Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Experiment Women don't have to have sex with me, but they should affirm that I am sexually attractive to them.

FrothySolutions

FrothySolutions

Post like the FBI is watching.
★★★★★
Joined
May 6, 2018
Posts
19,638
I approach the table with a proposal...

I don't consider myself "transphobic." But I do think the idea of transness is nonsense based on nothing objective or factual. I don't think trans people are dumber or more dangerous than anyone else, I don't think they should be barred from office or certain jobs, and if you wanna have sex with a trans person by all means go have it. But not only will I never have sex with a transwoman, I stand by the biology that says transwomen are men. The only reason anyone is asked to validate transness is because it's nice to the trans people, and it's better to be nice than "correct."

Some people say "But the biology DOES say transwomen are women!" In order to say this, you must first abandon the idea that everyone is whatever they identify as regardless of biology. With science, a thing either is or isn't something. We might not know which, but science has rules. It's not just up to your opinion. Then, you have to actually show me where it says that. What we've discovered recently that changes modern medicine's understanding of sex. Because I've looked into the argument and no one has brought up anything we didn't know decades ago. People are saying "What about hormonal/chromosomal abnormalities? What about people with malformed genitalia?" Yes, some women grow facial hair, some men have bitch tits and small dicks. Maybe even very small dicks. But hairy women are still women and bitchy men are still men. Any further and what you have is someone who is "intersex." But never ever until very recently did we say "Well she's got a fully formed dick and no vagina, but she's a woman." And it was not "transphobic" to deny those kinds of ideas.

We knew all this back in 1997. This right here is how people become conservatives. When progressives move too far left of sanity, the only ones left are conservatives. This was simply sanity back in 1997. This was not "conservative comedy" back in 1997, it was common sense.



So you might say "Trans people aren't asking you to fuck them, just validate them." And that's where my proposal comes in. I'm not asking for your body. But I am asking for what the trans people are asking for: You to fight for the very valid idea that I am attractive and valid, and anyone who disagrees is on the wrong side of history.
 
I didn't read +I hope all troons die of terminal cancer
 
How to fix inceldom: limit the freedoms of the female gender. And do not allow women to choose their partners, the state should pair people with their looksmatch. Not forcing women to marry a male will make inceldom much worse.
 
If a foid pisses you off, she’s basically giving off death wish. Nothing happens nowadays so they don’t connect the grievance.
 
Fucking troons I didn’t read but god damn troons need to be tortured and burned alive on the stake!
 
Trans people are dangerous, not physically, but by the influence they have on today's society.
 
Any kind of "trans" shit is useless because it's all about looks. People will always react to how you look, not what you identify as.

If you're a biological man but manages to look perfectly like a woman, you'll be generally treated as one, and that's it. If you're some 1,90 bearded manly guy in a dress, no one will buy the idea that you're a woman (although they may pretend to in order to appease the current political correct position towards this question).
 
Any kind of "trans" shit is useless because it's all about looks. People will always react to how you look, not what you identify as.

If you're a biological man but manages to look perfectly like a woman, you'll be generally treated as one, and that's it. If you're some 1,90 bearded manly guy in a dress, no one will buy the idea that you're a woman (although they may pretend to in order to appease the current political correct position towards this question).

How do you mean "treated?"
 
How do you mean "treated?"
Regarded as. Benefitting from all the privileges of being a woman, for instance.

A good example would be women's toilets. If a feminine, convincing shemale enters one, no one will say shit about it, most likely. But if the manly, tall, bearded, unconvincing shemale enters it, even the woke crowd will probably be unconfortable with him there.
 
This is an interesting rhetorical gambit. I always love turning their "logic" against them, even if it's only as a means to troll.

You must be aware, however, that they don't really use "logic" and as a result, you can't ever really turn it against them. They truth is, they say "trans women are women" only because it feels like the right thing to say - only because saying it makes them a "good person."

And you must be aware that they hate you. Saying anything nice about you isn't going to feel "right" to them. And supporting you in any way (not even just this way, but in any tiny thing, including just having a shred of empathy for you) wont get them rewarded by their peers, with virtue points.

So no, this isn't going to work. But, I still applaud the effort and encourage you to continue.

I do want to offer one small correction here:

With science, a thing either is or isn't something. We might not know which, but science has rules.
That's true about science, but there are categories of labels that are purely subjective. One example is a first name. When you say "that guy is Matt" all that you really mean is, "this is the label he uses for himself."

You just need to be aware that the people you're trolling here are attempting to apply the same rule to gender. They want "woman" to be nothing more than a self-referential label. If you ignore that, then your proposal here is going to be even less effective.

It'd probably be more effective for you to acknowledge that historically, the label "woman" was objective, but today (you would say, in your post) we have progressed to an understanding of "woman" as being purely subjective. There's no reason to stop there. Being attractive is an identity that is just as important to attractive people as is the identity called, "woman." To allow one kind of self-identification but deny another is to prevent solidarity among marginalized groups. Thus, you must validate me as attractive.
 
This is an interesting rhetorical gambit. I always love turning their "logic" against them, even if it's only as a means to troll.

You must be aware, however, that they don't really use "logic" and as a result, you can't ever really turn it against them. They truth is, they say "trans women are women" only because it feels like the right thing to say - only because saying it makes them a "good person."

And you must be aware that they hate you. Saying anything nice about you isn't going to feel "right" to them. And supporting you in any way (not even just this way, but in any tiny thing, including just having a shred of empathy for you) wont get them rewarded by their peers, with virtue points.

So no, this isn't going to work. But, I still applaud the effort and encourage you to continue.

I do want to offer one small correction here:


That's true about science, but there are categories of labels that are purely subjective. One example is a first name. When you say "that guy is Matt" all that you really mean is, "this is the label he uses for himself."

You just need to be aware that the people you're trolling here are attempting to apply the same rule to gender. They want "woman" to be nothing more than a self-referential label. If you ignore that, then your proposal here is going to be even less effective.

It'd probably be more effective for you to acknowledge that historically, the label "woman" was objective, but today (you would say, in your post) we have progressed to an understanding of "woman" as being purely subjective. There's no reason to stop there. Being attractive is an identity that is just as important to attractive people as is the identity called, "woman." To allow one kind of self-identification but deny another is to prevent solidarity among marginalized groups. Thus, you must validate me as attractive.

I know they mean to make gender subjective, but if their argument is "Gender is NOT subjective, and at the same time biology says the trans people are right" then someone's gonna have to provide proof. Real proof. Because I've read the pro-trans talking points and they still just amount to subjective opinions about when someone is or isn't wholly a man or a woman. Again, a hormonal quirk here and there does not a trans person make.
 

Similar threads

Hoppipolla
Replies
7
Views
129
SupremeFroggy
SupremeFroggy
RealSchizo
Replies
60
Views
596
Logic55
Logic55
XDFLAMEBOY
Replies
42
Views
665
IncelGolem
IncelGolem
Logic55
Replies
8
Views
465
SupremeGentleCel
SupremeGentleCel

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top