- Joined
- Jul 22, 2020
I completely, absolutely agree with you. I just laid out why they were ever allowed trannies to exist in the first place, why the legal infrastructure 'made sense' at the time it was first created. Basically the legislators were short sighted and didn't realise they were planting the seed of menace to come a few decades later.I don't agree. The legal infrastructure has been an active accomplice to the tranny ascendance, not a passive enabler. If the legal profession had any intention to maintain social order they could have drawn the line at "transwomen are legally women". They could have maintained a stance in which transwomen are a social fiction that has limited (or even zero) legal relevance -- which is basically what "trans accepting" people in the 80s believed anyway. Instead, the legal infrastructure got drunk on the human rights koolaid, got led by the loudest screamers, and granted trannies full legal status as women.
I don't think "legally women" should be a thing anymore, it doesn't make much sense. Why do we need a social fiction if it does completely nothing at least, and actively harming people and eroding social ties at most. It's better if we can say it to troons loud and firm that, no, you cannot be the opposite sex, and there will be nothing on the documents to ever accept their delusion. Let them dress and act whatever they want is accepting enough.
Do troons ever recognise the irony of their obsession with cyberpunk? They're the result of the very thing the genre sought to criticise.I only made it through the introduction section, & this video hit every single troon cliché. From “they/ them” pronoun declarations to “living in a capitalistic, queer cyber punk dystopia.” Every single one.