Lucille Bluth
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2019
I've probably posted in here before, but on further reflection, I don't think I truly fell for the troon-aid. I just didn't get why a man couldn't be femme or why a woman can't be butch. Given the sheer diversity of humans, it would make sense that some men or women aren't going to be super macho or feminine acting. Then, when I started hearing more stories of troon journeys, it all seemed to boil down to either having a fetish for the opposite sex or being gender non-conforming.
As the movement gained more traction, I started reading about how the troon community behaved and the bullying, lying and delusions held among them. If I had to cite a moment where I really was "peak trans", it would be somewhere around 2017-2019. I asked on several websites why transgenders are being forced upon us, but we can't accept transracialism, transageism or being transspecies. I knew it was a load of shit when I saw some of the responses and justifications for the former but not the latter.
The responses I got said transgenders are "allowed" because gender is a "social construct" and giving into these peoples delusions "helps" them. They're not actually a femme gay man or butch lesbian, a straight person that's gender non-conforming or someone with a fetish for the opposite sex (I'd say all troons fall under one of those four categories). This also ignores the fact that slapping on a wig and cutting off your dick doesn't actually solve everything. But when I said that transracialism should have just as much validity because "race" is also a social construct, I either got no response or had people telling me that transracialism is just "culture appropriation". Apparently, a delusional man in a ratty wig doesn't count as "appropriating" womanhood and vice versa.
Which was so odd to me because being "transracial" should have more validity than being a troon. A man can't truly become a woman and vice versa, but "race" really is a social construct. Some examples:
As the movement gained more traction, I started reading about how the troon community behaved and the bullying, lying and delusions held among them. If I had to cite a moment where I really was "peak trans", it would be somewhere around 2017-2019. I asked on several websites why transgenders are being forced upon us, but we can't accept transracialism, transageism or being transspecies. I knew it was a load of shit when I saw some of the responses and justifications for the former but not the latter.
The responses I got said transgenders are "allowed" because gender is a "social construct" and giving into these peoples delusions "helps" them. They're not actually a femme gay man or butch lesbian, a straight person that's gender non-conforming or someone with a fetish for the opposite sex (I'd say all troons fall under one of those four categories). This also ignores the fact that slapping on a wig and cutting off your dick doesn't actually solve everything. But when I said that transracialism should have just as much validity because "race" is also a social construct, I either got no response or had people telling me that transracialism is just "culture appropriation". Apparently, a delusional man in a ratty wig doesn't count as "appropriating" womanhood and vice versa.
Which was so odd to me because being "transracial" should have more validity than being a troon. A man can't truly become a woman and vice versa, but "race" really is a social construct. Some examples:
- Decades ago, the one-drop rule in the United States said anyone was legally considered a nigger if they one black ancestor.
- Back in my grandparents day, it was politically correct to call the Chinese "Yellow people". Even Martin Luther King Jr or maybe it was Malcolm X once called the Orientals "Yellow" in a televised interview. This is not the case today.
- In Japan, anyone is mixed-race/biracial if they're not fully Japanese ethnically. Many people who are half-Flipino and half-Japanese descent in Japan are considered biracial (or "hafu"). By Western (i.e - American) standards, they are not considered "biracial".
- Finally, having spent a bit of time in England and visiting America frequently, I've found that in the former country, when people talk about "Asian" culture or appearance, it always refers to hook-nosed Pajeets (or Brown people basically). While in the U.S, it almost always refers to slit-eyed Chinks because of cultural differences on what they perceive as being "Asian".
Last edited: