Trans disclosure drama in a /funny thread about a man who "discovers his wife of 19 years was born a man" 272+ children and multiple call outs. (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
36 ups - 15 downs = 21 votes
154 comments submitted at 21:02:00 on Feb 12, 2014 by david-me
Elsewhere in the thread: One user suggests literally tattoing all transgender people
Then says he would kill someone if they did this. Such an outstanding citizen...
Dude, that shit's for oppressed castes in fantasy novels.
What I think is funny is that...uh... Most mtf who get bottom surgery...I don't think they actually get cervixes constructed too, although I could be wrong. Shouldn't that be a really easy tell?
> Wow you're a disgusting piece of shit. Do you even chromosomes? Look up 'XX male syndrome' or 'intersex' in general and then stop using outdated bullshit ignorant language like 'sex change' and then literally fuck your own face you transphobic fuckpile. Fuck you. Trans people are more the gender they identify than you'll ever be a morally upright and decent human being, asswipe.
Ha, brilliant parody of SJWs...
checks comment history
Oh...never mind...
>Do you even chromosomes?
You mean that isn't a troll?
I chromosome all the time baby.
Paging /u/BiologyIsMyParamour
You're in the chromo-zone.
I've even got extra!
You decide.
Oh. It's that person. I recognize that name.
I think that's it. I'm full of trans drama. I never thought I'd get enough of this popcorn, but I have. It's over. It's just too much.
The main problem is that it's the same stale popcorn all the time. Another great example of people talking past each other and recycling the same arguments.
That's the thing. It's just so repetitive. Although the internet trans community provides some of the best popcorn. I'm just my appetite will improve soon.
If you want some fresher trans popcorn, you might try visiting a radical feminist blog. I never knew such buttery goodness existed.
I just run off and frolic in /r/transgendercirclejerk when this shit pops up now.
Isn't calling it a circlejerk a little transphobic since all of them have penises (yet?)
brb posting that
Edit: done
Linked OP's slow descent into madness was the best.
I've never met a community so desperate to be offended by everything as the transgender internet community.
>Anyone who does is a bigot and their opinions are as easily dismissed as your run-of-the-mill holocaust denier.
This is a response I received in that thread. It's one of them comparing caring about a partner's trans status to being a holocaust denier.
No kidding! One of the communities that are more ready to jump to arms and slay any comments revolving around gender identity.
I pity the poor sap that accidentally mixes up the words "gender" and "sex".
As soon as you post a slightly dissenting opinion you're an ignorant bigot and that's that.
I used to think people saying trans was a mental illness was just a joke, but the way they act on here makes me wonder. They are so angry and try so hard to find something to get outraged over.
This is a pretty shitty thing to say. You can't make judgment about transgender people based off of an internet subculture.
Fair enough, it was a bit harsh. Don't worry, I don't really think all trans are mentally ill. Just some of them on here are nightmarish.
Ok, but are bronies still fair game?
Nope, you can't make fun of over-the-top fanbases anymore, it's not aloud.
> it's not aloud
I'll do it very quietly.
^^^Ok ^^^I ^^^guess ^^^that's ^^^alright!
I absolutely love your username.
Thank you! Come join me and we will fight my arch nemeses, Man-Spider and Bastard Man!
More Comments - Click Here
You have to understand the context of this anger though. Imagine living your entire life in a world where an aspect as central to your identity as your gender is questioned on a daily basis. Imagine your condition being publicly mocked or at best ignored, even by ostensibly progressive organizations such as broader gender and sexual minority groups. It's easy to understand how living in such a hostile environment, trans* individuals can easily feel under siege or vulnerable. For some, the anonymity and distance provided by the internet allows them to finally speak their minds openly and release the frustrations that bottle up over time.
It's one thing if they have a (rare) genetical condition, or just think they are a trans or something.
No.
I will never understand anger over the simple concept of being honest with your partner.
It damages your cause to blow up over stuff like this.
Situations like this article aren't the norm, people just freak out and talk about it more when they're shocked by a revelation like that. Most trans people do disclose their status before a relationship, but it's a damn complicated situation.
My best friend is a gay trans man. If guys find out he's trans IMMEDIATELY after meeting him, they fall victim to their own prejudices and "ick" mentality and completely reject him with no chance. If he had sex with guys without telling them beforehand, he could seriously piss them off or shock them once they find out. But most gay guys don't exactly want to wait a long time before getting to the sex part.
If people stick around long enough to get to know him as a person, they're a MILLION times more likely to accept him as male and not have a problem. But if he tells people in the first few dates, they run away and make excuses. He's tried taking it slow, but a large number of gay guys aren't willing to stick around that long without sex. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
I'm not arguing in favor of hiding things from people - I'm just pointing out that it's not exactly cut and dry about when the ideal time to reveal that information is.
I don't think hardly anyone really disagrees over whether or not you should tell your marriage partner / fiancee / long term relationship partner.
Although if you want my personal opinion, I think that people put a lot of undue weight on trans* status, perhaps partially because they don't really believe that trans women are real women, or something similar but worded in a way that won't seem quite as offensive. Of course, I'm asexual, so I don't really care all that much about the exact construction of a potential partners vagina/dick, but I really do have a hard time understanding why someone would be upset at the fact that the women they are dating who is, for all intents and purposes, indistinguishable from women, was once a man.
I get being upset of being deceived, but the notion of being completely grossed out by the fact that someone is trans (when you're literally incapable of noticing the difference in a 19 year marriage) seems kind of bizarre or absurd. I can understand wanting children or not wanting to date someone who is pre-op, but the first seems moderately irrelevant (as plenty of women can't have children) and the second is obviously not important in context of people who have already fully transitioned.
> do you agree that trans* people have no responsibility in the event of a 1 night stand,
...are you serious? Honest question, do you really believe this?
It's almost like coming out as Mormon on the night of your Jewish wedding. /s
I don't believe it.
I'm posing a question (albeit probably badly worded), only because a lot of people say that trans* people should disclose because disclosing elements of your past is usually considered an important part of long-term relationships, and that when you are in a long-term relationship, a certain level of trust is to be expected and granted. Most people in one-night stands don't disclose a lot of elements of their past, and I think most people would agree that that's not necessarily harmful, unless it's something that is especially bad, like lying about a condom or birth control or something, and, depending on who you ask, whether or not you're transgender.
Personally, I wouldn't really care, but personally, I wouldn't involve myself in a one night stand / am not sexually attracted to people regardless, and personally, I care enough about other people that if I were theoretically transgender and theoretically in pursuit of overnight romance that I would disclose, because regardless of whether or not I feel that their feelings on the matter would be rational, I respect the right for them to have them.
> Personally, I wouldn't really care, but personally, I wouldn't involve myself in a one night stand, and personally, I care enough about other people that if I were theoretically transgender and theoretically in pursuit
You hurt my brain.
Take out the qualifiers and use periods instead of ands.
>I wouldn't really care, but I wouldn't involve myself in a one night stand. I care enough about other people that if I *were** theoretically transgender and *theoretically** in pursuit of overnight romance, I would disclose. Regardless of whether or not I [anticipate] that their feelings on the matter would be rational, I respect [their right to have them.]
*Emphasis mine
I think you should tell your partner the state of your sexual organs before engaging in sexual activity.
It amazes me how the social justicesphere, which is otherwise so vocally dedicated to the proposition that nobody is entitled to sex from or a relationship with any other person, so casually throws that principle away when it comes to transpeople, for whom one-night stands are apparently some inviolable right.
What they're arguing is that transpeople are just as much their gender as cispeople are theirs, so the expectations placed transpeople shouldn't be any different from the expectations for cispeople. Like, someone who was born a woman isn't usually expected to disclose that so a lot of them are of the school that transwomen shouldn't either (I think).
What are you talking about? Unless you just really believe that transwo/men aren't really wo/men, then it's not coercion or deception.
Your immediate resort to this depressingly predictable word game would be poor even if you hadn't just written multiple comments telling David that his explicitly stated preference for ciswomen doesn't matter as long as he can't immediately identify a woman as trans.
Like I said, amazing.
I'm not gonna tell anyone that their preferences are invalid, but if someone has had surgery completely to the point that they are indistinguishable from a biological woman in any way other than genetic testing and fertility, it's kind of weird to me to say that someone has a preference for ciswomen exclusively. I get it if people are really dead-set on having biological children, but otherwise I don't see what the difference is. It entirely seems to come down to "ick" factor, and I think that's something that people can get over by actually getting to know a trans person.
If they haven't had bottom surgery, the preference for ciswomen is more understandable - obviously it's not wrong to have a preference about what genitals your sex partner has. But why is it such a big deal if your partner USED to have genitals you're not into?
(To clarify, I'm not saying anyone is obligated to sleep with anyone. But seriously, can someone give me a good reason why a fully post-op trans person is not the same as an infertile cis person, besides "ick"? This is legitimately a question, I am cis and straight and it's not something that would bother me.)
> I get it if people are really dead-set on having biological children,
You mean like the huge majority of humanity
Personally I don't plan to have children and I know several other people who feel the same.
And there are plenty of people who are at least okay with adopting, even if it's not their preference. I even know straight fertile people who PLAN to adopt and don't intend to have bio kids. And infertile cis women AND men exist as well, although there's a much higher chance they won't know until they try having kids (though some people may know if it's caused by a disease or surgery). Some people don't want bio kids because of their family medical history.
I'm sure a majority of people would PREFER biological kids, but not everyone wants kids, and bio kids aren't the only kind. Adoption is fantastic and I admire the hell out of adoptive parents.
> I'm not gonna tell anyone that their preferences are invalid
No, what you'll do is tell them that their preferences are "weird" and demand to know why they're "such a big deal" and insist that they give you a "good reason" for having them, because you absolutely do consider their preferences invalid.
What you do unsurprisingly do consider to be valid, per your earlier post in this thread, is your trans friend's entitlement to gay men's bodies. In reality that matter is extremely cut and dried; your friend is no more "damned" than anyone who doesn't get something to which they have no right or expectation.
The reality of it is that there are people who don't consider them the same as men/women.
STORY TIME! soooo... (all paraphrased)
There was a poster in TumblrInAction - a transwoman. Actually looked pretty good. I said "you know, you look pretty good. I still wouldn't do anything with you, because I'm not really into it. I don't know why, I'm a little ashamed to admit it, but for some reason I just don't feel okay with it."
They replied
"No, don't you dare apologize. You are not obligated to be attracted to or sleep with people you are not comfortable with"
My jaw dropped. That was not what I was expecting. I think that poster did far far more to make me accepting of trans people on a personal level than anybody else did. At the time I didn't actively hate transpeople, but I would say I was averse to the idea of trans (transphobic even).
Take that as you will - I think that if/when the idea of straight men 'bending' a little bit becomes more mainstream, it wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue for straight men.
I should try to find that post again. Was really really good.
>The reality of it is that there are people who don't consider them the same as men/women.
SJW trans activists like to take advantage of most people's unfamiliarity / awkwardness with the terms 'trans' and 'cis' to excoriate people for transophobia when they express their preferences as you did rather than according to activists' preferred nomenclature.
A preference for cis partners is as valid as any other preference, and people who actually cared about informed, enthusiastic consent, as SJWs often claim to, would respect that preference regardless of how it is expressed, because they care about the comfort and well-being of their prospective partners. SJWs on the other hand like to use it to score cheap rhetorical points because they don't, and instead care about some transpeoples' feelings of entitlement to other people's bodies.
> about informed, enthusiastic consent
fuck thats a good point. i wonder if that was what that transgirl was talking about.
>I think that poster did far far more to make me accepting of trans people on a personal level than anybody else did.
I think this is a part of the problem. Everyone just demonizes transpeople into secret dick havers that are out to yell on tumblr and decieve potential sexual partners. But mostly they are just typical boring normal people. It's like if someone conflated all men with redpill or something. Most of the people bitching about disclosure are throwing shit about a hypothetical situation that will most likely never happen to them.
> "you know, you look pretty good. I still wouldn't do anything with you, because I'm not really into it. I don't know why, I'm a little ashamed to admit it, but for some reason I just don't feel okay with it."
Messaging a stranger to let them know you don't want to have sex with them. How delectably awkward.
> Everyone just demonizes transpeople into secret dick havers that are out to yell on tumblr and decieve potential sexual partners.
The problem is that it isn't about that at all; even if they had perfect reconstructive surgery, it's still percieved different.
>Messaging a stranger to let them know you don't want to have sex with them. How delectably awkward.
Wasn't a message; was a post where (I think) she was soliciting opinions. It was a really long time ago, and obviously the context was not awkward or I wouldn't have said anything about it.
>The problem is that it isn't about that at all; even if they had perfect reconstructive surgery, it's still percieved different.
Maybe we aren't on the same page with this. Whether or not it's different:
Whether the reconstruction is good or not, most people aren't going to be privy to their medical history, making it basically irrelevant in platonic interactions (basically most of the interactions that a person has)
Even if it is different, everyone has something different about them (gag). It's not like they're exceptionally deceptive or dangerous compared to other people.
>Wasn't a message; was a post where (I think) she was soliciting opinions. It was a really long time ago, and obviously the context was not awkward or I wouldn't have said anything about it.
I'm extremely relieved to learn that.
See, and I think some people are taking my comments to mean exactly that, that they're obligated to sleep with trans* people or else they're transphobic, when that's not what I'm trying to say. Either way, I think it's time I step out of the conversation. I don't think many are open to examining why they feel the way they do.
>I don't think many are open to examining why they feel the way they do.
That window is a mirror.
Well, like I implied (not directly but in my story) - that is something people will have to come to on their own terms, like I did. Trying to force it just makes people reject it even harder.
edit: >that they're obligated to sleep with trans* people or else they're transphobic
And I know you don't mean that, but it is slightly worded like that. Or atleast thats what the implication looks like it might be.
The problem is that the argument about honesty is a bit disingenuous. Even among partners it's not as though one must invariably discuss every minute detail of one's medical history. And when you come down to it, why would the gender assigned at birth matter at all in itself. After all, take this specific example, the couple seemed perfectly content until the husband discovered that his wife had affirmed her true gender at some point in her life.
Frankly, no matter how you slice it, the explanation lies in transphobia. With this in mind, I find it difficult to accept the notion that a bigot is entitled to a certain fact merely because he is likely to place an absurdly undue weight on it because of his prejudice. Having said that, I am of the opinion that this is an issue that probably should be discussed before marriage since the prospect of spending one's life with a transphobe seems repugnant. However, I am not willing to chastise a trans* individual for deciding against doing so.
> The problem is that the argument about honesty is a bit disingenuous. Even among partners it's not as though one must invariably discuss every minute detail of one's medical history.
You're right it's disingenuous. They treat being trans as though it is a defining part of their identity fundamental to their very being - right up until somebody mentions that they expect to be told about this by a partner, at which point "Oh, it's just a minute detail of one's medical history".
They can't have it both ways. If they really believe it's just a minor detail that's not worth mentioning, they would act a whole lot differently in every other conversation they have about being trans. If they act as though their life revolves around being trans, then somebody sharing that life is entitled to know about it.
I think that in this case, it is something that should be discussed and brought up before serious commitment. Not because of transphobia, but because your partner would feel like you don't trust them enough to tell them about something that was very important in forming who you are.
That would be hurtful in its own right.
> transphobia
I'm starting to be ok with the idea of this. It's not the worst thing in the world to want to know the trans status of a partner. If you want to call that transphobia, then so be it. Call the vast majority bigoted if you want to, but be honest with your partners.
And the sad thing is, that derpy SRS poster doesn't realize they are making things worse for trans people by making stupid arguments on their behalf like that. They make it sound like disclosing a sex change is the same as having a spleen removed.
The fact that you consider gender reassignment surgery to be a "minute" part of someone's medical history is pretty hilarious.
> among partners it's not as though one must invariably discuss every minute detail of one's medical history
I think sex is a pretty huge thing though. 99.8 percent of the population in cis and because of that have come to expect that their partners gender and sex match.
I could never be with a trans myself. even after SRS, all I would think about is that it used to be a penis. It's a non-starter for me. Now, if I made out with a woman and then found out later she was trans, I would go "oh well, I guess I thought she was hot enough to kiss". But any sexual attraction would cease.
Uh... I mean... but doesn't that make you transphobic?
Not any more than my not being sexually attracted to a man makes me homophobic, or a gay man not being attracted to a woman makes him heterophobic.
Not being sexually attracted to trans people is not transphobic.
No, you're right, it's not. But if you'd be perfectly okay with getting intimate with a transwoman until you find out they're trans*, that's not the same as just not being attracted to a person. If they can "pass" well enough that you don't know they were born male, then the only thing that's turning you off of them is the fact that they're trans...
I mean, shit, it doesn't make you evil. We're conditioned by our society, and trans* people have been treated pretty horribly by our society. But I really don't see how that scenario can be called anything but transphobic.
> I really don't see how that scenario can be called anything but transphobic
You love throwing around that word. Just because someone doesn't want a romantic relationship with a transexual doesn't mean you get to throw a demeaning name on them. If anything is bigoted it's that, "agree with me or you're a bad, transphobic person"
I love throwing what word around? "Transphobic"? I don't know why you'd think that because I rarely speak on trans* issues. I usually don't feel like it's my place, being cis and knowing very few trans* people (and none IRL). I did, however, point out that being transphobic doesn't necessarily make someone evil for the same reason that I don't think that everyone who is racist is evil.
Most of us have biases that we can't help because we've been conditioned to have them. But it is important to recognize those biases for what they are. That doesn't mean that anyone here has to go out and hook up with a trans* person just to prove a point, but at least recognize how irrational it is and how that mindset, on a larger scale, might negatively impact the lives of others.
More Comments - Click Here
It amazes me how the social justicesphere, which is otherwise so vocally dedicated to informed consent and the proposition that nobody is entitled to sex from or a relationship with any other person, so casually throws those principles away when it comes to transpeople, for whom one-night stands are apparently some inviolable right.
No. It's the same as making out with someone and finding out they are a cross-dresser. I'm attracted to members of the opposite sex. Men and trans women are not female. Sex is as important as gender.
No, because someone who only dresses as the opposite gender would presumably still have all or most of the typical characteristics of their born sex. I get that people might not be able to help not being attracted to certain features, including genitalia, typical of a particular sex or gender. It sucks, and it's not fair to them, but I wouldn't really call that transphobic.
However, if someone has transitioned to the point that they're indistinguishable from their identified gender, and you're attracted to them up until the point that they tell you that they were born a different sex... well, again, I don't know what else to call that other than transphobic.
More Comments - Click Here
> After all, take this specific example, the couple seemed perfectly content until the husband discovered that his wife had affirmed her true gender at some point in her life.
Most people are okay with things when it's under false pretenses they're comfortable with.
>With this in mind, I find it difficult to accept the notion that a bigot is entitled to a certain fact merely because he is likely to place an absurdly undue weight on it because of his prejudice.
It is not bigoted to not be attracted to transpeople, and it's interesting you're saying his opinion is less valid (e.g. "undue weight") because it makes someone else uncomfortable, thus rendering your position hypocritical.
7/5 glorious troll
Minute detail, right.
Here's what I don't get. If being trans is a real thing, what did trans people do for the hundreds of thousands of years prior to the incredibly recent invention of HRT and GRS? I guess they just went "damn I wish I was a chick", shrugged and went through life like normal people.
I am not honestly convinced that this would be all that terrible. All of us have to cope with being something other than what we wish we were. I, for instance, wish I were a little bit taller. I wish I was a baller.
I pretty much agree with you. Not many folks feel that it's necessary to disclose to their partners that they were once overweight, or that they had their appendix removed, nor do they scream "deception!" if the subject doesn't come up. We treat trans* people's histories differently because it's just silently understood that they're gross and "not really men/women". Ideally, I think the only thing that you're obliged to inform your partner is your reproductive status (i.e., whether or not you can have kids) and even then only if they've expressed interest in children.
That said, we don't live in an ideal world, and I think it's probably in the best interests of trans* people to at least figure out how their partner would feel about it.
Except an appendix is not a reproductive organ. The main reason one sex is attracted to another is reproduction. Women hate when men refer to them as females, but in realty we see you as both. Cis Men aren't just attracted to a gender, they're attracted to a sex.
See the part about reproduction. I don't think it's fair to go into a relationship knowing that your partner wants to reproduce when you're unable (whether that be because you're trans* or have PCOS or whatever). However, given that the original story was about someone who only found out his wife was trans* after 19 years, I think it's safe to assume that sex wasn't an issue.
Nah, I'd reserve that for the conspiracy community, given the drama we've seen lately.
Although that thread looks to be a lot more mad at the specter of the predatory transgender people that are seemingly so common and so adept at fooling everyone. Reads a bit like gay panic, to be honest.
I'm Kinsey 6, certified member of Sparkle Motion, and straight as a hulahoop. Post-op transpersons are not exactly common. Not that pre-ops are common either. The odds that so many people would run into so many furtive transpersons that they develop legitimate concerns about accidentally touching penis (or vagina-that-was-once-penis) is pretty much nil.
Of course, it wouldn't be reddit without hilariously overblown panics about genitalia and gender.
Perhaps you've never seen a community that was shit on more than the trans community. Yeah, we're angry and bitter, but we have a damn good reason for it.
You're angry at the concept of being honest with your partner?
more that our entire gender presentation is automatically "invalidated" by chromosomes...
Except that's not what he said. At all.
Those pesky evil chromosomes, always throwing a wrench in your plans.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
Here we see the portrayal of an oppressed community as people simply looking to get offended, and not as people struggling to be accepted by a very hostile society. Good nuanced, empathetic framing of the issue from a redditor.
Have you not seen white male Redditors?
From the SRS thread:
> > I support trans rights but... You can't just pretend getting a sex change isn't a big deal—it really is.
> When I said I supported trans rights, what I really meant is that I actually don't, at all, ever.
I don't understand the logic here. Supporting trans right equals not treating sex change as a big deal? But if it wasn't a big deal, trans rights wouldn't be an issue in the first place, and no support would be needed.
So, uh... what?
Either you agree with everything they say or you're against them. No middle ground.
>I want to be a pony. There's desire, there's reality, and there's acceptance. There's also non-acceptance, and through that route you'll find suffering.
.
>Eat shit you trasnpbobic pig.
.
>Compelling argument, and well-spoken, to boot! Lick my asshole.
Okay, you two, out of the pool. All you're doing is pissing in it and making things worse for everyone.
Oh man, those edits of his are hilarious. He is really taking his soapbox/persecution really srsly.
More and more I am somewhat disquieted by the argument that self-identification as something requires that the rest of society buy into it not just as a polite "I won't call you a man if you identify as a woman" but as an actual sincere belief.
It'd be like saying that if a Christian self-identifies as a follower of the one true religion, that means that Christianity is (in fact) the one true religion. Sure, politeness means that I don't call him a misinformed jackass to his face, but I don't have to believe in his self-identification.
It'd be like my girlfriend finding out that I have sickle cell anemia and will pass it on to our children and me saying "well, I don't identify as someone with sickle cell anemia, so it's okay and I don't need to have told you."
And politeness means that if someone is trans, I'm going to respect their belief that they are whatever gender they believe they are. But politeness from them includes that (given the high likelihood that I would find sleeping with/being in a relationship with a trans person somewhat icky) they tell me about it.
You seem to keep jumping back and forth between "society" and a sexual/romantic partner. What should be disclosed to one isn't necessarily the same as the other.
You lie/omit to me your relevant medical history, whatever, who cares.
You lie/omit to a potential parent of your children those things, that is shitty of you.
But that's the thing, it's a very relevant medical history. The fact that I respect trans* people doesn't mean that I have to internally buy into their "I'm actually a woman." I would never try to deny them their ability to be whatever they want to be, but it's something that I should know before even considering getting into bed with someone.
And let's dispense with the semantic bullshit. I get it, she has always been a "woman" even when she had a penis. Fine, whatever. Let's get this entirely out of the realm of gender or sex. If you once had one set of genitalia and now have another, you owe your partner (of whatever sex/gender/genitalia they may be) the respect of knowing that upfront.
[deleted]
3rd date. No more, no less.
What do their parents say when they find out?
"Have him back by 10 he's got school in the morning."
Do you mean "would you", or are you accusing me of being a pedophile?
If the former, I'm not sure. It's a tough situation given the stigma attached even to those who have never (and would never) harm any child.
If the latter, fuck you.
I, what? Are you just stirring the pot or does this guy have history or what?
You used to be a man? I thought you said you came from Iran!
>as it might cost you karma
I can see I'm going to take this seriously already.
>DO YOU HATE DEMOCRACY?
Who said Reddit as a democracy?
EDIT 1:
Make up is also deception apparently. Sounds like it could be equal to being Trans in his mind.
EDIT 2:
Now he calls breast implants "bolt-on boobs". I think we are getting a theme on hateing deception here.
EDIT 3:
Found him in /r/mensrights "I hate to sound shallow, but why are feminists always ugly?"
Also,
>Why isn't there a white history month, anyways?
and
>[In Reference to Rihanna]shes like a speed bag, you hit it and it comes back for more
and
>they are fucking things up for all the regular, non-flamboyant gay people. it's almost like how the images of gang culture can reflect negatively on black people.
sigh
>"I hate to sound shallow, but why are feminists always ugly?"
/r/WhatFeministsLookLike/
Wow. This guy thinks Ashley Judd is ugly?
http://imgur.com/kZxh35e
When every date you've ever had is done via pornhub, you can afford to be choosy.
FUCKING WRECKED.
Is it really possible to mistake a surgically implanted vagina for a real vagina? For someone who has seen a vagina before?
Well, I imagine vaginas vary a lot between individual people... and reconstructive surgery has come a long way. Of course MtF genital reconstruction is more advanced than FtM...
Lots of people have been there and not been to tell.
Wait, is that screenshot from a real article? That Belgian might be the least observant man in the universe...
How is he unobservant?
It's real
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/belgium/9703166/Belgian-discovers-his-wife-used-to-be-a-man-after-19-years.html
WHY AM I STILL READING THIS SHIT AFTER A YEAR. SERIOUSLY.
I don't say this often, but that poster is literally Hitler.
SnapShot
(Mirror | open source | create your own snapshots)
I have to laugh when I think of how all these assholes who are apparently terrified of trans people have likely encountered a trans person or two in their life and didn't even know it. They probably had pleasant conversations with them, or worked with them, and had no idea. Mostly because trans folk are regular god damn people whose lives don't revolve completely around the state of their genitals.
Man, people get pretty butthurt when SRS links to them. Lol @ those edits.
To be fair, it's obvious that butt hurt is contagious and that SRS is patient zero of Butthurtitis.
Many of us were in that thread before SRS linked to it.
> Many of us
I note you don't imply "all of us"
All 40K+ of us? Uh, no.
shit there were 40K+ SRS members posting in that thread? damn. That's impressive.
It's not called a brigade for nothing.