162

I don't believe anyone is actually trans. I don't believe in gender souls. I don't believe anyone is born in the wrong body.

So when TRAs say "you're denying the existence of trans people!" they're absolutely correct. I deny any of this is real or legitimate.

It is entitled, manipulative, misogynistic behavior grounded in solipsism and narcissism. It is abusive bullying disguised as a faux human rights campaign. It has no basis in objective fact. It is illogical, unreasonable, and impossible to defend or support. It is a flimsy excuse to destroy and hurt women. It is mental illness in a frilly dress and lipstick.

Trans identity is anything but factual or legitimate—it simply does not exist.

I don't believe anyone is actually trans. I don't believe in gender souls. I don't believe anyone is born in the wrong body. So when TRAs say "you're denying the existence of trans people!" they're absolutely correct. I deny any of this is real or legitimate. It is entitled, manipulative, misogynistic behavior grounded in solipsism and narcissism. It is abusive bullying disguised as a faux human rights campaign. It has no basis in objective fact. It is illogical, unreasonable, and impossible to defend or support. It is a flimsy excuse to destroy and hurt women. It is mental illness in a frilly dress and lipstick. Trans identity is anything but factual or legitimate—it simply does not exist.

48 comments

It's misusing the word 'existence'. Nobody is denying that a transgender person exists as a person (assuming this is about an actual person and not about a character in a story, of course). What is being debated is the question what it means to be, say, a man who identifies as a woman. In other words, does a man who has transitioned now exist as a woman? And that is what the demand is, to be validated in this manner.

But the problem is that if that person is now a woman, then the definition of 'woman' fails to include the basis on which I am one: my biological sex. So this transitioning person demands to redefine 'woman' for everyone, and if that is not allowed, then he views it as denying his existence.

I am very tired of the catastrophizing language which is the most common type TRAs use. Everything is transphobic, everything is anti-trans, even the gentlest questioning results in some trans person on the other side of the world to be murdered. And yet the same TRAs completely ignore the erasure of women's rights and even all names for our biological sex.

And yet the same TRAs completely ignore the erasure of women's rights and even all names for our biological sex.

They don't ignore it. They demand it and celebrate it.

An example:

Imagine you're talking to someone who legitimately still believes in Santa. You say to them, "Santa does not exist."

Their response is "If Santa doesn't exist, how come his picture is on all these Christmas cards? How come I've seen him at the mall around Christmas time?"

Because the concept of Santa exists. We aren't denying that some people truly believe in Santa, or saying that the culture around Santa is fictional (because it clearly isn't, we can see these Christmas cards and cosplays with our own eyes).

We are saying that Santa himself does not exist. The picture on the card is an illustration of a fictional character—and the man at the mall is only dressed as Santa, he isn't actually Santa.

I peaked all over again when I realized that they were the only ones denying their existence. A man with a crossdressing fetish who insists he isn't a man with a crossdressing fetish, but actually a woman, is literally denying his own existence. We're the only ones who refuse to deny their existence, and it enrages them.

Yes! I thought the same! Isn’t it “transphobic” to claim TWAW or to say that Richard Levine is “female” (etc)? That’s actually implying that trans is bad or doesn’t exist! They go around all day pretending they’re the same as us, denying their own “existence”. We’re just saying that we won’t go along with their delusions, not that we think they don’t exist.

I actually think gender dysphoria is a real mental illness. I know historically there were people who tried to transition even though they risked death. So the illness itself is real and it does torment people. The problem is how we should treat these individuals as a society, and also how it's been appropriated by a lot of NPDs/BPDs to suit their own purposes. The number of people who claim they are trans now far exceeds people who actually have gender dysphoria. It's not some trendy thing to not like the gender/sex you are born with. It's stupid. Just accept who you are.

[–] sohh 30 points

It is entitled, manipulative, misogynistic behavior grounded in solipsism and narcissism>

And symptomatic of personality disorders like BPD and NPD. It really speaks to how trans is untreated mental illness that they have such a weak sense of identity - that someone not outright validating their chosen identity is enough to undo their entire sense of self and make them suicidal. Poor sense of identity is literally one of the criteria of BPD.

There's nothing wrong with having a mental illness. My issue is the fact that academics and psychologists have decided that the best response to this one is for everyone in society to play along with it. Twilight Zone shit.

[–] Tortoisemouse 7 points Edited

I agree. So much of transgender bullshit ideology gives me major BPD and NPD vibes. I don't want to start diagnosing randoms (I'm not qualified and I don't know them) but I have family members with formal diagnoses of both NPD and BPD and I know the traits and tendencies when I see them.

I'm especially hardline about this when it comes to "trans kids" ...NO SUCH THING

The irony of telling us "you're denying my existence, and that puts me in danger', while denying the existence of women and putting them in danger

People who think they're Jesus or Elvis exist, but that doesn't mean they're Jesus or Elvis.

Yes, it's what I used to say to people whining about the denial of their existence: if I tell you I'm Napoleon, and you say 'no, you're not', are you denying my existence? Obviously they never answered this question

If your uncle turns up at a family occasion dressed as Elvis, you’re not denying his existence if you decline to call him Mr. Presley or the King.

[–] ProxyMusic 27 points Edited

I agree with you that no one is trans, that trans is "not a thing."

But I don't agree that this is the same as denying the existence of people who do believe in gender ideology and these phony identities. We're disagreeing with their beliefs, saying their beliefs and identities are not real. We're not saying that they are not real people.

Trans identity is anything but factual or legitimate—it simply does not exist.

Trans identity does exist, though - as a belief in some people's heads. It does not exist as part of material reality, as a matter of physical fact that is observable by all and can be verified scientifically.

People exist who believe in gender ideology, and who see themselves as trans. Just as people who believe in Scientology, the tooth fairy, transubstantiation and white supremacy exist. All those people would continue to exist and be just as real tomorrow as today if something happened to them overnight that took away their capacity to hold on to their beliefs and identities. If they went into a coma, had an accident resulting in massive brain damage and loss of cognition, or suddenly lost their minds and all their memories due to Alzheimers, they would still exist as much as they ever have. They just wouldn't exist with their heads full of their beliefs or their chosen identities.

Right, it's akin to a religion. Like I don't believe in Catholicism, but I've met people who've told me they're Catholics just like I've met people who say they're trans. I wish we would treat it the same as religion, separate from our government and public schools. People should be allowed to practice it as long as they aren't hurting anyone else. If some religion was performing FGM on children in our country, we would sure as hell fight it, so we should fight for children being mutilated by trans ideology as well.

[–] ProxyMusic 7 points Edited

Yes, it's like a religion. But one of the main differences between the Church of Genderology and other of the world's religions, is that historically there were plenty of people who were truly oppressed because of their religion - and actually did get murdered because of their religion - yet even they did not go around screaming to those who don't share their faith, "You're denying my existence!"

Even as the invading Muslim Arabs subdued them by the sword and were killing many of them off, the Zoroastrians of Persia didn't say, "You're denying our existence!"

When the Roman Catholic majority of France persecuted the largely Calvinist Huegenots for being Protestants and ran them out of the country, the Huegenots didn't shout, "You're denying our existence!" as they boarded boats and departed.

The Puritans didn't tell the English "You're denying our existence!" They sailed to the "New World" and stuck it to the native peoples who lived there.

When the Jews of Europe were subjected to pogroms, mass murder and genocide, they didn't say "You're denying our existence!"

Today, the CCP has taken over Tibet and forced many Tibetan Buddhists into exile, and interned millions of Uighur Muslims in concentration camps in Xinjiang. But neither the Dali Lama and his followers nor the Uighur Muslims are shouting, "You're denying our existence!"

The adherents of the Church of Genderology make a mockery of the sort of genuine persecution and peril that believers in other religions have dealt with over time. Coz they are self-pitying, narcissistic, histrionic Chicken Littles who over-react and make shit up. They think that other people not affirming them and their whacky beliefs is the same as other people annihilating them.

To a narcissist, not getting validated and receiving supply IS being annihilated. It is a mental illness, and a serious one at that. That doesn't mean society should play along, far from it.

I'm not saying TIPs are just as persecuted as other groups have been throughout history, only that these people exist even if I don't believe in their ideology and the rest of us shouldn't have to participate in their religion. If some wacko wants to go around beating people up for not keeping up with his weekly pronoun changes he should do that in the confines of a pronoun club with other consenting people, I don't want anything to do with it. It's not my job to validate other people's spiritual beliefs, they need to come to grips with the fact that most of us aren't members of their cult.

It's like saying Christians don't exist because there is no God according to atheists.

[–] Intuitive 4 points Edited

While you are right in pointing out that there is a difference in denying the validity of concept as opposed to denying the existence of persons who believe in that concept, I believe the notion of existence that TRAs appeal to is a bit convoluted. It is true that when we suggest that "trans" is not a thing, we aren't denying the material existence of people who claim they are trans. However, TRAs aren't suggesting that either. Their claim is that their identity is who they are and as such, denying the validity of the concept of trans automatically implies that their identities don't exist and as such, they don't exist.

In other words, to demonstrate the non-existence of an entity, it is sufficient to show that the concept underlying that entity isn't real. So Santa isn't real because the concept of Santa isn't a real thing, it is an imaginary construct. Thus denying the reality of the concept of Santa automatically implies that "Santa" doesn't exist. Similarly, denying the reality of the concept of trans implies that trans people don't exist. This, of course, has nothing to do with people who believe they are trans as the non-existence of Santa would have nothing to do people who believe they are Santa. Just because someone have started believing that they are Santa, it wouldn't imply that it is now incorrect to assert that Santa doesn't exist.

As such, I agree with OP in their claim that it is absolutely correct to state that trans people don't exist since denial in the reality of the underlying essence automatically implies the denial in the existence of the entity.

[–] ProxyMusic 1 points Edited

Their claim is that their identity is who they are and as such, denying the validity of the concept of trans automatically implies that their identities don't exist and as such, they don't exist.

The crux of the matter is that TIPs and others today have completely redefined the meaning of the word "identity." Oxford defines identity as the fact of being who or what a person or thing is - which is how the word has alway been used until just a few years ago.

But nowadays TIPs and a lot of other people are using the word "identity" to mean the idealized, fantasy-version of themselves people have in their heads, the self they wish they were and want to give others the impression that they actually are. They are confusing people's ideal self-concepts with the reality of who and what those people actually are, mistaking the imagined self for the actual self.

I believe that they are denying their own existence. Existence starts with a fertilized egg -- fertilized by either a sperm bearing the x chromosome, or bearing the Y chromosome. Before that, there is no existence. Existing is either as a male, or a female. There is no "non-binary" option. That's how we all came to be.

"No, I'm not. You exist in lipstick and a tight skirt. You're standing right there. I just don't believe you're a woman."

Load more (10 comments)