197

18 comments

Excellent. Intrusivity as a response to inclusivity.

I can see it in conversation: “We must be inclusive” “Not at the risk of being intrusive”

[–] tamingthemind eh/ayyyy 13 points

Yes! Can go hand in hand with: "Have an open mind, but not so open that your brain falls out."

[–] Lipsy #bornnotworn 2 points Edited

Some straight-shooting terms with which to deload the phrase 'trans rights' would be awfully useful at this juncture, too.

I'm comfortable assuming we (Ovaritarians) all understand that the supposedly denied 'rights' of trans persons are... at best frivolities, and at worst bypass routes around various safeguards for Women's and children's, mostly Girls', health and safety.

••BUT••
What of those trans 'rights' that not only aren't rights (in any paradigm ever accepted by a US court), but that in fact call directly for the abridgment or nullification of others' ACTUAL rights?
We need some simple call-out language because, of all the demons harbored in that movement, some of the most sinister are hiding in some pretty banal- or just stupid-looking shit.

Consider their constant bleating about a right not to be 'misgendered'.

Well... first things first: No. NO. That is absolutely not any type of right, civil or otherwise, in the US. We can credibly frame some slurs as fighting words, which will justify, well, fighting—but we still don't have snowflake rights against even vicious slurs (that are actually, y'know, slurs... that are actually vicious).

••BUT•• there is, in fact, one recognized human right at issue there. You might even know it off the top of your head.

What is it?

It's ••FREE SPEECH••.
O.G. First Amendment drip, type of thing, so it's kind of a big deal.

Specifically, the freedom to 'misgender' people, their pets, and even their imaginary friends is an absolute. You can go around misgendering as much stuff as you want, as often as you want. They're demanding the right to control other people's speech.

Please do not underappreciate the seriousness of this—even when it's utterly unserious. Even the trans-merDragons whose pronouns are 'fae'/((bubbling noises))—DUDE merDragons are maritime dwellers just like mermaids and shit!—are still enemies of the Bill of Rights. That's not even sort-of exaggerated.

That 'misgendering' is mostly just stupid shit and is not any kind of hate speech, in fact, makes this all WORSE! Because, since 1789, even hate speech—practically all of it—has been protected as free speech.
They are NOT just clawing and grabbing at the outer layer, of actual slurs and other actual instruments of potential harm. They're trying to snatch as much of it away as possible, for them to dictate as they see fit.

In the meantime, let's all maybe appreciate the deep, if dismal, poetic truth at work here? 'Trans rights' are a fraud upon public trust, and many or most of them are actually the precise opposite of rights.

In other words: They're yelling about how TRAR! Transrights are rights! But we know they aren't. How apt.

[–] KissMyOvaries 2 points Edited

No, don’t use it. It’s incorrect and there’s no need to drag Penn State (public university) for what was done by UPenn (private Ivy League university). Using this just makes us look like we are stupid and don’t know the very basics of what we are fighting for.

Edit. Use the updated version they promise to post tomorrow.

Excellent. Next time I hear the word inclusive I will respond with, "I'm sorry, did u say inclusive or intrusive?" Let them figure it out!

Load more (5 comments)