As always, a phenomenal article. Not only have they hijacked the LGBQT movement, but their "activism" is undermining rights to gay marriage. If they continue, gays and lesbians will lose civil rights earned through working within the communities they lived in.
This refusal to listen, and even worse, the desire to only select sources that validate your view is a failure of the education system. As a retired librarian, we used to be able to teach people how to evaluate sources for their validity; with the breakdown of our society, academic sources, influencers (both right and left), mainstream media, and governmental sources are responsible for creating these echo chambers that are sowing the divisions within our society.
They're upset and not talking to you because anyone would have the same reaction to a flat earther that wouldn't give. You're expecting a conversation when.. that's not what this sign is calling for.
As somebody who was born preterm to a lower-middle class family, and went undiagnosed with hearing loss and legal blindness since childbirth, until an audiologist decided I was hard of hearing two months after graduating high school, and until my doctor approved my getting a visual field exam at 52. You have no right to proclaim somebody else as a victim, nor do they have the right to proclaim themselves a victim. It is a power kick, a means to control other people. My number one problem with the classist elites is that they "vicdumbize" the people whom they want to control. When the elites decide there are issues that they want to claim, they coddle the "vicdumb" to gain support, then the classist, racist, ableist Nazi-occupied (Far Left and Far Right) use the others victim status to assert control and create nonsense policies. Yes, there are people who are born in the wrong bodies, but they are few; nonsense about gender-affirming care when they need compassionate therapy to determine what is the root source for their identity--is it their actual feelings, or have they been manipulated like Robin Westman?
Next time tell these nutters about The Heggen Survey, now about to receive testimony from trans widow #74. The rate of the crossdressing husbands sexually assaulting his wife is a steady 39% and rate of physical assault is steady 38%. As I get data from the younger generation I unfortunately anticipate the rates will increase. The pornography these men are addicted to exacerbates the violence and sexual deviance.
Peter I think that what you are describing represents the need to express personal superior virtue , which , when purposefully disassociated with any intellectual reflection, has no limit to the metric of such a claim. Pure narcissism. Humanity’s default position without acknowledging and cultivating personal humility?
Absolutely. Pure narcissism. In the old days, there were trans, but they never said that they were now actually 'women'. So silly. There is only XX and XY.
We've ALL known this from the beginning: its NEVER been about 'wrong bodies', or sexuality, or identities, or whatever. Its ALWAYS been a power move to assault cognitive liberty. A 'deconstruction' of reality itself in order to sow psychological chaos and confusion. This is largely why the 'soft science' industries have embraced it.
I am what is now called a "transwoman" who transitioned many years ago, before it became fashionable in recent decades. I discovered a few years ago how truly insane trans activism is, when I dared to suggest that we shouldn't be transitioning children or teens. This opinion did not result in discussion, but in being angrily called TERF, self-loathing trans, fascist, nazi, etc. So called "gender affirmation care" is medical/psychological/sexual child abuse. It's sad that parents who do this to their children, or allow it to be done will mostly likely never allow themselves to believe they've done anything wrong. Pathological sunk cost rationalization.
No, they are bent on the destruction and delegitimization of our cause: a smoothly functioning society which maximizes individual freedom while valuing reason and argument based on factual evidence, and settles policy disputes by democratic means while protecting minority rights. THAT is their cause.
Honestly, though, I think most people who consider themselves trans don’t actually want the destruction of the society they live in. They are unaware that they’ve been indoctrinated and are being used as pawns by people who do want the destruction of western societies.
Indeed, they've allowed themselves to be brainwashed.
That is why it is necessary not to pander to or "affirm" their "trans" identity, for "transitioning" from one sex to the other is biologically/chromosomally impossible.
Cannon fodder. Useful idiots. Lumpen proletariat. You can ascribe to them innocence, irrelevance, or terminal unawareness. It matters not. They are willing, vocal, and determined participants in the Revolution.
Of course, "transgendering", or "transitioning" to the opposite sex is a biological/chromosomal impossibility; therefore a 'transwoman" or a "transman" is a fictional being. They do not and cannot exist.
Who do, in fact, exist are human beings afflicted with gender dysphoria, a mental disorder that those truly afflicted with it (it's actually quite rare) attempt to cope with by physically modifying themselves to appear like members of the opposite sex, and thus (they mistakenly expect) achieve self-integration and peace of mind.
As is the case with any mental disorder and its delusions, pandering to them by affirming them is irrational and harmful because they depart from reality; therefore, accommodating mentally disordered people by enabling them to live their delusions is unethical.
Some people who claim to be "transgender" actually have a paraphilia of loving the idea of themselves as the opposite sex (autogynephilia or autoandrophelia). It's a kind of transvestitism, or cosplay, and can be a beneficial catharsis as long as it does not impinge upon areas of one's daily life.
The "social space" THEY claim is space no longer available to US to enter without explicit permission and strict adherence to the rules imposed governing that space. Eventually, with no social spaces left unclaimed, only the rules remain thereby snuffing out for all time freedoms once enjoyed without thought quickly fading even from memory.
P.S. The whole trans terminology is incomprehensible (unless you adopt their rules). I use 'ex-man' and 'ex-woman' (where you were but are no longer—best of luck wherever you end up).
"ex-woman" or "ex-man" is a biological/chromosomal impossibility, as well as being dehumanizing. Do not dehumanize, for that's how people have justified committing atrocities.
Address them as males and females. Address them by their name, or by "sir" or "miss/ma'am", regardless of their preferred male or female, or intersex name. When referring indirectly to them, whether they hear you or not, If they're male, use "he/him" pronouns. If they're female, use she/her pronouns.
If they get angry and accuse you of "misgendering" them, tell them the truth: they are misgendering themselves.
No. They have explicitly given up their identities as man or woman. We don't (and often THEY don't) know just what they are, where they're going, and how things will be if/when they get there. So, really the only thing we know is where they are no longer. Kinda like an expatriate, perhaps you're familiar with the term. Doesn't mean you are "de-country-izing" the poor souls just for leaving. You're simply producing all you really know of them. Where they were, they are no longer. Maybe they'll write and tell us where they ended up...
Have you considered the risk she would assume in articulating the definition of ‘trans’? No one will do it because everyone who claims to be trans fully understands the cost of not stepping ‘in line’, whether they acknowledge it or not. The reason no one defines the term is because there is no ‘authorized’ definition to chant and repeat ad nauseam. And there actually can’t be one because such a thing would inevitably reduce the number of fanatics who fall under the proclaimed category of ‘trans’. To define is not inclusive, if you know what I mean. In my estimation, keeping the term amoebic in its definition allows every single individual who feels a little different to identify with something that is loosely based on the ‘lived experience’.
I agree with Chris that it’s a cult of a certain kind.
The most honest answer to the question ‘what is trans?’ is going to be something along the lines of ‘an idea that takes away my pain.’ What trans person, who is sinking their hopes into this idea, is going to readily admit that?
To claim that one is "trans" is a self-delusional performative escape from emotional or physical pain, as is getting drunk or deeply drugged (stoned) is a consumptive escape from that pain. It merely provides the appearance of escape, but behind the performance, or after the alcohol or other drug wears off, the reality of the pain and its source(s) are still fully present, and the person remains stuck.
So to say, "I am trans" is an edgy, "hip" euphemism for "I am stuck". It's a thinly-concealed cry of pain, of low self-esteem, of self-disownment.
This is like trying to converse with someone who is seriously mentally ill, suffering from paranoia, auditory and visual hallucinations. They give the outside appearance of being a person , but are so lost in their illness and so convinced of their vision that it is unrealistic to expect them to reply rationally. I don't think "trans" is this far gone ,but it has similar dynamics and you are no more likely to engage them in meaningful conversation.
Your statement, “it means you grow up”, struck me as a fundamental flaw in those people subscribed to the trans ideology. A whole study could be done on this. My simple opinion is something terribly wrong happened during their puberty years. It’s hard to avoid in this day when exposure to p@rnography and truly sick and perverse ideas and images are everywhere. Some images I saw in my youth still flash across my memory - and I’m in my mid 60’s. My heart truly breaks for these people. Good article!
We need additional poster showing side by side internal human sexual anatomy of a man and a woman. Or - if this is too much to understand - at least a poster explaining that men produce small gametes - sperm and women produce large gametes - eggs. No hormones and/or surgeries can change the nature of this. Transgendering, in effect, means neutering not changing into the opposite sex. This is an attempt to revise evolutional biology. No science behind it only a pseudoscience. We should protect our children from this insanity.
Someone who decides to transgender as adult must understand the future health risks and life limitations.
They're upset and not talking to you because anyone would have the same reaction to a flat earther that wouldn't give. You're expecting a conversation when.. that's not what this sign is calling for.
there was a sign meant to be inflamitory. and then lamenting the laoss of dialouge failing... is this sea lioning? you're not owed a debate.
A wonderful summary of the dynamics behind so much of might be called identity theory from someone who experienced the deeply deceptive political face behind it. It needs to be exposed for what it is - a political movement masquerading as an academic theory which has absolutely no relation to either truth or reason.
Even far beyond when intersectionality and lived experiences were used for academics. I have to say that yes trans people do exist it is difficult to Define but we actually do have a definition just like you can't Define woke. You went around with a billboard expecting a conversation but you want a diatribe and a debate. And then you play victim.
when he made inflammatory statements on a sign he got what he wanted.
No one is playing victim. Understand that not everyone perceives the world through the Victim Triangle perspective. Not everyone is living in a persistent state of drama. This was a simple discussion and the person wouldn’t answer the question that established a premise. So the conversation was over. Just because she says she’s trans doesn’t mean that she may automatically assume the platform belongs to her and that everything she says is automatically more important than the question that was asked of her. She engaged. And she did it really really poorly.
"persistent state of drama". That is incredibly invalidating and possibly ignorant to the very rights and the like you're losing. Of which I'm surprised you're ok with or are so well-to-do as to not need to care about... or .. empathy.
When one is seeing victims everywhere, I consider that a state of drama. Sometimes that’s valid. But that’s not the case here. You seem to think that Peter & Chris are playing the victim because they couldn’t get a straight answer out of this person who just wanted to bulldoze over the whole conversation. So they moved on and then they made minimal discussion about it. If you think they were playing victims over that, then you’re definitely living in a persistent state of drama.
if you don't know then i guess censorship really is effective.
banking, payment processors, web hosting for starters. the OSA,... read something from THE FIRE org or the EFF at least once in your life? maybe even the free speech coalition?
"can't get a straight answer". well if you pulled a die hard 3 and hold up a sign saying...
Um, no. I don’t know because you stopped making sense a while ago. I don’t understand how you are putting these different concepts together. I don’t follow your reasoning. Seems like you’re reaching now, but I can’t tell because there are too many gaps in your logic.
Only you are seeing victims. I don’t engage in the world that way.
Try not assuming that he’s baiting. Because he’s not. Maybe his sandwich board suit isn’t a perfect engagement tool, but he’s not the vicious monster you may think he is.
I’m not sure you get what is actually going on. It’s not good.
She was all over the place, like a hippo flinging its feces with its tail during defecation. Her rambling and repetitive word salad suggested to me that she was drugged, mentally disturbed, or both.
"I have to say that yes trans people do exist it is difficult to Define but we actually do have a definition just like you can't Define woke."
False.
To be "woke", according to its original definition conceived in the 1940s, meant to be conscious of the plight of Black people and racist attitudes that Caucasians direct at them.
The modern definition of "woke" is derived from Marxism. It means to be awake, to achieve conscientisation (per Marxist "educator" Paolo Friere) by perceiving every aspect of human interaction, every aspect of society through a lens of power struggles between two collectives: "oppressors" (straight, white Caucasian males) and "oppressed" (straight females, and LGBTQ males, females, Blacks, and "People of Color").
Both definitions of "woke" are collectivistic, denying and repudiating the individual and personal volitional physical and intellectual agency. To the "woke", the group, not the individual, is the primary unit in society, and one derives one's identity by one's membership in the group.
"Trans people", i.e., people "transitioning" to the opposite sex, is a biological/chromosomal impossibility; therefore a 'transwoman" or a "transman" is a fictional being. They do not and cannot exist.
Who do, in fact, exist are human beings afflicted with gender dysphoria, a mental disorder that those truly afflicted with it (it's actually quite rare) attempt to cope with by physically modifying themselves to appear like members of the opposite sex, and thus (they mistakenly expect) achieve self-integration and peace of mind.
"You went around with a billboard expecting a conversation but you want a diatribe and a debate. And then you play victim"
(Cont'd) Not expecting, but inviting a conversation. A statement of fact is not a diatribe. Denouncing a fact is a diatribe. A conversation can seque into a debate, but, ideally, all parties must be willing to be rational, reasonable, and willing to check their premises against facts. Otherwise, it's a waste of everyone's time.
An individual with that way of thinking is doomed to a miserable life. A society that embraces it is doing no one a favor, except creating more misery.
As always, a phenomenal article. Not only have they hijacked the LGBQT movement, but their "activism" is undermining rights to gay marriage. If they continue, gays and lesbians will lose civil rights earned through working within the communities they lived in.
This refusal to listen, and even worse, the desire to only select sources that validate your view is a failure of the education system. As a retired librarian, we used to be able to teach people how to evaluate sources for their validity; with the breakdown of our society, academic sources, influencers (both right and left), mainstream media, and governmental sources are responsible for creating these echo chambers that are sowing the divisions within our society.
Andrew Sullivan and Andrew Doyle have both made similar arguments. It certainly seems to be the case.
That's blaming the victim.
They're upset and not talking to you because anyone would have the same reaction to a flat earther that wouldn't give. You're expecting a conversation when.. that's not what this sign is calling for.
As somebody who was born preterm to a lower-middle class family, and went undiagnosed with hearing loss and legal blindness since childbirth, until an audiologist decided I was hard of hearing two months after graduating high school, and until my doctor approved my getting a visual field exam at 52. You have no right to proclaim somebody else as a victim, nor do they have the right to proclaim themselves a victim. It is a power kick, a means to control other people. My number one problem with the classist elites is that they "vicdumbize" the people whom they want to control. When the elites decide there are issues that they want to claim, they coddle the "vicdumb" to gain support, then the classist, racist, ableist Nazi-occupied (Far Left and Far Right) use the others victim status to assert control and create nonsense policies. Yes, there are people who are born in the wrong bodies, but they are few; nonsense about gender-affirming care when they need compassionate therapy to determine what is the root source for their identity--is it their actual feelings, or have they been manipulated like Robin Westman?
Next time tell these nutters about The Heggen Survey, now about to receive testimony from trans widow #74. The rate of the crossdressing husbands sexually assaulting his wife is a steady 39% and rate of physical assault is steady 38%. As I get data from the younger generation I unfortunately anticipate the rates will increase. The pornography these men are addicted to exacerbates the violence and sexual deviance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHDK0y9GZrk&t=28s
Thanks for this
Really? So now you understand the information trans widows have on the medical transition medical complex? Let's talk~
Peter I think that what you are describing represents the need to express personal superior virtue , which , when purposefully disassociated with any intellectual reflection, has no limit to the metric of such a claim. Pure narcissism. Humanity’s default position without acknowledging and cultivating personal humility?
It’s a moral position.
Absolutely. Pure narcissism. In the old days, there were trans, but they never said that they were now actually 'women'. So silly. There is only XX and XY.
We've ALL known this from the beginning: its NEVER been about 'wrong bodies', or sexuality, or identities, or whatever. Its ALWAYS been a power move to assault cognitive liberty. A 'deconstruction' of reality itself in order to sow psychological chaos and confusion. This is largely why the 'soft science' industries have embraced it.
I am what is now called a "transwoman" who transitioned many years ago, before it became fashionable in recent decades. I discovered a few years ago how truly insane trans activism is, when I dared to suggest that we shouldn't be transitioning children or teens. This opinion did not result in discussion, but in being angrily called TERF, self-loathing trans, fascist, nazi, etc. So called "gender affirmation care" is medical/psychological/sexual child abuse. It's sad that parents who do this to their children, or allow it to be done will mostly likely never allow themselves to believe they've done anything wrong. Pathological sunk cost rationalization.
Thanks for your comment and perspective. It's so obvious they are destroying and delegitimizing their own cause.
No, they are bent on the destruction and delegitimization of our cause: a smoothly functioning society which maximizes individual freedom while valuing reason and argument based on factual evidence, and settles policy disputes by democratic means while protecting minority rights. THAT is their cause.
Honestly, though, I think most people who consider themselves trans don’t actually want the destruction of the society they live in. They are unaware that they’ve been indoctrinated and are being used as pawns by people who do want the destruction of western societies.
Indeed, they've allowed themselves to be brainwashed.
That is why it is necessary not to pander to or "affirm" their "trans" identity, for "transitioning" from one sex to the other is biologically/chromosomally impossible.
Cannon fodder. Useful idiots. Lumpen proletariat. You can ascribe to them innocence, irrelevance, or terminal unawareness. It matters not. They are willing, vocal, and determined participants in the Revolution.
Of course, "transgendering", or "transitioning" to the opposite sex is a biological/chromosomal impossibility; therefore a 'transwoman" or a "transman" is a fictional being. They do not and cannot exist.
Who do, in fact, exist are human beings afflicted with gender dysphoria, a mental disorder that those truly afflicted with it (it's actually quite rare) attempt to cope with by physically modifying themselves to appear like members of the opposite sex, and thus (they mistakenly expect) achieve self-integration and peace of mind.
As is the case with any mental disorder and its delusions, pandering to them by affirming them is irrational and harmful because they depart from reality; therefore, accommodating mentally disordered people by enabling them to live their delusions is unethical.
Some people who claim to be "transgender" actually have a paraphilia of loving the idea of themselves as the opposite sex (autogynephilia or autoandrophelia). It's a kind of transvestitism, or cosplay, and can be a beneficial catharsis as long as it does not impinge upon areas of one's daily life.
The "social space" THEY claim is space no longer available to US to enter without explicit permission and strict adherence to the rules imposed governing that space. Eventually, with no social spaces left unclaimed, only the rules remain thereby snuffing out for all time freedoms once enjoyed without thought quickly fading even from memory.
P.S. The whole trans terminology is incomprehensible (unless you adopt their rules). I use 'ex-man' and 'ex-woman' (where you were but are no longer—best of luck wherever you end up).
Their denial of their sex does not negate it.
"ex-woman" or "ex-man" is a biological/chromosomal impossibility, as well as being dehumanizing. Do not dehumanize, for that's how people have justified committing atrocities.
Address them as males and females. Address them by their name, or by "sir" or "miss/ma'am", regardless of their preferred male or female, or intersex name. When referring indirectly to them, whether they hear you or not, If they're male, use "he/him" pronouns. If they're female, use she/her pronouns.
If they get angry and accuse you of "misgendering" them, tell them the truth: they are misgendering themselves.
No. They have explicitly given up their identities as man or woman. We don't (and often THEY don't) know just what they are, where they're going, and how things will be if/when they get there. So, really the only thing we know is where they are no longer. Kinda like an expatriate, perhaps you're familiar with the term. Doesn't mean you are "de-country-izing" the poor souls just for leaving. You're simply producing all you really know of them. Where they were, they are no longer. Maybe they'll write and tell us where they ended up...
Have you considered the risk she would assume in articulating the definition of ‘trans’? No one will do it because everyone who claims to be trans fully understands the cost of not stepping ‘in line’, whether they acknowledge it or not. The reason no one defines the term is because there is no ‘authorized’ definition to chant and repeat ad nauseam. And there actually can’t be one because such a thing would inevitably reduce the number of fanatics who fall under the proclaimed category of ‘trans’. To define is not inclusive, if you know what I mean. In my estimation, keeping the term amoebic in its definition allows every single individual who feels a little different to identify with something that is loosely based on the ‘lived experience’.
I agree with Chris that it’s a cult of a certain kind.
The most honest answer to the question ‘what is trans?’ is going to be something along the lines of ‘an idea that takes away my pain.’ What trans person, who is sinking their hopes into this idea, is going to readily admit that?
To claim that one is "trans" is a self-delusional performative escape from emotional or physical pain, as is getting drunk or deeply drugged (stoned) is a consumptive escape from that pain. It merely provides the appearance of escape, but behind the performance, or after the alcohol or other drug wears off, the reality of the pain and its source(s) are still fully present, and the person remains stuck.
So to say, "I am trans" is an edgy, "hip" euphemism for "I am stuck". It's a thinly-concealed cry of pain, of low self-esteem, of self-disownment.
This is like trying to converse with someone who is seriously mentally ill, suffering from paranoia, auditory and visual hallucinations. They give the outside appearance of being a person , but are so lost in their illness and so convinced of their vision that it is unrealistic to expect them to reply rationally. I don't think "trans" is this far gone ,but it has similar dynamics and you are no more likely to engage them in meaningful conversation.
Like? It literally is conversing with someone who is seriously mentally ill.
Yep and if we enable their delusions we are as mentally ill as they.
Your statement, “it means you grow up”, struck me as a fundamental flaw in those people subscribed to the trans ideology. A whole study could be done on this. My simple opinion is something terribly wrong happened during their puberty years. It’s hard to avoid in this day when exposure to p@rnography and truly sick and perverse ideas and images are everywhere. Some images I saw in my youth still flash across my memory - and I’m in my mid 60’s. My heart truly breaks for these people. Good article!
We need additional poster showing side by side internal human sexual anatomy of a man and a woman. Or - if this is too much to understand - at least a poster explaining that men produce small gametes - sperm and women produce large gametes - eggs. No hormones and/or surgeries can change the nature of this. Transgendering, in effect, means neutering not changing into the opposite sex. This is an attempt to revise evolutional biology. No science behind it only a pseudoscience. We should protect our children from this insanity.
Someone who decides to transgender as adult must understand the future health risks and life limitations.
They're upset and not talking to you because anyone would have the same reaction to a flat earther that wouldn't give. You're expecting a conversation when.. that's not what this sign is calling for.
there was a sign meant to be inflamitory. and then lamenting the laoss of dialouge failing... is this sea lioning? you're not owed a debate.
A wonderful summary of the dynamics behind so much of might be called identity theory from someone who experienced the deeply deceptive political face behind it. It needs to be exposed for what it is - a political movement masquerading as an academic theory which has absolutely no relation to either truth or reason.
Check out my article on how the term "The Dolls' promotes unreality beauty standards. https://tenderprovocation.substack.com/p/when-the-dolls-become-the-standard
Even far beyond when intersectionality and lived experiences were used for academics. I have to say that yes trans people do exist it is difficult to Define but we actually do have a definition just like you can't Define woke. You went around with a billboard expecting a conversation but you want a diatribe and a debate. And then you play victim.
when he made inflammatory statements on a sign he got what he wanted.
No one is playing victim. Understand that not everyone perceives the world through the Victim Triangle perspective. Not everyone is living in a persistent state of drama. This was a simple discussion and the person wouldn’t answer the question that established a premise. So the conversation was over. Just because she says she’s trans doesn’t mean that she may automatically assume the platform belongs to her and that everything she says is automatically more important than the question that was asked of her. She engaged. And she did it really really poorly.
"persistent state of drama". That is incredibly invalidating and possibly ignorant to the very rights and the like you're losing. Of which I'm surprised you're ok with or are so well-to-do as to not need to care about... or .. empathy.
You lost me. What rights am I losing?
When one is seeing victims everywhere, I consider that a state of drama. Sometimes that’s valid. But that’s not the case here. You seem to think that Peter & Chris are playing the victim because they couldn’t get a straight answer out of this person who just wanted to bulldoze over the whole conversation. So they moved on and then they made minimal discussion about it. If you think they were playing victims over that, then you’re definitely living in a persistent state of drama.
if you don't know then i guess censorship really is effective.
banking, payment processors, web hosting for starters. the OSA,... read something from THE FIRE org or the EFF at least once in your life? maybe even the free speech coalition?
"can't get a straight answer". well if you pulled a die hard 3 and hold up a sign saying...
c'mon now
Um, no. I don’t know because you stopped making sense a while ago. I don’t understand how you are putting these different concepts together. I don’t follow your reasoning. Seems like you’re reaching now, but I can’t tell because there are too many gaps in your logic.
because it's a onesided conversation.
what happened here wasn't in good faith.
"there was a simple discussion'. what is simple about any of this?
her poor engagment. the guy went out with a sign. to bait. and he got the bait and now he IS playing victim.
Only you are seeing victims. I don’t engage in the world that way.
Try not assuming that he’s baiting. Because he’s not. Maybe his sandwich board suit isn’t a perfect engagement tool, but he’s not the vicious monster you may think he is.
I’m not sure you get what is actually going on. It’s not good.
She was all over the place, like a hippo flinging its feces with its tail during defecation. Her rambling and repetitive word salad suggested to me that she was drugged, mentally disturbed, or both.
Or. she's a person and you're looking for a way to not listen so you can not change. just as she was behind defensive.
"I have to say that yes trans people do exist it is difficult to Define but we actually do have a definition just like you can't Define woke."
False.
To be "woke", according to its original definition conceived in the 1940s, meant to be conscious of the plight of Black people and racist attitudes that Caucasians direct at them.
The modern definition of "woke" is derived from Marxism. It means to be awake, to achieve conscientisation (per Marxist "educator" Paolo Friere) by perceiving every aspect of human interaction, every aspect of society through a lens of power struggles between two collectives: "oppressors" (straight, white Caucasian males) and "oppressed" (straight females, and LGBTQ males, females, Blacks, and "People of Color").
Both definitions of "woke" are collectivistic, denying and repudiating the individual and personal volitional physical and intellectual agency. To the "woke", the group, not the individual, is the primary unit in society, and one derives one's identity by one's membership in the group.
"Trans people", i.e., people "transitioning" to the opposite sex, is a biological/chromosomal impossibility; therefore a 'transwoman" or a "transman" is a fictional being. They do not and cannot exist.
Who do, in fact, exist are human beings afflicted with gender dysphoria, a mental disorder that those truly afflicted with it (it's actually quite rare) attempt to cope with by physically modifying themselves to appear like members of the opposite sex, and thus (they mistakenly expect) achieve self-integration and peace of mind.
"You went around with a billboard expecting a conversation but you want a diatribe and a debate. And then you play victim"
(Cont'd) Not expecting, but inviting a conversation. A statement of fact is not a diatribe. Denouncing a fact is a diatribe. A conversation can seque into a debate, but, ideally, all parties must be willing to be rational, reasonable, and willing to check their premises against facts. Otherwise, it's a waste of everyone's time.
"And then you play victim"
You're projecting.
Very well put.
An individual with that way of thinking is doomed to a miserable life. A society that embraces it is doing no one a favor, except creating more misery.
Thanks
Great article.
Thanks