reason why I go out of my way to pay as little as I can in taxes.

Sorry for the political rant but I just don't think prohibition is the way to go. People should be allowed to cut their dicks off, but they shouldn't expect anybody else to pay for it.

Really, part of the fucking danger here is that the "reassignment" surgeries are state sanctioned, in many jurisdictions. Just fucking get the state out of it, and let people do whatever they wish.
I disagree to a hard degree. One of best and most useful features of living in society is that it limits your destructive behavior. While I don't want to power level too much, I have gotten better trough mental health treatments and I'm grateful that I wasn't allowed to go trough my most self destructive behavior and my case wasn't that bad. When your brain isn't working right it's almost impossible to evaluate stuff reasonably, you really have no idea what you are signing up for. It's for example extremely easy to convince a drug addict to consent to do absolutely insane stuff. This assuming that they don't get misslead. This doesn't need be lies, you can do other underhanded manipulation without ever saying anything untrue. Also difference between what should be considered just self destructive and what harmful to other isn't even clear. That's just part of being close others, what we do resonates well beyond ourselves. Like the homeschooling example you cave, that can and has been used to cover abuse and deny kids from learning basic life skills so that can't leave their parents ever. Now I don't think homeschooling should be banned just because there potential for abuse. I do think kids have right for education and that society should make sure that happens but there is no reason that can't include homeschooling. Just have parents prove that kids are well and learning, deny homeschooling only if they can't do it. Just because society can go too far forbidding stuff, forbid the wrong things or original negative that lead to a law has been solved, that doesn't mean having society set limits are overall bad.

That to be said, I think the current trans laws going to the wrong direction. I mean sure trans shouldn't be a reason to deny housing, work and other basic stuff like that, but they shouldn't be free from people challenging their world view and people offending them. Others have right for comfort and their own world view as well, trans aren't that special. While I think trans should be allowed to dress however they want, have whatever interest they want and think themselves as any gender they want, but that's it. Others don't have see them as they see themselves and they shouldn't have to treat them as gender they want to be treated as. People should be allowed to study and come conclusion that gender affirming care is crap and genders dysphoria isn't what's wrong with you. People should be allowed to say no to boys in girls sports, no matter what gender they say they are because it's just not fair physically. I think government should have unchanging register their biological gender because that has effect what health care they need or if that pool of blood might be from that missing person. Sure if a government wants they can record personal identity crap too to avoid chimp outs at the service desk but it shouldn't mean not having the biological info. And yes I don't think shared health care should have pay for cosmetic surgeries and treatments for trannies when others with same look complaints are out of luck.
 
I must unfortunately introduce you to Challah Back *girl*
View attachment 1899892

He, likes to post screens of his online dating adventures. So meet, totally not a blind idiot Sam.View attachment 1899903View attachment 1899904View attachment 1899905

But not to worry! M'lady has a protector!
View attachment 1899908

At least he's got a sense of humor.
View attachment 1899917

A lot of idiots mistaking him for an actual her.
View attachment 1899923
Sam went all in on that one.
good for him, this has probably happen a few times to him.
 
I disagree to a hard degree. One of best and most useful features of living in society is that it limits your destructive behavior. While I don't want to power level too much, I have gotten better trough mental health treatments and I'm grateful that I wasn't allowed to go trough my most self destructive behavior and my case wasn't that bad. When your brain isn't working right it's almost impossible to evaluate stuff reasonably, you really have no idea what you are signing up for. It's for example extremely easy to convince a drug addict to consent to do absolutely insane stuff. This assuming that they don't get misslead. This doesn't need be lies, you can do other underhanded manipulation without ever saying anything untrue. Also difference between what should be considered just self destructive and what harmful to other isn't even clear. That's just part of being close others, what we do resonates well beyond ourselves. Like the homeschooling example you cave, that can and has been used to cover abuse and deny kids from learning basic life skills so that can't leave their parents ever. Now I don't think homeschooling should be banned just because there potential for abuse. I do think kids have right for education and that society should make sure that happens but there is no reason that can't include homeschooling. Just have parents prove that kids are well and learning, deny homeschooling only if they can't do it. Just because society can go too far forbidding stuff, forbid the wrong things or original negative that lead to a law has been solved, that doesn't mean having society set limits are overall bad.

That to be said, I think the current trans laws going to the wrong direction. I mean sure trans shouldn't be a reason to deny housing, work and other basic stuff like that, but they shouldn't be free from people challenging their world view and people offending them. Others have right for comfort and their own world view as well, trans aren't that special. While I think trans should be allowed to dress however they want, have whatever interest they want and think themselves as any gender they want, but that's it. Others don't have see them as they see themselves and they shouldn't have to treat them as gender they want to be treated as. People should be allowed to study and come conclusion that gender affirming care is crap and genders dysphoria isn't what's wrong with you. People should be allowed to say no to boys in girls sports, no matter what gender they say they are because it's just not fair physically. I think government should have unchanging register their biological gender because that has effect what health care they need or if that pool of blood might be from that missing person. Sure if a government wants they can record personal identity crap too to avoid chimp outs at the service desk but it shouldn't mean not having the biological info. And yes I don't think shared health care should have pay for cosmetic surgeries and treatments for trannies when others with same look complaints are out of luck.
My argument at its core is that people should be allowed to harm themselves, because the alternative, being that people are prevented from harming themselves, is so much worse. Who is the arbiter of what constitutes "harm"?

These days we've seen cases of parents standing helpless as their children are being taken away from them because they refuse to consent to their children being given puberty blockers and hormone treatments.

I'm very happy that you got the help you needed when you needed it but I think it's a supreme danger to hand over the responsibility for governing our lives to other people. What I consider healthy and moral is starkly at odds with what my government does, and considering we are both posting to the Kiwi Farms it's likely that the same goes for you.

In the ideal dictatorship there would be a benign government that only wished for its subjects to be healthy, happy and fulfilled. Sadly no such government exists, nor will it ever. That is why I advocate for the government allowing people to troon out, because I never, ever want to live under a government where trooning out is mandated.
 
All troons, neckbeards and incels have the same filthy room.

Has someone investigated the potential connection between troonery and say, living surrounded by 1980s wood paneling?


Ehh...idk man, I always have a hard time believing their stories/screen caps of encounters in which the other character says shit the troon wishes were true, so...yeah, troons wish guys would think the troon is a good looking girl and only know the truth when the troon disclosed. I never believe it, along with never believing little girls tell them they’re pretty and other troon fantasies.
 
Last edited:
Sam went all in on that one.
good for him, this has probably happen a few times to him.
Idek, fam. If they say they're trans in the profile and it was indeed in the profile prior to this screenshot, then that's on Sam for being a petulant manchild when he could have just kept swiping after having himself a good cringe session and shaking it off.

-If it's not an elaborate cope on troon's part, that is. Which it's entirely possible. Troons are next level after all.
 
Last edited:
My argument at its core is that people should be allowed to harm themselves, because the alternative, being that people are prevented from harming themselves, is so much worse. Who is the arbiter of what constitutes "harm"?

These days we've seen cases of parents standing helpless as their children are being taken away from them because they refuse to consent to their children being given puberty blockers and hormone treatments.

I'm very happy that you got the help you needed when you needed it but I think it's a supreme danger to hand over the responsibility for governing our lives to other people. What I consider healthy and moral is starkly at odds with what my government does, and considering we are both posting to the Kiwi Farms it's likely that the same goes for you.

In the ideal dictatorship there would be a benign government that only wished for its subjects to be healthy, happy and fulfilled. Sadly no such government exists, nor will it ever. That is why I advocate for the government allowing people to troon out, because I never, ever want to live under a government where trooning out is mandated.
They aren't banning people hurting themselves, they're banning hurting other people for a huge amount of money with no responsibility, potentially giving them health complications.
 
Gotta disagree with you there man. I think every person should have the right to do harm to themselves, and any person should have right to do harm to them if they have their consent.

While I think trans-surgeries are abhorrent, and I wish they would never occur, I think it's very dangerous to give one group (e.g. a government) the right to dictate to an individual what they can or cannot do to their own body.

I don't think it should be up to any individual to tell another individual what they can and cannot do, as long as the actions of that individual does not infringe on the rights of any other individual. So let's say an individual wants to chop their dick off, as long as their surgeon does not lie to them and misrepresent themselves or the procedure, they should be allowed to do so.

For the same reason I believe people should be allowed to take anabolic steroids, performance enhancing or recreational drugs, they should be allowed access to euthanasia, etc. If any person commits a violent crime because anabolic steroids have made them aggressive, let's say, then prosecute them for for the violent acts they've committed. But as long as they're not infringing on the rights of another person, then just let them be.

I think the biggest crime when it comes to SRS, aside from surgeons lying, misleading their patients and providing improper care, is making the taxpayer foot the bill. Now that's coercive and infringing on the rights of the common person, and the reason why I go out of my way to pay as little as I can in taxes.

Sorry for the political rant but I just don't think prohibition is the way to go. People should be allowed to cut their dicks off, but they shouldn't expect anybody else to pay for it.

Really, part of the fucking danger here is that the "reassignment" surgeries are state sanctioned, in many jurisdictions. Just fucking get the state out of it, and let people do whatever they wish.

I would agree, were it not for everything that comes along with it. Not just, like you said, that the state (i.e. the taxpayer) is now paying for it; but they're also indoctrinating minors into the same cult. These things don't exist in a vacuum, if you let people do fucked up shit to themselves like that, some will try to normalize it, indoctrinate others into doing it (misery loves company, crabs in a bucket, etc etc etc). I prefer not to live in a nation where doctors and therapist are outright doing harm.
 
Gotta disagree with you there man. I think every person should have the right to do harm to themselves, and any person should have right to do harm to them if they have their consent.

While I think trans-surgeries are abhorrent, and I wish they would never occur, I think it's very dangerous to give one group (e.g. a government) the right to dictate to an individual what they can or cannot do to their own body.

I don't think it should be up to any individual to tell another individual what they can and cannot do, as long as the actions of that individual does not infringe on the rights of any other individual. So let's say an individual wants to chop their dick off, as long as their surgeon does not lie to them and misrepresent themselves or the procedure, they should be allowed to do so.

For the same reason I believe people should be allowed to take anabolic steroids, performance enhancing or recreational drugs, they should be allowed access to euthanasia, etc. If any person commits a violent crime because anabolic steroids have made them aggressive, let's say, then prosecute them for for the violent acts they've committed. But as long as they're not infringing on the rights of another person, then just let them be.

I think the biggest crime when it comes to SRS, aside from surgeons lying, misleading their patients and providing improper care, is making the taxpayer foot the bill. Now that's coercive and infringing on the rights of the common person, and the reason why I go out of my way to pay as little as I can in taxes.

Sorry for the political rant but I just don't think prohibition is the way to go. People should be allowed to cut their dicks off, but they shouldn't expect anybody else to pay for it.

Really, part of the fucking danger here is that the "reassignment" surgeries are state sanctioned, in many jurisdictions. Just fucking get the state out of it, and let people do whatever they wish.
They’re not doing it to themselves. Doctors are doing it to them.
There used to be breast implants called string implants, which would continue to grow after the surgery, and they were dangerous and women almost died, so they were banned by the FDA. Dangerous medical procedures should not be performed. You can go somewhere else to get them done — American plastic surgery and weight loss surgery and tranny surgery tourism is real! But American doctors shouldn’t be doing it.

There’s no way to have truly informed consent here. You can’t understand the horror of SRS until you’ve had it. I agree with you on steroids, but this isn’t steroids. And it’s not at all reversible.
 
Last edited:
zxse1R1.jpg
 
I'm assuming this is aimed at me. If so, you didn't understand what I was saying at all. I'm not saying not to give a shit about other people, I'm saying not to give the state mandate to prevent people from hurting themselves, because in doing that it will inevitably lead to giving the state mandate to hurt people.

Also, the picture is inaccurate, I don't have hair.
 
I agree with @Somchai, and I think there are ways of combating the troon menace that don't involve further state coercion. The trans phenomenon is spreading due to social contagion and institutional indoctrination schemes. We need to recapture the culture. Yes, it's going to be a very difficult uphill battle, but I think the tide will eventually turn when the detransitioner wave grows too large to ignore and the lawsuits start exacting a significant financial toll. Right now, many people haven't had their lives directly affected by troonery, so it's easy for them to be apathetic or sympathetic in their ignorance. But when girls losing scholarship opportunities and having to share lockerrooms with their male peers become regular occurrences in suburbia, I really do think people will start waking up. The cowed, fearful silent majority will have to buck up and start fighting back -- people will have to stop giving a shit about being called "transphobic" and start using their financial resources and their powers of social shaming to shift the cultural messaging back to a place of sanity. Yes, some unfortunates will have gotten hurt by the time that happens, but that was always going to be the case. The trans movement and wokeness more generally will be subject to a serious backlash, it's only a matter of time.
 
There's a serious trans discussion thread. I think part of the problem is the trans threads are all over the place vs. Grouped together so you can better choose where to post.
Yeah that's my bad, didn't mean to derail the thread with a political discussion. I mostly only follow this thread, the SRS Surgeons thread and the Tranny News thread.

I'm guessing this thread is the one that's being referred to: General transgender discussion thread - Take the tranny related debates here. Didn't even know about it until now. My apologies.
 
The trans regret subreddit that's probably banned. If you spend time on any of the trans subreddits you can see people encouraging confused posters they are trans. Same with discord groups. They try to downplay the risks and exaggerate the results of hormones and surgery. People actually think it'll fix their depression and life issues. It's disgusting but it seems its getting normalized or people are scared of having their lives ruined if they speak up. It's concerning since these groups can be a good place for pedophiles to thrive with how unreported and untouchable they are.
I knew somebody who had suffered severe mental health issues during high school such as depression and ADHD. He left the school at the end of the year to seek proper help. Afterwards, he decided to transition as an MTF at quite a young age. Although he identified as trans for a couple of years if I remember, he eventually detransitioned and came back to being a guy again. It looks like he never took hormones (thank goodness) as he was able to conceive with his girlfriend. I don't know how he decided he was trans, but I imagine some not-so-well-intentioned therapists were misleading him into believing he was trans when he was at his lows.
 
Back