I don't think I've ever heard us described as props to their agenda, before. That's a really great description of the relationship.

I read about it in relation to AGPs and how their wives are just props to them and their fetish. Trans activism is indeed women having to be props on a larger scale and forcing women to participate. I too love that the female weightlifters didn’t participate.

i love the eventual 'no thank you.' just to prove we heard you and that's a no.

[–] maypelsyrup 34 points Edited

I theorize that old married AGPs use their wife as a rooting agent. While the man may uproot his entire life after his crossdressing fetish breaks into "reality", he assumes his wife will still be around due to the prior decades of commitment, life building, and concluded arguments. The TRA ideology saying "if you want to be the opposite sex you are trans, no one who thinks like you are cis" makes it so much more likely for him to commit to transition without asking himself "what does being a woman mean, is there anything else I should work through before doing this, why do I really want to do this". So the wife ends ups being stuck as the teacher as well as the familiar who won't abandon him.

I've also heard transition manifesting in becoming the women who they are attracted to. So instead of simply admiring the company of a woman, even if the woman doesn't like them back romantically, they turn that woman, or a combination of women, into a physical manifestation of their goal while erasing her personhood.

I think this is a reason why anime is so popular with TIMs; anime girls are purposefully created to be the male gaze's perfect representations of women, so 'becoming a woman' results in men obsessing over these characters because they are their goal.

I wonder what percent of marriages actually survive a trans? I would guess nearly zero but I suppose even then there are some women who feel they can't leave because of kids or finances or whatever. I just can't imagine staying for a minute longer than I had to.

That and lesbians in general. We must date/have sex with them to validate them. Doesn't matter what we want. Doesn't matter our wants, desires, wishes to partner up with another woman.....all about validation. Narcissists need narcissistic supply---libfems are the codependents willing to continue to line up to give it to them and sacrifice the rest of us.

It’s apt for TIFs, too, who have been used as body shields for TIMs for years. They love to use photos of male-passing TIFs with captions like “would you want HIM in the ladies’ room? CHECKMATE, TERFS!”

…as if even 10% of TIMs are even close to passing, and as if all the little “soft gay boi” straight teenage girl TIFs who have no intention on going on T are also supposed to go in the men’s, then?

It's also just dumb whataboutism and All Lives Mattering the issue.

I'd rather be in a prison or shelter with Buck Angel than Contrapoints any day. Buck cannot rape or impregnate me. Having presented as a woman for years, Buck also knows what it feels like and has great sympathy for women, whereas Contrapoints is condescending, snotty, and acts like he has this burden of "educating" women on our own lives and bodies. (These are just two famous examples, but I find them pretty representative of TIMs and TIFs i've come across respectively -- if anything I'm being extra charitable as most TIMs and TIFs look much more clearly like a member of their birth sex than Contra and Buck do respectively).

If TIFs want to go into male prisons then I view that as their personal choice since they don't pose an increased threat to the men in there. As long as men are categorically stronger than women and only women can get pregnant, there will always necessarily be a "double standard".

It's the same reason why a university can have say, a Black Accounting Majors association or an Asian Heritage Pride festival, whereas a White Only Club or White Power March would be viewed as racist. The distribution of power is such that we have "double standards" in order to protect historically disadvantaged groups. It's really bizarre to me that the same people that understand why "all lives matter" is racist don't understand why "pregnant people" is sexist.

The difference, if anything, is that sex differences are even more relevant, because [1] they're clearly delineated and [2] the physical disparity is more concrete... you can have a half black half Latina woman who is perceived as black in some communities and Latina in some other communities. But she will be perceived as a woman in 100% of the world.

It's really bizarre to me that the same people that understand why "all lives matter" is racist don't understand why "pregnant people" is sexist.

It’s essentially because they don’t actually think women are oppressed 😔

I really wish every single woman would wake up to the trans bullshit and refuse to kowtow to their narcissism and public fetishism. I can never understand the hand maidens that still support selfish TIMs taking over women's hard won rights and achievements.

[–] remove_the_veil 48 points Edited

Those women mistakenly view themselves as the 'saviours' in that scenario. They don't see it as the TiMs taking over, but rather as women being gracious and accommodating towards poor, benighted 'minority "women"'. And since being seen as 'virtuous' has social currency in the Woke hierarchy, they do not want to give up that saviour status in their minds. Women under patriarchy are expected to be seen as virtuous in some way, whether it be in a religious sense, or by adhering to this new secular psuedo-religion of gender ideology. And generally, women have always been held to much higher standards of virtue than men. So these women think this is their big chance, their ticket to that coveted saviour status and thus higher social standing. Not realising that all of it depends on the most flimsy house of cards and the 'permission' of the men in charge to 'allow' them that status in the first place. And that said status can be revoked by those same men at a moment's notice. It's very difficult to convince women who are so deep into this mindset that they are in fact the ones being taken advantage of. The status of 'saviour' feeds both their ego and their false sense of 'empowerment'. Why would they want to give that up for the painful reality that we 'evil terfs' understand all too well.

[–] Tnetennba 10 points Edited

Women under patriarchy are expected to be seen as virtuous in some way, whether it be in a religious sense, or by adhering to this new secular psuedo-religion of gender ideology.

The details change every era, but that expectation stays the same.

I honestly don't know what to do about these women. If all this material hasn't peaked them, I don't know what will. You'd think maybe firsthand experience would do it, but no—many handmaidens have trans BFFs or trans romantic partners. I wonder if they double down even more because they have firsthand experience. They feel guilty that they support trans people online wholeheartedly—but the trans person in their own life is domineering, off-putting, weird, predatory, etc so they need to double down and "unlearn" their bigoted personal feelings.

I wonder if it would be hard to deprogram these women. Your description reminds me of when I was in a rather abusive relationship 30 years ago. The guy convinced me that what he was selling was necessary, and then controlled my access to it.

They don't see it as the TiMs taking over, but rather as women being gracious and accommodating towards poor, benighted 'minority "women"'.

Absolutely. I think it’s the comparisons to previous injustices like racism and segregation and shit is what gets them. They want to be on the “right side of history” and view the trans movement as the next logical progression.

[–] Whatshername [OP] TheySeeMeRowling 49 points
[–] Jade 37 points

Just WOW. I wish I was like that. I'd be the one going on a rant, and be deemed a "hATeFuL tErF" forever, I'd have fallen for the obvious bait. So happy and humbled by their response. I've learned something today.

They were so polite, professional, and classy. And they didn't fall for the bait. I hope I have the composure to respond like that if I'm ever faced with this crap in public.

What I loved about it was it was such obvious grey rocking but there was plausible deniability. No one could possibly say the response was bigoted or rude - it was just disinterested. But the message was loud and clear.

[–] Jade 11 points

Grey rocking. Yes, that's the word. Hadn't heard of it since the online support group for survivors of psychopathic abuse. I'll bookmark it as a great example of grey rocking.

That dead ass SILENCE right before the no thank you! There were so many words and emotions within that silence alone.

[–] Tnetennba 11 points Edited

What is that saying? 80% of language is non verbal? Body language sometimes says way more than words ever could.

But I've noticed TIMs are really really bad at reading body language. And by TIMs I mean men.

Yrah, they were supposed to either fawn or express their disdain in which case the 'journalist' would write an article about the 'catfight'. Very good move to just not engage.

We need to start a movement #nothankyou. I would start it but I haven’t been on Twitter in a decade.

[–] [Deleted] 21 points Edited

They’re using #NoThankYou alongside other suffragist and GC women’s issues tags on Twitter already. It’s civil and succinct.

I haven’t had a Twitter account for many years either, or I would participate, but I’ve seen it all over just casually browsing Radfem Twitter.

Ah they say no thought is original lol, oh well glad to see it’s already out there ✊

Your idea is so great that other people are already using it!! Great minds think alike

Yeah I think I'll sign up again. I just have to remember to not go nuts following radfem accounts immediately because they flag your account and then you're forced to provide a phone number.

I'm in no way comfortable with the Social Media Stasi having my real phone number.

I forgot my password and when I tried to reset it and get back on they insisted they needed my mobile so I thought no thanks, that was about 6 years ago and I’d stopped tweeting about 2012 and that place was toxic then so I dread to think what it’s like now. I take look occasionally from the outside but I have no wish to go back.

True facts. We're supposed to be validation tools on several levels.

I'm so glad they shut it down efficiently.

I love it. It’s their win absolutely nothing to do with him.

I love, love, love that they didn't engage. I would've been tempted to say "yes, it was a historic night" or something to keep the peace if I were in their shoes, but this is so much better.

Yes, I mean, I wish they had the freedom to speak their minds, but since they were all painfully aware they had no such freedom, at least they found a way to hold on to their dignity.

What subreddit is this and how has it not been banned yet?

[+] [Deleted] 17 points

Taking down this post in particular would be as good as saying, yes, women really are props. None of these validating expectations are falling on men.

Did you get the sense that the question was deliberately phrased for a positive or negative response? It seemed to me like "how you felt about that/what took place in your sport" could just as easily have delivered a rant about the destruction of women's spots, had they wanted to go there.

[–] Whatshername [OP] TheySeeMeRowling 3 points

It didn't occur to me until I read some of the comments here. But yes, it could very well be bait. Either way, the interviewer wanted to make it about Hubbard and not the women's achievements.

Load more (2 comments)