Happy 3rd Pit Birthday!

#28621

Scented Nectar wrote:
HunnyBunny wrote:
:o

Ohh, dis gonna be good :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
That courtesy is more than I feel comfortable with these days. I don't think I should be expected to participate in someone's autogynephiliac fantasy foreplay. Calling an autogynephiliac "she" or "her" or "Mary, let's do our nails, girlfriend!" is participating in what sexually titillates them. I don't have to participate.

This has been pissing me off more and more. I've nothing against their paraphilia per se, but they've got to stop forcing others into their sexual role play.

Comic Dave Chappell was at a party when a cross dressing man collapsed. Dave asked, "Is that guy okay?" And was upbraided for it. His response was: "I support anyone’s right to be who they want to be. My question is: to what extent do I have to participate in your self-image?"

#28622

My old blog is fucked up with pictures and videos all mixed up somehow. So, I've taken most of it down. I wasn't writing in it any more anyways. But the other day, I wrote out something about autogynephiliac trans-women, that would have made a good post there. So, I'll plop it down here instead! Ignore the unnecessary explanations, like what TERF stands for. They are there because this was going to be a blog post. It's easier to write this 'ignore' stuff, than it is for me to edit it out.
______________________________________

The Pink Trans-Elephant in the Room - Autogynephilia

I think of male-to-female transexuals as being in one of three categories:

1. Some trans-women (males who 'become' females cosmetically and behaviourally), are autogynephiliacs. Autogynephilia is a sexual orientation where a man is aroused by thinking of his own body as female.

2. Some trans-women are gay men who are uncomfortable with their orientation and, because of that discomfort, can only have sex with straight men while pretending that they themselves are female (and straight).

3. Some trans-women have authentic body dysmorphia, which means that their reason for being trans is that they really believe they are a woman trapped in a man's body.

Most people think that the last one, the body dysmorphia is the main reason men 'become' cosmetically female. I think it's mostly the first one, the autogynephilia. There's nothing wrong with that intrinsically. It's a non-harmful sexual orientation.

However, I think a line should be drawn at expecting non-consenting people to participate in their autogynephilic behaviour. That means that no one should be EXPECTED to pretend with them that they are female. No one is under any obligation to call them pronouns that titilate them or to talk 'girl-talk' with them.

Most autogynephiliacs claim that they are lesbian. They are actually straight men who are attracted to women, but since they want to think of themselves as women too, they consider themselves lesbian. They are not lesbians. They are straight men whose fetish is autogynephilia. Part of that is sexual arousal when others pretend with them that they are female. Such as calling him 'her', 'she', or 'Mary'.

I don't like that pronouns are gendered in the first place. One's sex organs have nothing to do with most sentences, so there's no reason for separate gender pronouns. However, like it or not, gendered pronouns exist. And trans-women like gendered pronouns. A lot. Most people by habit, use pronouns based on the presenting physical features of the person. Deep voice, male body shape, and Adam's apple? That's 'he', 'him', and 'his'. The reason those pronouns get a trans-woman angry isn't because gendered pronouns are unnecessary or that they are sexist. It's because autogynephiliac trans-women want everyone to be forced to participate in what sexually arouses them.

Do I HAVE to use the pronouns they find titillating? No. Should lesbians HAVE to have sex with an autogynephiliac? No. If a real woman claims that her autogynephiliac male lover's body is female, she's lying to herself. She's either bisexual or straight. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it should be acknowledged for what it really is. Let's not pretend any more.

Consider this as a comparison. Say someone gets aroused by frottage, which is rubbing up against other people. If that person intentionally goes onto a crowded subway at rush hour for the express purpose of sexual arousal, are those other people consenting? They don't even know that the person pressed against them is there on purpose to get off. Just like people who agree to use pronouns and call a man "Mary" don't realize that the man is getting off on it. So, is that sort of thing consensual?

I used to know a woman who did that subway frottage thing back in 1980. She would go on the subway during rush hours for that purpose. She didn't care who the strangers were as long as they would press up against her. Pretty, ugly, old, young, even kids, she didn't care as long as she could deceptively get some frottage from them.

Consent is the issue here. On one hand, I don't believe in thought crimes. People can have horny thoughts whenever, and about whatever, they want. It's the expectation of participation that I'm against. Should I have to share a public bathroom or change room with a man who gets off on pretending he's a lesbian? No. Do I have to accept real lesbians who might be there? Yes, of course. Bathrooms and change rooms are not there for sexual arousal. They are sex separated because most men and most women are only comfortable being in states of undress around people of their own sex. If an autogynephiliac is in a women's change room, it's not because they are a fellow woman. It's because they get off on it, even if they don't finish wanking about it until later in private.

So, how is it different from a lesbian who finds herself aroused by other women in the change room? It's incidental to lesbian's being there. Non-lesbian women tend to not mind lesbians sharing those places. They are however, uncomfortable with a man sharing those spaces, even if he's gay and not at all aroused by women. It's the body parts that count the most in change rooms. So, when someone with the wrong body parts is in the change room, discomfort occurs. I suspect that the discomfort is made worse by knowing the man's intention is sexual arousal, but that the main discomfort is due to the wrong body parts. It's not bigotry.

In the case of an autogynephiliac, all female gender role behaviour, including using women's bathrooms and change rooms, are done for sexual gratification, not because they have a female body. Change rooms and bathrooms should stay body-part-based, not based on whatever a person wishes they were, or 'identifies' as, or feels more aroused by. Trans people have to accept that the vast majority of people are uncomfortable with the opposite sex seeing them naked or being in the bathroom with them. Even post-op trans-women have to accept that. Cosmetic changes are not real, and also, they usually don't work very well. Very few trans-women pass as real women. Sex differences in body types show.

I fight a lot with feminists and social justice warrior types, but in the online trans-wars, I have to side with the TERFs. That stands for "trans exclusive radical feminists". While I disagree on many things with radical feminists, the TERFs have a very good point. Trans-women are men, and no one should have to participate in their pretense of being women by letting them into women's change rooms, etc.

Autogynephilia, the real reason many trans-women are women, is the pink elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about. Everyone wants to believe trans-women are that way due to true body dysmorphia, some even believing the old this-brain-in-a-that-body nonsense. That's only the case for some. Many are autogynephiliacs.

I have nothing against the fetish itself. It should be accepted and treated equally with every other non-harmful fetish. But to ensure it really is non-harmful, consent is needed. That's how it works with all sexual orientations and fetishes. It must be consensual in order to be non-harmful. Autogynephiliacs have to accept that they can't force people to participate.

I also agree with the TERFs in another way. I'm against pressuring people to fit into gender roles. Trans people equivocate feminine gender roles with actually being physically female. Just because he wears pink, wears makeup, calls himself Mary, and likes high heels or frilly lingerie, does not mean that I must think of him as a woman. He's a man who happens to like pink, makeup, calling himself Mary, high heels, and frilly lingerie. No problem. Just don't expect me to participate without my consent. Trans-women have to start accepting other people's right to not consent.

I think everyone should choose behaviours based on what they as individuals enjoy rather than have to conform to societal gender roles. However, co-existing with that, is the fact that most humans everywhere tend to WANT gender roles to some extent. So, while people should be free to not conform to gender roles, people should also be free TO conform to them. That freedom has to stop though, at parts of life that are sex-organ-specific, such as change rooms and public bathrooms. Those places aren't even gender role based. They are sex organ based. No matter how much a man enjoys, or is aroused by, female gender roles, that shouldn't include any right to use female change rooms or female public bathrooms.

In the news and on social media are examples of trans-women insisting that lesbians should allow these men into lesbian porn flicks, and that straight men should learn to enjoy "girl dicks" and if they don't then they are transphobic bigots. This overt non-consent and disrespect of other people's sexual orientations happens alongside the less sexually obvious demand that everyone call them by the pronouns they find titilating.

There are some grey areas in all this though. I don't think any sexual thoughts should be considered crimes, but on the other hand, to what extent are actual behaviours involved? Is entering a change room with the purpose of sexual arousal a thought 'crime' that should not be thought poorly of, or is it a deceptive behaviour with participation forced onto other people? How can we differentiate between a sneaky autogynephiliac and an innocent person suffering either body dismorphia or self-gay-hatred? Is the discomfort experienced by trans-women when using men's facilities greater than the discomfort experienced by women who have to share their facilities with a man?

#28623

I always enjoy reading the Breitbart comments because it's refreshing to read a media comment section that doesn't sound largely right wing and pissed off. I think most of Breitbart's natural constituents are over at the Guardian penning seething jeremiads - any remaining conservatives mostly sound querulous, lost and a bit overwhelmed, like maiden aunts who took a wrong turn on Tom of Finland wrestling night and now must deal with confusingly mixed feelings regarding a sudden onslaught of homosexuality and liberalism in a place they once thought they knew.

Guest_27324df6 · #28624

Cnutella wrote:
rayshul wrote:I'm amused watching the reddit fuckery.
Yeah, I have been enjoying the actions of a community manager who first came to the general attention of the community still missing her predecessor by pissing off a large chunk of their more influential members right out the gate.

Shades of Ellen Pao? The Redditor owners consider themselves sooooper-genius Masters of Puppets, so I am vaguely interested to know whether they really do have a diabolic plan to reform Reddit into something more loveable to investors, or whether they're just frantically winging it as they try to effect change without evaporating into MySpace.

I'd say there are separate factions that have the same goal for different reasons. There are those that want to control the internet to make it easier to monetize, and there are those that want to control it for ideological, political reasons. Extreme right wing religious radicals and regressive leftists both would love to criminalize speech, and they're both blind enough to believe that OF COURSE their speech isn't the one that is going to be curtailed, since it is self-evidently moral and right. It's those disrespectful, insulting atheists shitting all over the sacred doctrines of religions, or those disrespectful, insulting racists/sexists shitting all over the sacred doctrines of postmodernism which will be rightfully silenced, since their odious hate is obviously incompatible with free speech.

The real winners will be the corporations and businesses, the others are merely useful idiots who will be the first up against the wall, metaphorically, once the "revolution" is complete. Extreme speech will be the first curtailed, and so many of these idiots are unnable to see that they are the extreme and not the mainstream, that they are a vanishingly small but loud and entitled minority.

Incidentally, I see the corporatization and/or government imposed authority over the internet, it's fragmentation from quasi-universal to a chain of isolated islands, each under a different cyber jurisdiction depending on the interests of the businesses or government in question, as inevitable. Enjoy the internet as we know it while it lasts.

#28625

Kirbmarc wrote:
We don't know if she might have in danger from him or not. Yes, Hannibal has paid his debt with society (assuming that he was actually convicted and the website where his profile was found is reliable). No, this doesn't mean that he's completely harmless, especially since he's engaging in questionable behavior with JJTalkz. If his date of birth is accurate he's much older than her.

He's much older than me, and men my age (26) who hit on 17 year old girls on the Internet are showing some creepy, potentially dangerous behavior. I believe that if he sent her sexually explicit material or having sexually suggestive talks when she was a minor he committed a crime. Even if he didn't he's still skating on very thin ice. If we add to that a previous conviction for "corruption of a minor" (assuming that it's accurate) he really doesn't look like a "harmless" person.

He's not as bad as an Ogvorbis, but if we assume that everything about him is true he's a middle-aged man who has shown some sexual preference for underage girls who hangs around an underage/barely legal girl that he met on the Internet.

Some concern is probably warranted.

"Corruption of a minor" is a sexual offense that does not apply when one turns 18.
And while most countries have similar laws few are as mushy to define or as all-encompassing as the US version.
I'm sorry but sticking his dick into a willing 18 year old is not a 'danger' (assuming that was to happen, I doubt she's physically attracted to Mr 400 pounds) even if the age -range difference makes you personally queasy.

f
"Corruption of a minor" is a sexual offense that does not apply when one turns 18.
And while most countries have similar laws few are as mushy to define or as all-encompassing as the US version.
I'm sorry but sticking his dick into a willing 18 year old is not a 'danger' (assuming that was to happen, I doubt she's physically attracted to Mr 400 pounds) even if the age -range difference makes you personally queasy.

I also doubt he's the type to chop people up.
At this point this seems much ado about nothing. Focus on his bad behavior towrds Thunderf00t, find out the exact details of whatever he was convicted for and criticize him for that, but for the love of God stop White Knighting the sexual purity of an 18 year old SJW female.

#28626

HAHAHAHAHA!

http://imgur.com/eIRqzoK.png

Poor Boodles, it turns out her name ISN'T in Twitter's mission statement.

BTW Rebecca, thanks for not sharing. Really.

#28627

Seems I copied a paragraph before I copied and pasted. I really need to preview more :(

#28628

Ape+lust wrote:HAHAHAHAHA!

http://imgur.com/eIRqzoK.png

Poor Boodles, it turns out her name ISN'T in Twitter's mission statement.

.

I laughed. My God, these people think they are the End All and Be All of the Universe.

#28629

Clarence wrote:I laughed. My God, these people think they are the End All and Be All of the Universe.

They're probably sick of her. With all her hectoring, I expect they're ready to send her a job application so she can shut up and fine-tune the Twitter experience properly.

#28630

Guest_84d94f98 wrote:Just to put Hannibal's actions of trying to pick up an underage girl for sex into perspective, in the rural parts of ohio there are not a lot of job opportunities. People get sucked into just surviving on meth and heroine. It is a hideous downward spiral. And the women who get addicted to these drugs have to find ways to pay for them somehow. Without much in terms of employment prospects, and not much to steal, that kind of leaves them with prostitution.

There are a number of desperate easy marks. So desperate that there has been a serial killer offing some of these women. And yet they are still so hooked on the drugs, they still continue to go out and prostitute themselves.

So he is probably so used to it being around, he thought he could get away with it.

cnn.com/2015/06/26/us/chillicothe-ohio-missing-women/

wcpo.com/news/state/state-ohio/missing-chillicothe-women-who-or-what-is-killing-women-in-small-central-ohio-city

Don't worry. I am sure that JJtalkz was totally not at risk meeting up with a secretly convicted pedo in drug infested rural ohio that she had only met on the internet before. What could go wrong.

AHAH!
Well, you've cracked the case Sir. Clearly this guy had a one plus year plot (that he hadn't even put into operation yet, My God are you astute and brilliant at reading minds) to get this girl (who seems perfectly rational and in control of her facilities for NOW but just wait till he got her hooked on weed/meth/crack cocaine!) all doped up and HAVE HIS WICKED WAY WITH HER! Then, he would be pimping her out here and there UNDER The nose of not only the local cops (who were probably aware of his record) but also her Lawyer mom (whom he'll also get addicted to the drugs or his big "D").

Human trafficking ALL THE WAY baby!
Big deal that most drug and HT dealers are parts of large organizations and are violent people. This guy is 400 pounds and he had some sort of non-violent but illegal stuff with a 13,14, or 15 year old over ten years ago. Clearly there is NOTHING he won't do, nothing he isn't capable of!

The above would be bad fiction. It's too bad some people take it as fact.

#28631

Guest_84d94f98 wrote:Just to put Hannibal's actions of trying to pick up an underage girl for sex into perspective, in the rural parts of ohio there are not a lot of job opportunities. People get sucked into just surviving on meth and heroine. It is a hideous downward spiral. And the women who get addicted to these drugs have to find ways to pay for them somehow. Without much in terms of employment prospects, and not much to steal, that kind of leaves them with prostitution.

There are a number of desperate easy marks. So desperate that there has been a serial killer offing some of these women. And yet they are still so hooked on the drugs, they still continue to go out and prostitute themselves.

So he is probably so used to it being around, he thought he could get away with it.

cnn.com/2015/06/26/us/chillicothe-ohio-missing-women/

wcpo.com/news/state/state-ohio/missing-chillicothe-women-who-or-what-is-killing-women-in-small-central-ohio-city

Don't worry. I am sure that JJtalkz was totally not at risk meeting up with a secretly convicted pedo in drug infested rural ohio that she had only met on the internet before. What could go wrong.

AHAH!
Well, you've cracked the case Sir. Clearly this guy had a one plus year plot (that he hadn't even put into operation yet, My God are you astute and brilliant at reading minds) to get this girl (who seems perfectly rational and in control of her facilities for NOW but just wait till he got her hooked on weed/meth/crack cocaine!) all doped up and HAVE HIS WICKED WAY WITH HER! Then, he would be pimping her out here and there UNDER The nose of not only the local cops (who were probably aware of his record) but also her Lawyer mom (whom he'll also get addicted to the drugs or his big "D").

Human trafficking ALL THE WAY baby!
Big deal that most drug and HT dealers are parts of large organizations and are violent people. This guy is 400 pounds and he had some sort of non-violent but illegal stuff with a 13,14, or 15 year old over ten years ago. Clearly there is NOTHING he won't do, nothing he isn't capable of!

The above would be bad fiction. It's too bad some people take it as fact.

#28632

ARGGGGGGGGGGGH evil Slymepit! This time a DOUBLE POST.
WHY? y? Y? wiiiiiiiiiiii?
*grumbles and goes off for some breakfast*
You kids stay offa my lawn!

#28633

Clarence wrote: You kids stay offa my lawn!

http://www.smilies.4-user.de/include/Sp ... sp_003.gif

good advice.

#28634

Service Dog wrote:
Clarence wrote: You kids stay offa my lawn!

http://www.smilies.4-user.de/include/Sp ... sp_003.gif

good advice.

I figured someone would 'go there'. heehehehehehehe

#28635

Guest_84d94f98 wrote:Just to put Hannibal's actions of trying to pick up an underage girl for sex into perspective, in the rural parts of ohio there are not a lot of job opportunities. People get sucked into just surviving on meth and heroine. It is a hideous downward spiral. And the women who get addicted to these drugs have to find ways to pay for them somehow. Without much in terms of employment prospects, and not much to steal, that kind of leaves them with prostitution.

There are a number of desperate easy marks. So desperate that there has been a serial killer offing some of these women. And yet they are still so hooked on the drugs, they still continue to go out and prostitute themselves.

So he is probably so used to it being around, he thought he could get away with it.

cnn.com/2015/06/26/us/chillicothe-ohio-missing-women/

wcpo.com/news/state/state-ohio/missing-chillicothe-women-who-or-what-is-killing-women-in-small-central-ohio-city

Don't worry. I am sure that JJtalkz was totally not at risk meeting up with a secretly convicted pedo in drug infested rural ohio that she had only met on the internet before. What could go wrong.

I apologize for initially thinking you were spewing garbageheaded fantasies.
The ironclad facts are on your side.

http://i.imgur.com/LwCiYWI.png

#28636

Ape+lust wrote:HAHAHAHAHA!

http://imgur.com/eIRqzoK.png

Poor Boodles, it turns out her name ISN'T in Twitter's mission statement.

BTW Rebecca, thanks for not sharing. Really.

Well, looks like PZ won't be kicked off Twitter. I mean, it has to be PZ, right? Who else would ruin perfectly good porn by shopping Watson's doughy, bleary-eyed head on it?

#28637

Clarence wrote:
Guest_84d94f98 wrote:

You are right Clarence. It isn't as if the guy has a criminal history of targeting underage girls. And it wasn't that long ago that JJTalkz was posting about being in highschool and her 1 year anniversary on youtube with all those great amazing impressive mentors at the age of 17.

Oh -no. She just wiped all of her videos older than 6 months from her channel within the last 24 hours after finding out she had a pedopal. Seriously, take a look at her channel.
Because 17 is a child and is the exact same as 13, right? And now she's 18 anyway, but he's still obviously 'grooming' her.
We have no idea the details of his conviction except that it almost certainly didn't involve force.
We know it was over 10 years ago.
We know that he was out of jail for most of those ten years apparently not molesting any more young teens.
She has every right -upon presumably learning more from him then we know- to be disgusted by him.
But she doesn't seem to have been in any danger FROM him.

Your temporal point of reference is off. This has been going on for quite some time. That she's NOW 18 doesn't mean the perv wasn't slowly working his way into her life when she was 16 and/or 17 and wouldn't have, if the opportunity presented itself, tried to bang her as an under-age girl.

Nor does any lack of subsequent arrest and punishment mean he hasn't either tried or executed the same or that he was not doing it at this point in time. Truth is, people frequently do not report crimes, especially sexual-related crimes, but even non-sexual crimes are often unreported and grooming isn't even a crime:

From 2006 to 2010, the two highest percentages of unreported crime were among household theft (67%) and rape or sexual assault (65%) victimizations, and the lowest percentage was among motor vehicle theft (17%) victimizations (table 1). About 46% of serious violent victimizations were not reported to police.

Source -- US Department of Justice -- http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/vnrp0610.pdf

That's not a bunch SJWs crying about 'stare rape' or 'regret rape' or 'I changed my mind after he shot his wad in me rape.' Those are professional crime epidemiologists using strict definitions of crimes in a very controlled and statistically significant survey that, annually, is conducted with over 50,000 households.

Now, was he grooming her? Fuck if I know. But your argument against the evidence-free accusation (which is all it remains unless he establish a clear pattern of behavior on his part) is just plain crap as well. Bottom line is as much he doesn't have case, you don't have rebuttal.

#28638

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
deLurch wrote:https://veuwer.com/i/3aga.jpg

https://veuwer.com/i/3ag9.jpg
Is Milo aware of this?

I haven't told him.

I am not sure if it would be important to him, but I guess the information might be handy in case something big comes up later.

#28639

Cnutella wrote:Lackwit Dave Futrelle whiteknights in...

At least he acknowledges that Laughing Witch called Thunderf00t a nazi, and disagrees with it. He even allows that the letter writing campaign was wrong. However, he's back in classic form when he links to a tweet that he says is T'f00t dismissing LW's apology when it says nothing of the sort, and was in fact written before she posted her video. Not that I would entirely blame T'f00t for not rushing to post acceptance when LW and hubby's e-begging page is downright combative in its tone.

His commenters promise to write more letters to T'f00t's employers and pledge to join the crusade to get his account pulled from Patreon. I guess these are the risks of taking the hardline but holy shit, these guys are weapons grade oblivious ass-fucks:

Oh, and for all the whining and crying these same people go on about their freeze peach, this is an example of people who are genuinely taking away someone’s right to free speech. She can’t be critical of them or they will DESTROY HER LIFE.

I know I’ve been around long enough that I shouldn’t be shocked by this kind of behavior, but somehow I still am.
i no rite

My theory about GG, MRAs, et al., is that they’re basically bullies that enjoy hurting people, but they also need to see themselves as righteous good guys. Their concern for “ethics in video games journalism,” men’s problems, white genocide, or whatever is just a shallow ideological cover that they use to justify flipping out on people they already hated anyway without feeling like they’re just being cruel. This sort of overreaction (to a real problem in this case–I would unsubscribe to TLW over the letter writing thing) is typical, both in its gleeful cruelty and its pointlessness for achieving purported aims.
Fllllllly into the.... danger zone!

And finally, my favorite by far:

Phil Mason is a bitter, twisted little man. Since being punted from FtB for being a twerp he’s forte has been reduced from “mocking creationist silliness” to “bitter complaining that feminism exists.” Now he’s levelled up to actively trying to destroy people’s lives. Sad, sad git.
It's all been downhill since his glory days on FTB. He threw it all away and for what? A Youtube channel with several hundred thousand subscribers, an article in Nature, and some beehives.

YOu know, his subscriber count dropped by 3 after the FTB fiasco. Which was made up in just a couple of days and he now has close to 400,000 subscribers, which is significantly higher than it was when they brought him to FTB.

Meanwhile FTB has lost, what? A third? Half? More? Of it's traffic.

#28640

Scented Nectar wrote:Most people think that the last one, the body dysmorphia is the main reason men 'become' cosmetically female. I think it's mostly the first one, the autogynephilia. There's nothing wrong with that intrinsically. It's a non-harmful sexual orientation.

Is there much in the way of evidence for this?

I agree we shouldn't be shamed into joining in with people's sexual fantasies, but it would be interesting to know the proportion of trans people this actually applies to. And how in our dealings with trans people are we supposed to differentiate autogenynophiles from the 'real' dysphorics (i.e. the ones whose condition we need to take seriously) without being a cunt about it?

#28641

katamari Damassi wrote:
Aneris wrote: I posted it under the video

What apology?

“I'm really sorry, I made a lot of trouble for people I care about” simply isn't an apology to Thunderf00t, or to anyone else who is negatively affected by the air of doxxing, slander and libel. She keeps implying Thunderf00t really commands an army to cause “trouble for people” she cares about, and illustrated what she was trying “to stop [him] making these videos about this woman sarkeesan, because she was getting' so much harassment” which is again rubbing it in another time. Then she brings up Kevin Logan and how Thunderf00t seemed to be cold-hearted for having rejected her reaching out. After that she concedes that it was stupid idea, because it negatively affected people she cares about, again rubbing it in another time. And then she says she's going away from YouTube. I don't care about her videos, but I don't like this outcome, people should be able to maintain their presence and voice. The only sensible thing is that she hopes people stop the dox dropping. I know social justice warriors are big on notpologies. I'd be happy to acknowledge it, but there was really nothing there whatsoever that would count as an apology. It was a message to her fans and subscribers foremost.
I agree. I too hate the SJW practice of never accepting an apology short of seppuku, but LW admits no wrongdoing other than making life for her husband and employees difficult. By not doing so, she can claim her 72 neckbeards in paradise as a martyr of feminism, a woman silenced for speaking truth to power.

Agreed.

LaughingCunt, like Ophelia Benson, will only be forgiven when she actually grovels apologies to every single person she has hurt. We don't accept the CJ Werleman routine of apologising to a sockpuppet he invented to falsely smear someone, and we don't accept LaughingCunt's "apology" to her own friends, but not her victims.

It is obvious you have to be ruthless with SJWs/FTBullies, for they simply don't seem to learn their lessons. They need to be hurt, badly, their reputations tarnished forever, and their financial potential to be damaged. That is the only set of circumstances where they will start to admit they were wrong. Until PZ Myers and Rebecca Watson are in that low place, it is war. A war we are winning, and I don't care how long it fucking takes.

#28642

Gumby wrote:
Ape+lust wrote:HAHAHAHAHA!

http://imgur.com/eIRqzoK.png

Poor Boodles, it turns out her name ISN'T in Twitter's mission statement.

BTW Rebecca, thanks for not sharing. Really.
Well, looks like PZ won't be kicked off Twitter. I mean, it has to be PZ, right? Who else would ruin perfectly good porn by shopping Watson's doughy, bleary-eyed head on it?

:lol:

Well, now he's been given license to crank them out. If his bum ticker blows anytime soon, we'll know why.

#28643

Aneris wrote:Thanks You, PZ!
https://archive.is/DArsj

Seriously, the fucker's not even trying anymore. He cannot have written that without reminding himself of what he tried to do with Skeptickle. I'm now wondering if he's simply fucking around with his 'horde', just to see how much he can get away with.

#28644

Can anybody here remind me how and when PZ MYERS called out and condemned Greg Laden's attempt to hassle Abbie Smith's employers, or any of the other occasions when members of THE HORDE urged contacts with employers?

IOWTDI

:whistle:

#28645

Tribble wrote:Meanwhile FTB has lost, what? A third? Half? More? Of it's traffic.

Alexa rankings from Sunday:

http://imgur.com/C9844kr.png

Just a year ago, FtB was the 21,000th most trafficked site worldwide. Today, they're pushing 36,000. And their fall hasn't been arrested yet. Every week they plumb new depths.

#28646

CommanderTuvok wrote: LaughingCunt, like Ophelia Benson, will only be forgiven when she actually grovels apologies to every single person she has hurt. We don't accept the CJ Werleman routine of apologising to a sockpuppet he invented to falsely smear someone, and we don't accept LaughingCunt's "apology" to her own friends, but not her victims.

It is obvious you have to be ruthless with SJWs/FTBullies, for they simply don't seem to learn their lessons. They need to be hurt, badly, their reputations tarnished forever, and their financial potential to be damaged. That is the only set of circumstances where they will start to admit they were wrong. Until PZ Myers and Rebecca Watson are in that low place, it is war. A war we are winning, and I don't care how long it fucking takes.

Basically, LaughingWitch should be stripped naked and horsewhipped by a laughing Thunderfoot into hauling a huge cart filled with his model tanks around her place of work for 24 hours solid.

#28647

Tigzy wrote:Basically, LaughingWitch should be stripped naked

Thanks, I think I'll pass.

#28648

Søren Lilholt wrote:
Scented Nectar wrote:Most people think that the last one, the body dysmorphia is the main reason men 'become' cosmetically female. I think it's mostly the first one, the autogynephilia. There's nothing wrong with that intrinsically. It's a non-harmful sexual orientation.
Is there much in the way of evidence for this?

I agree we shouldn't be shamed into joining in with people's sexual fantasies, but it would be interesting to know the proportion of trans people this actually applies to. And how in our dealings with trans people are we supposed to differentiate autogenynophiles from the 'real' dysphorics (i.e. the ones whose condition we need to take seriously) without being a cunt about it?

It's pretty simple. If they act as an entitled child they're probably the former, and if they're mature about it and treat it as a tricky situation that people should be given some slack for dealing with, they're probably the latter. That's the way I see it.

#28649

Easy J wrote:
Scented Nectar wrote:
HunnyBunny wrote:
:o

Ohh, dis gonna be good :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
That courtesy is more than I feel comfortable with these days. I don't think I should be expected to participate in someone's autogynephiliac fantasy foreplay. Calling an autogynephiliac "she" or "her" or "Mary, let's do our nails, girlfriend!" is participating in what sexually titillates them. I don't have to participate.

This has been pissing me off more and more. I've nothing against their paraphilia per se, but they've got to stop forcing others into their sexual role play.
It never occurred to me to think of it that way. I've always felt put off when strangers introduce themselves with some nickname instead of their actual name. It's imposing a bit to insist that I participate in whatever social niche their goofy handle has currency in.

That said, I've yet to have any goths or trailerpark gangsters spazz out on me SJW-style for not referring to them as "Thorn" ,"J-Money" or whatever (mis-handling?). Most of them still seem aware of how they may appear to those outside of their bubble.

It only occurred to me to think of it that way fairly recently. Until then, I figured the courtesy of calling them feminine names should be a given, and that it was completely separate from what arouses trans-woman sexually.

#28650

katamari Damassi wrote:
Scented Nectar wrote:
HunnyBunny wrote:
:o

Ohh, dis gonna be good :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
That courtesy is more than I feel comfortable with these days. I don't think I should be expected to participate in someone's autogynephiliac fantasy foreplay. Calling an autogynephiliac "she" or "her" or "Mary, let's do our nails, girlfriend!" is participating in what sexually titillates them. I don't have to participate.

This has been pissing me off more and more. I've nothing against their paraphilia per se, but they've got to stop forcing others into their sexual role play.
Comic Dave Chappell was at a party when a cross dressing man collapsed. Dave asked, "Is that guy okay?" And was upbraided for it. His response was: "I support anyone’s right to be who they want to be. My question is: to what extent do I have to participate in your self-image?"

Exactly! :)

#28651

Søren Lilholt wrote:
Scented Nectar wrote:Most people think that the last one, the body dysmorphia is the main reason men 'become' cosmetically female. I think it's mostly the first one, the autogynephilia. There's nothing wrong with that intrinsically. It's a non-harmful sexual orientation.
Is there much in the way of evidence for this?

I agree we shouldn't be shamed into joining in with people's sexual fantasies, but it would be interesting to know the proportion of trans people this actually applies to. And how in our dealings with trans people are we supposed to differentiate autogenynophiles from the 'real' dysphorics (i.e. the ones whose condition we need to take seriously) without being a cunt about it?

It's a disputed topic. There's a wiki article that talks about it at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blanchard% ... m_typology. I wish I knew the real numbers. I think it's possible that some trans-women might not even admit to it if they are getting medically insured payments for hormones or surgery. I think it's only covered by medical insurance if the person claims a psychological body dysmorphia. At least here in Canada as of a few decades ago, psychological assessment was required. I'm not sure of current requirements. I doubt admitting to it being a sexual fetish allows a person to qualify for gov't paid 'treatment'.

#28652

Tigzy wrote:
Aneris wrote:Thanks You, PZ!
https://archive.is/DArsj
Seriously, the fucker's not even trying anymore. He cannot have written that without reminding himself of what he tried to do with Skeptickle. I'm now wondering if he's simply fucking around with his 'horde', just to see how much he can get away with.

He's a disgusting liar. LW looked into the camera and said, "I EVEN USED MY OWN NAME TO SEND MY INCOHERENT BLOCK OF TEXT CALLING YOU A NAZI. AIN'T SHIT YOU CAN DO TO ME, ASSHOLES." and zoomed in on her real name.

Clarence wrote:
Guest_84d94f98 wrote:[youtube]AdYQ_ENWU5o[/youtube]

Well if nothing else, you have to admit that JJTalkz is well groomed.

Best friend. He supports me in everything. I love him. Started last year (was she still in high school back then?) I was planning on meeting him in real life.

-Soylent f98
Oh, goodness.
THIS bullshit again?
So now he can't talk to legal girls?

http://thelegalwatchdog.blogspot.com/20 ... avior.html

At some point we gotta tighten out definitions up a bit. Becoming friends with someone doesn't mean you are grooming them, and I'm going to look totally askance at counting anything as 'grooming behavior' if it isn't explicitly aimed at lowering sexual boundaries and isn't some reasonable time frame from the alleged offence, say 3 months or so. Few "predators" want to wait years to get into someone's pants.

Around 3:00:

Oh, I wasn't expecting this. The guy with three convictions for banging underage girls has a long story that reveals the situations are more complicated than they seem. And he told the girl with whom he became friends when she was underage this very convincing story that made everything okay and she bought it. This is not literally what kiddie fiddler scumbags do every day.

There's nothing at all creepy about pics like these:

http://media.mlive.com/grpress/lifestyl ... -large.jpg

Jared was simply teaching these young tikes about healthy eating and the importance of exercise. It's not like he was making plans to put his hand down their pants. What guy even has energy to rape everyone they would like to have sex with? We should reinstate Jared immediately as Subway spokesperson.

Hannibal is a fucking moron. He threatened Thunderfoot and wheezed to the defense of people like Anita because Thunderfoot had the temerity to question the validity of their statements. The moron seems to think that it is NOT okay to say Anita's thesis reads like a middle-schooler's fan fiction, but it IS okay to call someone a Nazi without evidence and to try and get them fired. All the while fucking knowing that he has done more harm to women than Thunderfoot ever could.

Fuck him.

#28653

Skep tickle wrote:Moment to catch up on a couple of posts from the past week w/ a common theme: personality disorders. Couple points of clarification on a post from 1 day ago (Matt's below) and one from 5 days ago (Billie's below). All bolding was added by me. Caveat that IANAP.

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
katamari Damassi wrote:I know we've often discussed Borderline Personality Disorder here, and there's a kind of fun movie about it starring Kristen Wiig. Check out Welcome To Me if you haven't yet.
Watched it just last week. Odd little film, mildly entertaining. Wiig's character was not classic BPD -- more of a mish-mash of borderline & other PDs. Near the start of the film, she says her illness was first called manic-depressive, then relabeled Bipolar, then relabeled Borderline. The first is true; the second is false, as bipolar & borderline are distinct PDs, although sometimes comorbid, and the one is often misdiagnosed as the other.

Wiig's character is on (then off) Abiify, which has been found to ameliorate BPD symptoms in some cases....
Manic-depression is an old term for what's now called bipolar disorder (and now has a couple of subtypes). Indeed bipolar and borderline are distinct, but they're not "distinct PDs" because bipolar disorder is a mood disorder, not a personality disorder.

Borderline personality disorder is sometimes abbreviated BPD, as you noted, but that abbreviation might sometimes be confusing because it could also stand for bipolar disorder, but that abbreviation isn't used for bipolar.

BPD and bipolar disorder can both present with mood instability and thus can look like each other, & people with one are not uncommonly initially misdiagnosed with the other, as you said.

Abilify is sometimes used in BPD (apparently), and is definitely among the treatments used for bipolar disorder.

Billie from Ockham wrote:
Shatterface wrote:I'm not sure anyone can claim Disability for narcissism or narcissistic personality disorder.
If that was a serious musing, the answer is that personality disorders can qualify you for disability (under, e.g., Social Security), but only those in Cluster A have a decent chance. The exception to this is being OCD, which is in Cluster C and also has a decent shot if it's bad enough.

Narcissism is in Cluster B.
OCD is Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. It's classified as an anxiety disorder, rather than a personality disorder. It's not the same as Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder, which is one of the Cluster C PDs, though the symptoms of OCPD and OCD do overlap. As Medline puts it in a nutshell, "People with OCD have unwanted thoughts, while people with OCPD believe that their thoughts are correct."

/zebrasplain

Thanks for those clarifications. Yeah, "BPD" is short for borderline, not bipolar (maybe because "borderline" was coined in the 1930's, "bipolar" only in the past 20 ? years). FTR, "manic-depressive" is now "bipolar". "Borderline" was originally coined because the symptoms appeared to cluster on the 'borders' of other disorders. It's not at all descriptive of the disorder, and "Emotional Dysregulation Disorder" is one of the alternate names being considered. In the borderline support community, "BP" = person with the disorder; "-non" = people in a relationship with the BP. "PD" is short for any personality disorder.

I've been blessed to have been in romantic relationships with both a bipolar and a borderline. The latter was (for me) far more devastating & gut-wrenching.

For anyone interested in learning more about borderline, BPDcentral is good place to start.

#28654

Really? wrote: Around 3:00:

Oh, I wasn't expecting this. The guy with three convictions for banging underage girls has a long story that reveals the situations are more complicated than they seem. And he told the girl with whom he became friends when she was underage this very convincing story that made everything okay and she bought it. This is not literally what kiddie fiddler scumbags do every day.

There's nothing at all creepy about pics like these:

http://media.mlive.com/grpress/lifestyl ... -large.jpg

Jared was simply teaching these young tikes about healthy eating and the importance of exercise. It's not like he was making plans to put his hand down their pants. What guy even has energy to rape everyone they would like to have sex with? We should reinstate Jared immediately as Subway spokesperson.

Hannibal is a fucking moron. He threatened Thunderfoot and wheezed to the defense of people like Anita because Thunderfoot had the temerity to question the validity of their statements. The moron seems to think that it is NOT okay to say Anita's thesis reads like a middle-schooler's fan fiction, but it IS okay to call someone a Nazi without evidence and to try and get them fired. All the while fucking knowing that he has done more harm to women than Thunderfoot ever could.

Fuck him.

Hannibal Lecher.

#28655

Nuclear Winter

http://d1h8qm6whtl6z3.cloudfront.net/wp ... loding.jpg

NOW!

#28656

From the Pharyngula Thunderf00t thread:

Giliell, professional cynic -Ilk-
27 October 2015 at 5:49 am
This stiuation is laughable, not because someone may commit suicide, but because if she had never sent a letter to his employer his fans would never have retaliated against her.
And this, little children, is what we call victim blaming…

"I tried to punch someone and they hit me back. I'm the victim!"

Although the "little children" bit is insufferably patronizing, she's not wrong.

#28657

Q1: Why is the Italian Prime Minister in jail? Is he a pedophile?
Q2: How come this newsreader chick is dressed like a bootscooter with two of Saturn's rings attached to her earlobes?

http://www.htxt.co.za/wp-content/upload ... 58x370.jpg

The world makes no sense to me any more. :|

#28658

Was ~~Hannibal@Zama~~ Hannibalthevictor13 a professed atheist?

#28659

One for CH2O here - our lil buddy Nerd of Redhead, once again slavishly imitating his beloved Peezee by being every bit as oblivious:

Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls

27 October 2015 at 9:46 am

TF did wrong. We have no problem criticizing bad behavior of TF, and will do so with our free speech.

You don’t like it, it is YOUR problem, not ours. We don’t have to agree with you or him. And we won’t.

Your motor-mouthing arrogant aggression is typical of MRA assholes. You are your own worst enemy, and your behavior makes more enemies

'You are your own worst enemy, and your behavior makes more enemies.' So, kinda like LaughingWitch then. :lol: :lol: :lol:

#28660

Guest_84d94f98 wrote:[youtube]AdYQ_ENWU5o[/youtube]

Hilarious. Thanks guest, good eye.

I'm finally sold on this side-story. Thanks, pitters! This is some hot diarrhea.

#28661

Service Dog wrote:
Clarence wrote: You kids stay offa my lawn!

http://www.smilies.4-user.de/include/Sp ... sp_003.gif

good advice.

stay off my lawn too.

http://images4.fanpop.com/image/photos/ ... 80-360.jpg

#28662

Ape+lust wrote:Here's a vid of Hannibal creeping on Twitter. Underneath, I've put links to the pictures he's looking at. Each has a quote from Hannibal so you'll know when it comes up in the video.

[youtube]FSJtTqlNZnI[/youtube]

You look fantastic.

I do have to say it definitely looks sexy.... What are you talking about you're not ugly!

And looking damn good while doing it too.

OK you look amazing in that.

I think it looks great.

I like this picture way too much.

I'm not prepared for visions of beauty at this time of night :)

You know. I have to admit you look really good with bangs.

I like. I like very much.

If i had two hundred dollars to spare i would. You look pretty damn stunning in that dress if I do say so myself.

Case closed.

Clarence's best friend is a creep.

#28663

[youtube]AdYQ_ENWU5o[/youtube]

JJ is intelligent and articulate, yet her emotional age is c. 9 years old. While discovering that your "best friend" online who you planned on meeting in person, was a pedo likely grooming you, must be truly upsetting, JJ seems to thrive on the drama. "This is something I really need to deal with in privacy" she says to the world in a Youtube confessional.

SJW culture has raised an entire generation of JJs, incapable of coping with the real world as adults.

Interesting also to note that JJ is worried her feminist sistahs will chide her along the lines of 'I told you so, male allies are just looking for reward sex'. If that's the consensus within the movement, it only confirms what us, outside looking in, have surmised.

#28664

HannibalTheKidDiddler13

#28665

Xenu wrote:HannibalTheKidDiddler13

Awesome sig!! :lol:

#28666

Billy The Hillbilly wrote:Q1: Why is the Italian Prime Minister in jail? Is he a pedophile?

Yes

#28667

Justicar left a really good comment on a video about the Hannibal situation. I don't want to link because of doxing concerns. I'm sure interested parties can find it if they like.

Justicar presents the attorney's name and the judge's name from public records and seems to confirm what we've figured; that Hannibal's registration requirement lapsed.

Which doesn't change the fact that he banged a person between the age of 13 and 15.

#28668

Kirbmarc wrote:
Billy The Hillbilly wrote:Q1: Why is the Italian Prime Minister in jail? Is he a pedophile?
Yes

Some would say that's the least of his crimes.

#28669

feathers wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:
Billy The Hillbilly wrote:Q1: Why is the Italian Prime Minister in jail? Is he a pedophile?
Yes
Some would say that's the least of his crimes.

Well, when he fucked that 17 year old her, he just fucked her. When he was prime minister he fucked up the entire justice system.

#28670

Skep tickle wrote:http://skepticon.org/fallon-fox-qa-at-sk8/

Lauren Lane wrote:Fallon Fox Q&A at SK8

Hello Skepticonville!

We’re going to be doing something a little bit different for Fallon Fox’s talk this year at Skepticon 8, we’re going to do it Q&A style!

Such rank amateurs at putting on events! You've got professional MMA fighter, Fallon Fox, and Krav Maga instructor, Mary Anne Franks, both appearing ... yet there's no Friday Night Cage Fight? WTF?

Of course, if Franks won, she'd end up killing Fox. So charge $10 extra & open it up to the general public.

#28671

Until this week, I thought Laughing Witch was Sael Palani. I didn't know if Hannibal was an MRA, or that fat gamer Francis who throws spittle-tantrums. When someone mentioned jj, I thought they meant TJ. And I still don't know how McDermott fits into the picture.

Jenny McDermott makes my skin crawl. She's animated, whether fabricating a narrative impromptu, or infusing her prewritten script with life. She 'sells' her words as Her Emotional Truth. Buys her own emotional reasoning. Is contemptuous of her own fans for believing her. Similar to Rebecca Watson. But Watson's range is flatter & smells like farts. McDermott can do it on camera, Watson only pulls it off on podcasts.

This jjtalkz kid benefits from being younger, personally closer to the Hannibal story, reacting instantly when she gets the sex offender news, in the intimate setting of her dark bedroom. So she's free to pause dramatically, choke up, let her voice crack-- to an extent which would undermine the credibility of "Blue Angels" Watson or "Press Release to All Media" McDermott. If they lost all composure, they'd look like batty, startled hens.

Muslims don't let damsels sing the Call To Prayer, nor pray with upturned asses between men & Mecca. Sensible policies, if we're such suckers for their bleating.

I wanted backstory on these characters. Went to Encyclopedia Dramatica. Only 2 mentions of Hannibal. One was under the entry for Men's Rights Activists... a prolonged example of stale feminist 'humor'. (That's that also the only ED entry which mentions the Slymepit, listed as an MRA site.)

Under "How to troll MRAs" it says:
http://i.imgur.com/lLC1vnw.png

I wonder if Hannibal's deleted channel is where this points:
http://i.imgur.com/tZFoFCU.png

Add Sequester Zone to the names I've heard, but have made zero impression on me before this drama.

I do know Sequester Zone was accused of sexually harassing jjtalkz.
At 3:00 [below] she says SZ didn't do it.
But, jj sez:

"It's especially harmful because a lot of the people who are doing this to me, or to my my friends, are people who are in the feminist community. I can honestly say there are two, maybe three, male youtubers that I genuinely feel safe talking to... it's been people that I have seen make videos about rape, about MRAs, and sexual harassment-- who have been the ones who sexually harass me."

"...do not tell them that you are going to go masturbate to [jjtalkz & her friends].... I can name about 4 or 5 male feminists in the youtube community who have sent me unwarranted sexual messages.... is it them intentionally getting into the feminist community so they can get to females. Is it literal white knights?!.... we actually feel the need to make a list!"

I wonder if Hannibal is still on her "2 or 3" good ones list, or has he been added to the Male Feminist Sexual Harassers list?
:popcorn:
[youtube]bIjQus7NQoQ[/youtube]

#28672

New Sargon vid:

[youtube]by0spgMrbl0[/youtube]

Mentions Aron "You're either a feminist or a sexist" Ra and Hannibal.

#28673

Scented Nectar wrote: I don't think I should be expected to participate in someone's autogynephiliac fantasy foreplay. Calling an autogynephiliac "she" or "her" or "Mary, let's do our nails, girlfriend!" is participating in what sexually titillates them. I don't have to participate.

This has been pissing me off more and more. I've nothing against their paraphilia per se, but they've got to stop forcing others into their sexual role play.
Easy J wrote: It never occurred to me to think of it that way. I've always felt put off when strangers introduce themselves with some nickname instead of their actual name. It's imposing a bit to insist that I participate in whatever social niche their goofy handle has currency in.

That said, I've yet to have any goths or trailerpark gangsters spazz out on me SJW-style for not referring to them as "Thorn" ,"J-Money" or whatever (mis-handling?). Most of them still seem aware of how they may appear to those outside of their bubble.
It only occurred to me to think of it that way fairly recently. Until then, I figured the courtesy of calling them feminine names should be a given, and that it was completely separate from what arouses trans-woman sexually.

I've mentioned before that I was a member of a dance company which integrated gay, straight & tranny people; where re-inventing yourself as a Warhol Superstar was encouraged. Pronoun wordgames were part of the culture. One might say "She's being a bitch!" about the most straight cis dude. When one member proudly became a gay prostitute/ then promptly died of meth + AIDS, I felt like our escapist games had collided with reality. I became more circumspect about playing-along. That experience jaundices my views about how SJWs of all stripes 'identify'. It seems like a juvenile 'phase' to me. It also makes me feel entitled to not treat today's trans*dogma as the solemn One True Way.

The same applies to my buddy Fang. I don't like his drag personality & I don't know where his cross-dressing ends & mental illness begins. I avoid his "girlmode" & don't flirt with him, even in jest.
Yet both Fang & the dance company have a better take on trans-etiquiette than SJWs do. Fang admits that it's a fetish, doesn't overstate that he 'is' female or 'isn't' male. The dance company treated mis-gendered pronouns as sassy talk, not a crisis.

I like Scented's POV, but I think whether someone is getting-off is their business, not mine. If they can keep a pokerface in the locker room, it's not my problem whether they jerk-off to the memory later. As long as they keep it to themselves.

I think it's probably 'rude' to not use someone's preferred pronouns or new name, but the penalty for being rude should only be-- that you might be seen as rude. Similar to if you're brusque. There shouldn't be any official penalty for it-- kicked out of school, fined by the police, censored by the UN.

#28674

Another New Sargon Vid:

1.5 hour long discussion with Kevin Logan (Laughing Witch's "Emissary", and noted Jenny McDermott associate)
Discussion starts with the TF/LW drama, then moves onto discussion of where feminism/SJW falls on the political compass.
[youtube]XLKAjx9sBA0[/youtube]

#28675

1.5 hours? Fucking hell.

#28676

Karmakin wrote:
Søren Lilholt wrote:
Scented Nectar wrote:Most people think that the last one, the body dysmorphia is the main reason men 'become' cosmetically female. I think it's mostly the first one, the autogynephilia. There's nothing wrong with that intrinsically. It's a non-harmful sexual orientation.
Is there much in the way of evidence for this?

I agree we shouldn't be shamed into joining in with people's sexual fantasies, but it would be interesting to know the proportion of trans people this actually applies to. And how in our dealings with trans people are we supposed to differentiate autogenynophiles from the 'real' dysphorics (i.e. the ones whose condition we need to take seriously) without being a cunt about it?
It's pretty simple. If they act as an entitled child they're probably the former, and if they're mature about it and treat it as a tricky situation that people should be given some slack for dealing with, they're probably the latter. That's the way I see it.

I'm totally happy to refer to trans people as the sex they identify as, to use the names they choose. What I have difficulty with is the notion that we must immediately accept that trans women (and it does seem only to apply to trans women) were never, in any sense, male. They were always women, even when winning Olympic medals in men's athletic events and fathering children. Their penises, testicles, receding hairlines, five o'clock shadows and luxuriant handlebar moustaches are, and always were, female penises, testicles, receding hairlines, five o'clock shadows and luxuriant handlebar moustaches. We have always been at war with Eastasia. Stalin never associated with those people he airbrushed out of the photos.

Not only is it rewriting history, it impedes understanding. Trans people are rare, and many, probably most, people have never knowingly met one. How are they supposed to understand trans people and their issues if you're not allowed to say something like "a trans woman is someone who is biologically male but psychologically female, and who has transitioned from one to the other" without being considered a bigot?

I don't much like TERFs, because they're basically misandrists who believe men just aren't as human as women and never can be. They dislike trans women because, although they'll never admit it, they see them as men appropriating privileges that properly belong to women and women alone. Like, for example, having the power to compel people to say what you want to hear on pain of drama, or ruin a man's life by telling everyone he said something that upset you.

But some trans activists rival TERFs in their misandry. I remember having an altercation with a trans woman elsewhere on the interwebs who wanted to eliminate the male gender by treating all foetuses with hormones in the womb so none of them developed male characteristics - and considered herself an ally to men, because she didn't want to rid the earth of men in a cruel, painful or violent way! She thought adverts for testosterone supplements were equivalent to genocide.

I said a while back that Zinnia Jones seems to me to be primarily an exhibitionist, and since exhibitionist men are considered creepy and dangerous and exhibitionist women are not, Zinnia had to become female to be able to enjoy her kink. Some trans women are primarily misandrists who see ridding themselves of maleness as their part in ridding the world of it. And I suspect it's these ones who take offence at anyone who says they were ever biologically, chromosomally, or even apparently male.

#28677

(Oops on OCD <> OCPD. I'd try to say it was a typo, but it wasn't.)

#28678

Service Dog wrote:I think it's probably 'rude' to not use someone's preferred pronouns or new name, but the penalty for being rude should only be-- that you might be seen as rude. Similar to if you're brusque. There shouldn't be any official penalty for it-- kicked out of school, fined by the police, censored by the UN.

I have to agree, although to be fair this should also cover every slur and bigoted opinion. People shouldn't be punished for saying rude, insensitive, irrational or bigoted things. Their only punishment should be to be seen as rude, insensitive, irrational or bigoted.

And if they say insensitive, rude or bigoted things by accident reasonable, sane, sensible people should politely point out that what they said came across as insensitive, rude or bigoted. If the people who hear accidental insensitivity, rudeness or bigotry shriek, yell, and try to bully others into feeling guilty they're not reasonable, sane or sensible.

Unfortunately the shrieking SJW community is ready to yell even more if you point out that they're overreacting.

I doubt that all of them are so oversensitive that they can't control their outrage. It's far more likely that they simply don't want to be criticized and amp up the outrage to feed their narrative of perpetual victimhood.

#28679

Shanley struggles to keep the #GiveYourMoneyToWomen flame from guttering and going out in this month's Model View Culture, the most retarded name for a yet publication, if you ask me.

Anyway, Shanley interviews the brain trust behind this wizard wheeze "analyst and dominatrix Bardot Smith; private consultant and dominatrix Yeoshin Lourdes; and domestic violence educator and prison abolitionist Lauren Chief Elk-Young Bear."

MVC: How does #GiveYourMoneyToWomen play out on an interpersonal level, and in your own lives?

Yeoshin: I realized I was depleting myself dealing with men both at work and otherwise. My career trajectory has almost always depended on male-dominated work, where I was constantly subject to unwanted male gaze and male emotion. It’s demoralizing and exhausting, and it’s the perfect catalyst for mental health problems, which then can jeopardize employment altogether. And not only are women’s wages incommensurate with our job descriptions in any given male-dominated field, but we receive no compensation for any of the other bullshit that is automatically attached to the job simply because we are women. I’ve never gotten paid to get ogled and flirted with every single day in the office. Nothing about that is sustainable as an avenue for survival, let alone achievement of financial security.

I imagine this doesn't occur in her dominatrix line of work, where you presumably beat anyone impertinent to flirt or ogle with a cane and then hand him a bill.

Then there's this quality trollage:

Yeoshin: Speaking of the internet, think about the way even mainstream social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram, and others, capitalize on female participation. On Facebook, people who click on profiles are mostly men, and people whose profiles are clicked on are mostly women. So my having a personal account on Facebook makes me a product for Facebook to sell to men. And now that site is worth $250 billion. Likewise, nightlife venues thrive by getting women to participate in their business operations, and they do so by waiving or discounting cover charges or otherwise marketing to women specifically. Women are the product these establishments are selling to men, who then arrive and spend heavily just to be in the same room as women. But I’ve never received a check from Facebook or any club for my business development services. So, instead of wasting my time generating revenue for corporate entities that aren’t paying me, I’d rather make my social interactions profitable to me.

Bardot: And since this is all happening on mainstream platforms, we’re seeing broadly that men are just approaching women online at all times for all reasons, expecting to be accommodated or humored or entertained or fought with or whatever it is. It’s not trivial. And it’s not without cost. So I started just using that as my own practice: my boundary is that if you want to talk to to me at all, you have to pay. Period.

Yeoshin: I started actively using Twitter about two years ago and soon discovered how taxing and violent the daily online experience was. It’s particularly unmanageable if you don’t enforce a highly selective filtering mechanism, so I eventually followed Bardot’s example and began requiring payment to interact with me.

That's some precious shit right there.

Lauren: I also want to mention this in terms of anti-violence, because we’ve all talked about this individually as a violence prevention strategy. There are few things that men love more than their money. If they are making an investment up front and in advance to be able to have access, the chances they are going to harm or disrupt or destroy their investment shrink.

Yeoshin: It’s a litmus test of their intentions, upfront and in substantive terms. In a capitalistic society, money secures power and safety. Statistically, women engaging with men in any capacity is an unsafe venture. If a man wants me to open myself to risk so he can consume my time and energy, but he is unwilling to offset that risk in substantive terms? Without question he is a liability. Next. And while there’s no guarantee a man who pays won’t be violent in some way, it does eliminate men who are certain deadweight.

Honestly, I can hardly wait to open up my wallet for a few precious moments in the company of these three. They seem delightful.

I have to assume this is top level trolling or an attempt to break into financial domination by three very lazy people? I would have to assume the market for that isn't huge. It seems less like being dominatrix and more like having sugar daddies with whom you get to be sullen and entitled, and there's no sexual obligation or even the requirement of having to spend time with them if you don't want to. Such an evolution!

https://modelviewculture.com/pieces/giv ... capitalism

#28680

Cnutella wrote:1.5 hours? Fucking hell.

Yeah, agreed - although since it's an interview a longer video is to be expected. But even in an interview format vid, very few people are so interesting or important that it's worthwhile slogging through anything over, say, 15-20 minutes. Maybe a half hour.

No big surprise, but I've found that the length of YouTube videos is inversely proportional to the actual informative content. It's why I gave up on Mykeru videos. He's talented, has some good insights and does have the ability to make points more quickly, but he'd rather bloviate and go off on weird tangents for an hour while desperately trying to be tongue in cheek and snarky. I finally gave up on his videos 1/2 hour into an excruciating video slog that went nowhere because he kept trying to compare feminists to his sinuses, or something.

I think it's a reason why he never became the big time internet celebrity he so obviously wants to be - imo cutesy "oh aren't I snarky and clever" verbal masturbation is no substitute for clear and concise and substance.

It's pretty simple - if you can't edit yourself and keep on point, then whatever points you were trying to make get lost.