75

28 comments

[–] MenHaveItEasy Moid Respecter 33 points

Do these TIFs think that avatar of the cute, blushing tomboy with the messy pixie cut, exudes "masc enby" energy? Because it's more girly/prettier than the less edited one on the right.

[–] Lipsy [OP] #bornnotworn 11 points

I agree with you, but, that's not a totally baseless association—given the frightening numbers of formerly "manic pixie dream Girl"-identifying persons who are now refashioning themselves as exactly that.

Oh shit, YES. Why is that?

[–] Lipsy [OP] #bornnotworn 1 points

Not even clue number one, unfortunately. Although an almost mystical non-binarying power seems to be attributed to pixie cuts[§] these days—as long as they're not totally symmetrical, no hair product is used (other than bleaches and dyes in all the wrong colors for the wearer's complexion), and, most importantly, no attempt is made to redirect the trajectory of the hairs either jointly or severally

[§] it is understood that the "pixie" in MPDG does not usually refer to a type of haircut.
but
in this Very Stupid Era of the TransKid™ in which we currently find ourselves, it almost seems like these things are slowly being replaced by exactly the kinds of ingenuous, grinningly uncultured associations that small children might make.

[–] Sylvanas 33 points Edited

ROFL at that one comment that asks if the book is illegal, lol.

Just once, I’d like see is a debate in which TRAs try to refute gender critical arguments without using the word “transphobic”.

Girls are removing their breasts because they’re depressed? That’s transphobic. Abigail Shrier meeting women who deeply regret transitioning? Transphobic. Scott Newgent medically tortured? Transphobic.

It’s as if they think using this magic word somehow eliminates the harm done to people who fell for this cult.

Oh, and also, in this hypothetical debate, I’d like to ban the emotionally manipulative argument of “if you don’t accept everything I say, I’ll commit suicide”.

[–] Lipsy [OP] #bornnotworn 7 points

Just once, I’d like see is a debate in which TRAs try to refute gender critical arguments without using the word “transphobic”

And just once i'd like to see TIMs try to argue their side of a policy issue without any references to "genocide", "want us dead", or "concentration camps". Or rlly just any good-faith argumentation/rhetoric at all, for starters.

We're both gna be waiting for a long, long, long time, so i hope you brought a book!

[–] Lipsy [OP] #bornnotworn 20 points

Archive of the thread.

I do wana give a shout out to the reddit OP for providing a helpful thumbnail image of the mass market paperback cover, which will help people locate Ms. Shrier's book more easily. 🥰

BTW because Scott Newgent is mentioned in there...

just wana make sure I've not totally lost the plot—
Scott Newgent's name is wordplay, right?
"New Gent"?

I'm not immediately able to turn up Newgent's original Female name (which surprises me—from everything I've seen, I would've guessed that putting O.G. pre-trans lesbian names up in lights would totally be Newgent's thing), but... New Gent is just TOO on the nose. Yeah?

Newgent is still more subtle than Newman. 😂

[–] Lipsy [OP] #bornnotworn 6 points

Right smh... I mean, if it's wordplay I think it's ingenious! Just very surprised that Newgent's former name is not easy to find

I have the hard copy of this book and tried to share it with my daughter. She flat out refused to even look at it. Yes, it's a great book!

[–] Lipsy [OP] #bornnotworn 1 points

Hard copy as in hardcover? or just like, (normal paperback) book as opposed to a .pdf or kindle file or whatever?

Is yr Daughter identifying herself as a transman or transmasc NB?

No, she is an adult human female and doesn't express herself as NB or transmasc, etc. She did tell me she is bi, though.

Hardcover! 😀 And she identifies as queer, which I don't understand.

[–] Lipsy [OP] #bornnotworn 1 points

Well, if it helps, I'm gen Z and I don't get "queer" identification either—although I suspect it's mostly just another modality of lesbian erasure.

What I mean is... I've never even once heard of a "queer"-identifying male, so, clearly there's some sort of coercive pressure specifically on young Women to self-identify as "queer".
From everything else that's going on these days, I infer that young Lesbians are under the greatest pressure of all to call themselves "Q" instead of "L"—where the point of the coercion is to gaslight them into rejecting the strictly same-sex attraction that they genuinely feel.
Ergo, exhibit no. 19361853848.1.1(ii)(c)(4) of coercive pressure to have sex with men.

What are your thoughts on that? Your own firsthand experience with a "Q"-identifying Daughter is definitely more valuable than anything I can pitch in.

I wish that wasn't the book to peak people/explain what's going on to them.

[–] BlackCirce enby jinping 8 points

It somehow straddles the line of being genderist in both the trans and conservative senses.

[–] Lipsy [OP] #bornnotworn 7 points

Because you wish the process had been cut off before getting to that point?

Because Abigail Shrier espouses right-wing views on other topics?

Something else?

Hell yeah that book should be gifts to moms the world over

Image Transcription: Meme


My mother won't shut up about how wonderful this shitty book is and it's awful

[Wojak meme, showing head-and-shoulder portraits of stock characters. Shown here are Doomer Boy (a teenaged boy with dishevelled black hair wearing a black hoodie, often used to represent feminine men) and Tradwife (a blonde woman wearing a blue flower-patterned dress in a vintage style).]

Doomer Boy: [captioned 'me, in the closet'] mom no

Tradwife: [captioned 'my mom'] thank you for changing my life

Irreversible Damage book cover: i'm literally a terrible book

[–] Lipsy [OP] #bornnotworn 2 points

ahh thanks for "Wojak", didn't know this name until now 💯