Good sir, this is the first post of yours which has led me to think you may be in need of an editor as I emerge quite confused. In what world is Sophie Cook a "she"? A world in which womanhood is defined by hair length, use of lipstick and mascara, high heels or because-I-said-so bullying? I encourage you to change this pronoun, at the least, to "xhe," since it seems Sophie thinks there is something shameful about a man wanting to do all the things women are allowed to do. As a pants-wearing, makeup-eschewing, ovaried believer in truthful self-acceptance and unconditional love (I believe that's what TERF stands for), I'd have to disagree. Congratulatons, Mr. Cook, on your promotion. You are really weird, and I identify as weird, too. If you weren't part of a movement with actual power and influence, I would go along with your crazy in a heartbeat.
Sophia is definitely a dude, needs AC/DC tour shirt, leather jacket, jeans, studded belt, headband instead of that dress... Sophia is a hesher in drag.
Just one more example of how trying to be accepting of the delusions of others to be nice is a weakness that will result in the destruction of society.
I know that anyone quoting or discussing controversial topics is supposed to self-sensor their language so as to not offend, e.g., saying "n-word" instead of "nigger." I know that my use of that verboten word will cause some to irrationally conclude that I must be racist. (I wrote a short piece about that in my substack). I know that many have decided it's better to go along with the "big is beautiful" narrative so they aren't accused of "body shaming" and refusing to "believe all women" elicits cries of "sexism." But I don't care.
The reason I will not go a.ong to get along is not that I don't care about human beings. It is because I do care that I will not participate in the delusions and absurdities that if allowed to continue will destroy Western Civilization.
Rational human beings must refuse to entertain these delusions and absurdities.
The very non-pc American writer Steve Sailer, who correctly made the pithy observation that "political correctness is a war on noticing" writes quite a bit about this new brand of transgender women who've exploded on the scene this last decade. These "Ex-men", as he calls them, differ greatly from those unfortunate souls suffering from true gender dysphoria. They tend to be high IQ bullies with autogynephila fetishes who love their newfound power in forcing people to acquiesce to their sexual proclivities. Here's one of Sailer's latest on this topic: https://www.unz.com/isteve/transgender-century-of-visibility/?highlight=transgender
After the Oberegfell decision in the US, one of Sailer's commenters wrote that gay marriage is the starting line, not the finish line. Look around you; he was right. Slippery slopes are real, and we are tumbling head-over-heels down one that will not end until sex with minors is legalized. Oh, they'll call it mentorship (like the ancient Greeks!) or some such Bee Ess, and they'll even be able to bolster their position using our new god of "Science"--the onset of puberty will be used to justify lowering the age of consent. Psychology will jump onboard and helpfully explain that most children are very precocious, sexually. I predict...
I don't have too much of a problem with whatever anyone chooses to 'be' on a personal level. You do whatever makes you happy - and if that's prancing around at midnight eating grass and pretending you're a deer - go for it.
But, as the saying goes, "don't drag me into your delusion" - which is a mildly offensive way of questioning the demands you make on others to accommodate you.
I'm perfectly OK with treating a trans woman, for example, *as if* she were a woman on a personal, everyday interaction, sort of basis. It's not such a big deal for me and seems a reasonable compromise. What I won't do, and can't do, is to accept that person *IS* actually a woman in any meaningful biological sense.
The problem is, and the reason for the growing pushback, is that things have not just stopped at this "personal" level - it seems like everything is being re-shaped, forcibly, to accommodate the feelings of a small minority. And it's OK to go some way towards accommodating those feelings - I don't wish discrimination on anyone - but there is, as in most things, a balance to be struck.
What we're seeing at the moment goes way beyond mere acceptance and tolerance. It has reached the level of *encouragement*. It also impacts other groups - and so goes beyond the 'personal'. If there is, effectively, no such thing as a 'woman' - and we've all seen the absurd struggles to give any kind of meaningful definition of the term from the high priests of gender-woo, then feminism and the struggle for 'women's rights' becomes a meaningless thing. So we're re-shaping our society to have this weird conception of what a woman is, meanwhile throwing the vast majority of actual women under the bus.
Tolerance, to put a spin on Erdogan's quote about democracy, is a train that the left used to arrive at cultural dominance. Now that it's been achieved, tolerance towards divergent views (held by practically all until the day before yesterday) is being denied.
As you've written, this transgender movement (curiously, seemingly not led by actual transgender individuals) goes far beyond acceptance/tolerance and makes demands on others. It's also an attack on reality and the language that reflects reality (man/woman; male/female). Confusion abounds now. Recently I read an article claiming that (iirc) over 20% of American kids in the 12-17 yo category claim to be one of the varieties of the rainbow and, horrifyingly, befuddled minors are being chemically and surgically altered.
Along this line, as someone who saw no problem with gay marriage when it passed, I now would have opposed using the word "marriage,", opting instead for "civil union," conferring all the legal rights of marriage, but avoiding the term. Marriage and family are the foundations of strong societies, so it's no surprise that Western nations are falling into disarray. Now that we've tinkered with the meaning of marriage, on what grounds are we to oppose marriage between multiple individuals? Besides, it turns out, gay people don't really subscribe to traditional beliefs of marriage: https://www.thedailybeast.com/gay-open-marriages-need-to-come-out-of-the-closet
Why the letter x? Because it is often representing "the unknown" in mathematics? Or because it is such an underrepresented letter? Or because it is a crossing of two phallic symbols (now try to unsee that one in the future)?
Sophia would look good with a handlebar moustache... btw, latinx womxn is pronounced "latina" or "latinas" or "mujeres latinas" if you want to be understood by Spanish speakers.
yeah, my best friends are from the US - he's a cracker and she's latina and takes extreme offence at being described as "latinx". We sometimes have lots of fun ribbing each other along lines that the "woke" would consider to be egregiously offensive and stereotypical - anything goes. But it brings us closer together. Weird that isn't it?
Good sir, this is the first post of yours which has led me to think you may be in need of an editor as I emerge quite confused. In what world is Sophie Cook a "she"? A world in which womanhood is defined by hair length, use of lipstick and mascara, high heels or because-I-said-so bullying? I encourage you to change this pronoun, at the least, to "xhe," since it seems Sophie thinks there is something shameful about a man wanting to do all the things women are allowed to do. As a pants-wearing, makeup-eschewing, ovaried believer in truthful self-acceptance and unconditional love (I believe that's what TERF stands for), I'd have to disagree. Congratulatons, Mr. Cook, on your promotion. You are really weird, and I identify as weird, too. If you weren't part of a movement with actual power and influence, I would go along with your crazy in a heartbeat.
lol
Yeah - you've made me realize that the word "she" actually contains the word "he" and so does the word "her"
I should, of course, have written 'hxr' and 'shx'
My apologies
Sophia is definitely a dude, needs AC/DC tour shirt, leather jacket, jeans, studded belt, headband instead of that dress... Sophia is a hesher in drag.
shxt.
I agree. I can't do it. I can't refer to a man as "she"
Just one more example of how trying to be accepting of the delusions of others to be nice is a weakness that will result in the destruction of society.
I know that anyone quoting or discussing controversial topics is supposed to self-sensor their language so as to not offend, e.g., saying "n-word" instead of "nigger." I know that my use of that verboten word will cause some to irrationally conclude that I must be racist. (I wrote a short piece about that in my substack). I know that many have decided it's better to go along with the "big is beautiful" narrative so they aren't accused of "body shaming" and refusing to "believe all women" elicits cries of "sexism." But I don't care.
The reason I will not go a.ong to get along is not that I don't care about human beings. It is because I do care that I will not participate in the delusions and absurdities that if allowed to continue will destroy Western Civilization.
Rational human beings must refuse to entertain these delusions and absurdities.
The very non-pc American writer Steve Sailer, who correctly made the pithy observation that "political correctness is a war on noticing" writes quite a bit about this new brand of transgender women who've exploded on the scene this last decade. These "Ex-men", as he calls them, differ greatly from those unfortunate souls suffering from true gender dysphoria. They tend to be high IQ bullies with autogynephila fetishes who love their newfound power in forcing people to acquiesce to their sexual proclivities. Here's one of Sailer's latest on this topic: https://www.unz.com/isteve/transgender-century-of-visibility/?highlight=transgender
After the Oberegfell decision in the US, one of Sailer's commenters wrote that gay marriage is the starting line, not the finish line. Look around you; he was right. Slippery slopes are real, and we are tumbling head-over-heels down one that will not end until sex with minors is legalized. Oh, they'll call it mentorship (like the ancient Greeks!) or some such Bee Ess, and they'll even be able to bolster their position using our new god of "Science"--the onset of puberty will be used to justify lowering the age of consent. Psychology will jump onboard and helpfully explain that most children are very precocious, sexually. I predict...
I don't have too much of a problem with whatever anyone chooses to 'be' on a personal level. You do whatever makes you happy - and if that's prancing around at midnight eating grass and pretending you're a deer - go for it.
But, as the saying goes, "don't drag me into your delusion" - which is a mildly offensive way of questioning the demands you make on others to accommodate you.
I'm perfectly OK with treating a trans woman, for example, *as if* she were a woman on a personal, everyday interaction, sort of basis. It's not such a big deal for me and seems a reasonable compromise. What I won't do, and can't do, is to accept that person *IS* actually a woman in any meaningful biological sense.
The problem is, and the reason for the growing pushback, is that things have not just stopped at this "personal" level - it seems like everything is being re-shaped, forcibly, to accommodate the feelings of a small minority. And it's OK to go some way towards accommodating those feelings - I don't wish discrimination on anyone - but there is, as in most things, a balance to be struck.
What we're seeing at the moment goes way beyond mere acceptance and tolerance. It has reached the level of *encouragement*. It also impacts other groups - and so goes beyond the 'personal'. If there is, effectively, no such thing as a 'woman' - and we've all seen the absurd struggles to give any kind of meaningful definition of the term from the high priests of gender-woo, then feminism and the struggle for 'women's rights' becomes a meaningless thing. So we're re-shaping our society to have this weird conception of what a woman is, meanwhile throwing the vast majority of actual women under the bus.
Tolerance, to put a spin on Erdogan's quote about democracy, is a train that the left used to arrive at cultural dominance. Now that it's been achieved, tolerance towards divergent views (held by practically all until the day before yesterday) is being denied.
As you've written, this transgender movement (curiously, seemingly not led by actual transgender individuals) goes far beyond acceptance/tolerance and makes demands on others. It's also an attack on reality and the language that reflects reality (man/woman; male/female). Confusion abounds now. Recently I read an article claiming that (iirc) over 20% of American kids in the 12-17 yo category claim to be one of the varieties of the rainbow and, horrifyingly, befuddled minors are being chemically and surgically altered.
Along this line, as someone who saw no problem with gay marriage when it passed, I now would have opposed using the word "marriage,", opting instead for "civil union," conferring all the legal rights of marriage, but avoiding the term. Marriage and family are the foundations of strong societies, so it's no surprise that Western nations are falling into disarray. Now that we've tinkered with the meaning of marriage, on what grounds are we to oppose marriage between multiple individuals? Besides, it turns out, gay people don't really subscribe to traditional beliefs of marriage: https://www.thedailybeast.com/gay-open-marriages-need-to-come-out-of-the-closet
tale as old as time
misogynists with lipstick
https://www.salon.com/2014/12/02/fast_company_promotes_live_chat_with_creepy_male_feminist/
Why the letter x? Because it is often representing "the unknown" in mathematics? Or because it is such an underrepresented letter? Or because it is a crossing of two phallic symbols (now try to unsee that one in the future)?
Sophia would look good with a handlebar moustache... btw, latinx womxn is pronounced "latina" or "latinas" or "mujeres latinas" if you want to be understood by Spanish speakers.
yeah, my best friends are from the US - he's a cracker and she's latina and takes extreme offence at being described as "latinx". We sometimes have lots of fun ribbing each other along lines that the "woke" would consider to be egregiously offensive and stereotypical - anything goes. But it brings us closer together. Weird that isn't it?
I put Sophie through one of those female or male programs.
I was not impressed with the results.