The Problems with Trans-ideology

[Vol8188]

A drag queen is an exaggerated depiction of a woman for comedic purposes, certainly doesn't need to be "hyper-sexualized" and I think pretty unequivocally less sexual than a Hooters girl hired because of her big boobs etc and wearing the least amount of clothes possible to show those sexual attributes off

The “exaggeration” is almost always in an overly sexualized manner. That’s the aspect they exaggerate. Idk how you can honestly deny that aspect.

That’s why they’re wearing heels, tight dresses, Dolly Parton sized fake breasts, etc.

To deny that is to simply be dishonest.

 

[NashVol11]

The “exaggeration” is almost always in an overly sexualized manner. That’s the aspect they exaggerate. Idk how you can honestly deny that aspect.

That’s why they’re wearing heels, tight dresses, Dolly Parton sized fake breasts, etc.

To deny that is to simply be dishonest.

Just as real as all drag queens twerking, right??

Dishonest would be describing these as equally sexual:

 

[C-south]

Just as real as all drag queens twerking, right??

Dishonest would be describing these as equally sexual:

Dishonesty would be thinking they’re all women.

 

[Vol8188]

Just as real as all drag queens twerking, right??

Dishonest would be describing these as equally sexual:

Seems you’re not interested in genuine/honest dialogue if you’re just going to say “I can find an example of drag queens who aren’t trying to be as slutty as possible”….cool? That doesn’t change anything.

 

[NashVol11]

Seems you’re not interested in genuine/honest dialogue if you’re just going to say “I can find an example of drag queens who aren’t trying to be as slutty as possible”….cool? That doesn’t change anything.

Lmao it's the other way around, go ahead and let me know how many people trying to be as slutty as possible you see here. You apparently went to one adult drag show where people were twerking and it formed your opinion for eternity

 

[Vol8188]

Lmao it's the other way around, go ahead and let me know how many people trying to be as slutty as possible you see here. You apparently went to one adult drag show where people were twerking and it formed your opinion for eternity

That’s what drag shows are about. When you say they overly exaggerate womanhood, which specific aspects of womanhood if not the sexual aspects do you mean?

 

[NashVol11]

That’s what drag shows are about. When you say they overly eggagerate, womanhood, which specific aspects of womanhood if not the sexual aspects do you mean?

Could be high voice, could be big hair, could be a style of walking or singing, could be wearing an extremely colorful dress. RuPaul's Drag Race is an entire mainstream TV show that is rarely if ever sexual. Who knew "protect the children" was a cover for Republicans apparently being turned on sexually by all drag queens.

Let me know where you see any reference to sex here:
Definition of DRAG QUEEN

A drag show is a form of entertainment performed by drag artists impersonating men or women, typically in a bar or nightclub. Shows can range from burlesque-style, adult themed nightclub acts to all-ages events with sing-alongs and story times.

 

[Vol8188]

Could be high voice, could be big hair, could be a style of walking or singing, could be wearing an extremely colorful dress. RuPaul's Drag Race is an entire mainstream TV show that is rarely if ever sexual. Who knew "protect the children" was a cover for Republicans apparently being turned on sexually by all drag queens.

Let me know where you see any reference to sex here:
Definition of DRAG QUEEN

Interesting. You’ve still completely ignored the fact that homosexuality (I’m including the whole alphabet) is inherently related to sexual hedonism when you’re making these claims.

So when you attempt to separate drag from its obvious roots the way you are, it would be as disingenuous as taking a bear made for kids and dressing it in bdsm gear and then pretending “it’s no longer sexual”.

Can you take a drag Queen and dress them as unsexual as possible for kids? Sure. But you’re still missing the overall point that the act itself is an example of sexual hedonism, as are all acts of homosexuality.

 

[NashVol11]

Interesting. You’ve still completely ignored the fact that homosexuality (I’m including the whole alphabet) is inherently related to sexual hedonism when you’re making these claims.

So when you attempt to separate drag from its obvious roots the way you are, it would be as disingenuous as taking a bear made for kids and dressing it in bdsm gear and then pretending “it’s no longer sexual”.

Can you take a drag Queen and dress them as unsexual as possible for kids? Sure. But you’re still missing the overall point that the act itself is an example of sexual hedonism, as are all acts of homosexuality.

I've ignored it because when people get to the point of making last-gasp arguments like "well, there should be a different standard of treatment for gay/trans people because they are inherently more sexual and dangerous to children because I said so," I've already proven my point.

 

[Vol8188]

I've ignored it because when people get to the point of making last-gasp arguments like "well, there should be a different standard of treatment for gay people because they are inherently more sexual and dangerous to children because I said so," I've already proven my point.

Depends on what exactly you mean by different standard. Legally? No. Should you take your kids to drag shows? Also, no.

 

[Sea Ray]

Brian Austin Green Responds to Claim Megan Fox Forces Kids to Wear 'Girls Clothes'

 

[Vol8188]

I've ignored it because when people get to the point of making last-gasp arguments like "well, there should be a different standard of treatment for gay/trans people because they are inherently more sexual and dangerous to children because I said so," I've already proven my point.

And for the record my argument was never “because I said so”, nor have you actually proven anything

 

[Vol8188]

It is amazing how frequently the alphabet soup people go after children while proclaiming they 100% are not trying to legalize pedophilia…

Even though the actual philosopher behind queer theory (Michele Foucault) openly supported the idea that children could consent to sex and openly petitioned France to lower their then age of consent which was already only 15

 

[Vol8188]

I've ignored it because when people get to the point of making last-gasp arguments like "well, there should be a different standard of treatment for gay/trans people because they are inherently more sexual and dangerous to children because I said so," I've already proven my point.

Out of curuousity does it bother you that a lot of left wing philosophers (Marx, Foucault, Marcuse, even BLM) have openly spoke out about the need/desire to destroy the traditional family?

When you combine those openly stated desires with obvious attacks on traditional sexuality targeted towards children, how can you see that and not see an issue?

 

[NashVol11]

It is amazing how frequently the alphabet soup people go after children while proclaiming they 100% are not trying to legalize pedophilia…

Even though the actual philosopher behind queer theory (Michele Foucault) openly supported the idea that children could consent to sex and openly petitioned France to lower their then age of consent which was already only 15

It's Michel and Foucault was influential for a number of different reasons, but queer people existed centuries before he did and calling him the "philosopher behind queer theory" which started in the 1990s is also extremely dubious like most of your BS innuendo

 

[NashVol11]

Out of curuousity does it bother you that a lot of left wing philosophers (Marx, Foucault, Marcuse, even BLM) have openly spoke out about the need/desire to destroy the traditional family?

No, especially not when you're making it up for half of them. Foucault analyzed and critiqued the family but didn't "speak out about the need to destroy it" and I suspect the rest of these are similar BS boogeymen

When you combine those openly stated desires with obvious attacks on traditional sexuality targeted towards children, how can you see that and not see an issue?

"Obvious attacks" just like drag queens and their twerking right? Heterosexual children are just being attacked left and right lol

 

[Vol8188]

It's Michel and Foucault was influential for a number of different reasons, but queer people existed centuries before he did and calling him the "philosopher behind queer theory" which started in the 1990s is also extremely dubious like most of your BS innuendo

Is it dubious or was queer theory not an offshoot of his philosophy? Even the university of Cambridge when studying queer theory starts the course with Foucault.

 

[NashVol11]

Oh, surprise, the BLM one was BS too:

For example, at the Republican National Convention, former NFL player Jack Brewer said the organization "openly on their website calls for the destruction of the nuclear family. My fellow Americans, our families need each other. We need black fathers in the homes with their wives and children."

We found that while Black Lives Matter seeks change in how "family" is defined, especially with respect to public policy, it’s a leap to conclude that it wants to eliminate traditional family structures.

What Black Lives Matter says
First, Brewer’s statement doesn’t fully represent what the Black Lives Matter website says about families.

"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable," it says on the page titled "What we believe."

The movement, which was formed in response to the 2013 acquittal of George Zimmerman, a neighborhood-watch volunteer who fatally shot teenager Trayvon Martin in Florida, also says:

"We make our spaces family-friendly and enable parents to fully participate with their children. We dismantle the patriarchal practice that requires mothers to work ‘double shifts’ so that they can mother in private even as they participate in public justice work."

Funny how many of these "theories" thrown at me to justify transphobia turn out to be complete horsesh**

 

[Vol8188]

No, especially not when you're making it up for half of them. Foucault analyzed and critiqued the family but didn't "speak out about the need to destroy it" and I suspect the rest of these are similar BS boogeymen



"Obvious attacks" just like drag queens and their twerking right? Heterosexual children are just being attacked left and right lol

Let’s start with your first claim that I’m “making it up for half of them”. Outside of Foucault who do you believe did not oppose the nuclear family that I specifically listed? It’s easier than me finding direct quotes from all if you’re only questioning my claim regarding some.

There’s an obvious movement away from traditional families and to teach children that gender roles, sexuality, etc are fluid, on a spectrum, social constructs, etc.

 

[NashVol11]

There’s an obvious movement away from traditional families and to teach children that gender roles, sexuality, etc are fluid, on a spectrum, social constructs, etc.

Teaching children that other forms of sexuality exist is an "attack on nuclear families" the same way saying Happy Holidays is an "attack on Christmas", which is to say, not at all other than in the minds of people who are used to being the only voice in the room and want to play the victim about it

 

[Vol8188]

Oh, surprise, the BLM one was BS too:


Funny how many of these "theories" thrown at me to justify transphobia turn out to be complete horsesh**

Is it horseshit or are you just arguing semantics? “We disrupt the nuclear family”….that obviously reads to anyone/everyone “we oppose the nuclear family”.

How else could you possibly see that? I can’t think of any reason why you’d place that statement in a conversation about the value of black lives, other than as a Marxist virtue signal. But if you can provide another reason, I’d be willing to listen

 

[NashVol11]

Is it horseshit or are you just arguing semantics? “We disrupt the nuclear family”….that obviously reads to anyone/everyone “we oppose the nuclear family”.

How else could you possibly see that? I can’t think of any reason why you’d place that statement in a conversation about the value of black lives, other than as a Marxist virtue signal. But if you can provide another reason, I’d be willing to listen

Collective support to the degree parents are comfortable is not "destroying the family" lol. I can't imagine the mindset it takes to be threatened by that

 

[Vol8188]

Teaching children that other forms of sexuality exist is an "attack on nuclear families" the same way saying Happy Holidays is an "attack on Christmas", which is to say, not at all other than in the minds of people who are used to being the only voice in the room and want to play the victim about it

I could care less about happy holidays. You keep doing this weird thing where you find other things people complain about and then lump me in for no apparent reason other than deflection from the point.

Do other families exist? Sure. But it still seems you’re intentionally avoiding the point that many are opposed to the nuclear family and are very open about it.

 

[NashVol11]

I could care less about happy holidays. You keep doing this weird thing where you find other things people complain about and then lump me in for no apparent reason other than deflection from the point.

Do other families exist? Sure. But it still seems you’re intentionally avoiding the point that many are opposed to the nuclear family and are very open about it.

I'm not saying you get angry about Happy Holidays, I'm saying the outrage is similar where if you acknowledge anything other than heterosexuality (or Christmas in my example), those people - who happen to be in the overwhelming majority that society has always catered to - claim they're "being attacked" and everyone else rolls their eyes. I'm heterosexual and never once have I even thought to play the victim like that

 

[Vol8188]

Collective support to the degree parents are comfortable is not "destroying the family" lol. I can't imagine the mindset it takes to be threatened by that

Destroying vs disrupting, is there really a difference in that context?

If not, can you tell me what you believe they mean by their stated desire to “disrupt” the nuclear family?

Anyone who is attempting to promote a lesser alternative, we should all take issue with. The data on the importance of two parent households is incredibly solid.