autogynephiles-anonymous:

taramaclaywasaterf:

veerletakino:

mango-thot:

redscarebear:

terf rhetoric kind of falls apart once you bring up straight trans women, and as a result they can’t paint themselves as victims. they start talking about hyperrealistic neo-vaginas and plasticated seductresses that destroy traditional families and corrupt their poor straight boyfriends and husbands. that’s where the real resemblance to right-wing conservatism is most obvious.

Straight trans women and trans lesbians dating primarily other trans women make them short circuit and turn into Pat Robertson

I’d need to look up the thread, but basically TERFs came straight out of conservative Catholicism

Let’s take two seconds to debunk these blatant lies, shall we?

Regarding “straight” trans“women”:

Radfems literally talk about this all the time. In fact, if any of you actually knew your LGB history, and not the revisionist lies your movement has spread, you’d know the reason the T was added was to include transvestites/transsexuals, who were cross-dressing gay males: men who you would call “straight” trans“women” in today’s world, despite the fact that they were proud gay men. You know, like Marsha P. Johnson, who said, days before his death, that he was, is, and always had been a gay man, yet trans activists insist on calling him a “woman” regardless.

One of the main reasons radical feminism is against transitioning young children is because it is being used to “correct” children who are GNC and show signs of being gay. That’s why you see so many heavily religious families transitioning their young children. Your movement has been essentially sterilizing an entire generation of young gays and lesbians. Just like in Iran, where being gay is punishable by death, so the government helps homosexuals transition into the opposite sex, that way they can be “straight.”

“Straight” trans people only further prove what radical feminists have been saying: that the trans movement is regressive, homophobic, garbage.

“They start talking about hyperrealistic neo-vaginas and plasticated seductresses that destroy traditional families and corrupt their poor straight boyfriends and husbands.”

To be perfectly blunt with you, that is nothing but a blatant lie you’ve pulled out of your ass. Anybody with eyes can see that a neovagina is not a real, natural vagina, and this “hyperrealistic” nonsense is just so dumb I’m not even going to waste my time talking about it.

As for the “destroying traditional families” claim, this is where your obvious ignorance of radical feminist theory really shines through. If you had even the slightest idea about what radical feminism actually is, you’d know that the vast majority of us believe that the “traditional” nuclear-family is a toxic, unhealthy dynamic. Again, it’s clear you just pulled this right out your colon (or, well, what’s left of your colon, after its been mutilated Frankenstein-style into a gaping wound you think looks like a real vagina.)

The fact that you think we care about where straight men put their dicks and whether or not they want to fuck trans“women” is just plain laughable. Again, the vast majority of radfems, myself included, want nothing more than to get away from men. We want liberation from the centuries of oppression they’ve forced on us. We want to live our lives free from their violence and rape. We want little girls to grow up in a world without brutality and murder and exploitation. If straight men want to stick their dicks into an open wound, let ‘em. No skin off our backs.

Lastly, the claim about Catholicism is nothing but hypocrisy and projection. The vast majority of radfems are against all Abrahamic religions due to the fact that they all center around the exploitation, degradation, and oppression of women. Many radfems have escaped these religions and still deal with the trauma it caused them.

I’ll finish with my favorite example of trans activists’ clear hypocrisy:

Conservatives: “You’re a boy *so you have to* like the color blue, playing with trucks, splashing in the mud, and be dominate and aggressive. You’re a girl *so you have to* like the color pink, wear frilly dresses, play with baby dolls, be submissive and fragile and let men treat you like a sex toy.”

Trans activists: “You’re a boy *because* you like the color blue, playing with trucks, and are dominate. You’re a girl *because* you like pink frilly dresses, wearing makeup, and are submissive and fragile and don’t mind being seen as a walking sex toy.”

Radical feminists: “You’re a boy because you were born with a penis and XY chromosomes, but you can like whatever you want, wear whatever you want, and play with whatever you want. You’re a girl because you have a vulva and XX chromosomes, and you’re a human being with full body autonomy. Your sex doesn’t limit you from doing anything.”

So, who are the conservative ones here again? The people who think a little boy wanting to wear a dress makes him a girl in need of medical intervention, or the people who think he should be able to just wear the fucking dress without it being a big deal?