It's only another step to insisting they really *are* those animals because they 'identify' a such. The liberal inability to say 'no' to anything is the reason why w…
It's only another step to insisting they really *are* those animals because they 'identify' a such. The liberal inability to say 'no' to anything is the reason why we're having all these dumbass conversations about whether you can be another race or another sex. The far left is as is virulently individualist as the far right, and doesn't want to 'oppress' anyone (esp if they're non-white) by telling them no, you can't be a boy or a black guy or a tiger or a mermaid.
And they *do* believe that reality, facts and scientific evidence are 'hate speech'.
Hell, even a lot of scientists are on board with that.
I actually hope you're right. Because horrifyingly enough, I think trans-age is next. "Minor attracted people" 🤮 have never had an opportunity like this one and they're pushing as hard as they can (thankfully humanity's natural disgust response means they can't push too hard).
But even in the comments of some of my articles, I'm seeing that some people desperately want age to be a fuzzier concept than it is...for some reason.
"(thankfully humanity's natural disgust response means they can't push too hard)."
Oh, you think so? I don't. I'm working on an article right now tracing the history of LGBTQ's and the left's complicated relationship with pedos, which started before the 'T' was added (the T has brought back a very ugly pedo image for gay men which they've helped to bring on themselves by being too inclusive - not of pedos this time, but trans, which has allowed, for the first time, heterosexual men who don't give a damn about conservative 'blood libel' against gay men.
I explain how trans 'grooming' isn't necessarily pedo (although I can't say there's not a nefarious purpose we haven't yet identified) but that, with transactivists' cooperation or not, the pedos are waiting in the wings (you know about MAPs already, I touch upon Jacob Breslow) while transactivists groom mostly progressive parents to unquestioningly accept everything their children and adult activists tell them.
I touch upon how mostly white 'progressive' feminists are more rape-collaborative if the situation is 'problematic' (i.e., the rapist(s) are not white, and the victims are). I had to cut out the part about feminist silence surrounding the horrific rapes of Israeli Jewish women for length sake, it's already very long.
No, I *don't* think either LGBTQ, feminists, or progressive parents will say no to pedos when they arrive for their kids. However, I'll happily, joyfully rebut if they prove me wrong.
I'm just not holding my breath. The right will be our allies against the pedos.
"I explain how trans 'grooming' isn't necessarily pedo"
Yeah, I don't really connect the T with pedophilia. Lots of sexual deviants have attached themselves to trans activism and transsexual issues, but I don't get the impression that there's any strong connection. Maybe you've seen some stuff here that I haven't.
But as you say, pedophiles have been trying to attach themselves to the gay community for decades. At least since NAMBLA if not earlier. But they got cut loose because, as unwilling as society was to accept gay people back in the day, they were far, far less willing to accept "man-boy lovers."
The reason I say they've never had an opportunity like this one is because there's never been such widespread support for the idea that all categories and boundaries are meaningless and even oppressive. If, in the "social construct" era, we accept that men can be women, why can't 25-year-olds be 15-year-olds? We're seeing isolated cases where this kind of thinking is already gaining traction.
There's a pocket of people on the left who will accept literally anything (https://x.com/JebraFaushay/status/1698077497722565099?s=20). And while not all progressives are in this category, all of the people in this category are progressives. But society in general, the normal people who aren't chronically online and have no idea any of this is happening, I think there are hard limits for almost all of them that don't include pedophilia.
"If, in the "social construct" era, we accept that men can be women, why can't 25-year-olds be 15-year-olds? We're seeing isolated cases where this kind of thinking is already gaining traction."
This is actually quite scary as I think a lot of young people are already quite young for their age. I think I've seen talk of this elsewhere, they want to stay sort of in perpetual childhood. A friend has a 23-year-old stepson going on 15. It's not a conscious decision on his part to be a child but he essentially is - lives with his bio mom, plays video games all day, doesn't want to go to community college or get a job. And he identifies as a 'furry', which I have found seem to attract very young adults, and I mean young upstairs, not necessarily chronologically. And of course there's teh immediate application for pedos to take advantage of this. This is what scares me so much: Because I DON'T think the prog left has the brains to say no. Some will, many won't. I mean, these mornons frankly, couldn't envision how opportunistic predators might take advantage of gender-ID-on-demand. None of them think it's at all weird that so many male prisoners, as soon as a law is passed in a state, suddenly find their inner woman and want to be housed in a female prison because 'they feel unsafe'. No one thinks it's weird that roughly half of them have been convicted for sex offenses (US, UK, Canada) and I'm like ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME??? DO YOU THINK IDENTIFYING AS A WOMAN CURES RAPISTS OF RAPING AND CHILD MOLESTERS OF CHILD RAPING???
THIS is why I don't believe the prog left will put the skids on pedos. It's not just the LGBTQ set; everyone on the far left strikes me as too brain-dead (or perhaps too preoccupied with their new-found Nazi collaboration) to say no to this stuff.
And I admit, I always tend to suspect these ideas are male-generated. Hell, I pointed out years ago on a Pagan discussion group that when someone complained the coven/group they were in didn't do 'skyclad' rituals, they were always invariably male :) Gerald Gardner, founder of Wicca, was a nudist...hence his insistence on skyclad. Go figger.
Well bestiality's illegal now, so I don't know, maybe they'll start campaigning to repeal oppressive laws to allow the Love That Dares Not Bark Its Name?
> "suddenly find their inner woman and want to be housed in a male prison"
Typo? "female prision"?
(Just trying to help cleanup typos, which I make in abundance, "not" vs "now" being my worst misfire - I agree with your main points and am not disparaging you or your words).
I spent a decade and a half leading/staffing pagan festivals, and the small minority of people who wanted to ban clothing optional spaces were all women in our case - a very small portion of pagan women, but we had no men trying to prevent anybody from being openly skyclad at all (even if they themselves stayed in the clothing required areas). From much experience, I don't believe the skyclad contingent were mostly men wanting to see women's bodies.
I was one of the main peacemakers, trying to find a compromise which met everyone's major needs if not all of their preferences. But that was in an earlier era; it's probably nastier today.
I actually believe the furries are next. People have been body-modding themselves for many years, including to make themselves look more like animals.
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/409898003560841968/
It's only another step to insisting they really *are* those animals because they 'identify' a such. The liberal inability to say 'no' to anything is the reason why we're having all these dumbass conversations about whether you can be another race or another sex. The far left is as is virulently individualist as the far right, and doesn't want to 'oppress' anyone (esp if they're non-white) by telling them no, you can't be a boy or a black guy or a tiger or a mermaid.
And they *do* believe that reality, facts and scientific evidence are 'hate speech'.
Hell, even a lot of scientists are on board with that.
"I actually believe the furries are next."
I actually hope you're right. Because horrifyingly enough, I think trans-age is next. "Minor attracted people" 🤮 have never had an opportunity like this one and they're pushing as hard as they can (thankfully humanity's natural disgust response means they can't push too hard).
But even in the comments of some of my articles, I'm seeing that some people desperately want age to be a fuzzier concept than it is...for some reason.
"(thankfully humanity's natural disgust response means they can't push too hard)."
Oh, you think so? I don't. I'm working on an article right now tracing the history of LGBTQ's and the left's complicated relationship with pedos, which started before the 'T' was added (the T has brought back a very ugly pedo image for gay men which they've helped to bring on themselves by being too inclusive - not of pedos this time, but trans, which has allowed, for the first time, heterosexual men who don't give a damn about conservative 'blood libel' against gay men.
I explain how trans 'grooming' isn't necessarily pedo (although I can't say there's not a nefarious purpose we haven't yet identified) but that, with transactivists' cooperation or not, the pedos are waiting in the wings (you know about MAPs already, I touch upon Jacob Breslow) while transactivists groom mostly progressive parents to unquestioningly accept everything their children and adult activists tell them.
I touch upon how mostly white 'progressive' feminists are more rape-collaborative if the situation is 'problematic' (i.e., the rapist(s) are not white, and the victims are). I had to cut out the part about feminist silence surrounding the horrific rapes of Israeli Jewish women for length sake, it's already very long.
No, I *don't* think either LGBTQ, feminists, or progressive parents will say no to pedos when they arrive for their kids. However, I'll happily, joyfully rebut if they prove me wrong.
I'm just not holding my breath. The right will be our allies against the pedos.
"I explain how trans 'grooming' isn't necessarily pedo"
Yeah, I don't really connect the T with pedophilia. Lots of sexual deviants have attached themselves to trans activism and transsexual issues, but I don't get the impression that there's any strong connection. Maybe you've seen some stuff here that I haven't.
But as you say, pedophiles have been trying to attach themselves to the gay community for decades. At least since NAMBLA if not earlier. But they got cut loose because, as unwilling as society was to accept gay people back in the day, they were far, far less willing to accept "man-boy lovers."
The reason I say they've never had an opportunity like this one is because there's never been such widespread support for the idea that all categories and boundaries are meaningless and even oppressive. If, in the "social construct" era, we accept that men can be women, why can't 25-year-olds be 15-year-olds? We're seeing isolated cases where this kind of thinking is already gaining traction.
There's a pocket of people on the left who will accept literally anything (https://x.com/JebraFaushay/status/1698077497722565099?s=20). And while not all progressives are in this category, all of the people in this category are progressives. But society in general, the normal people who aren't chronically online and have no idea any of this is happening, I think there are hard limits for almost all of them that don't include pedophilia.
"If, in the "social construct" era, we accept that men can be women, why can't 25-year-olds be 15-year-olds? We're seeing isolated cases where this kind of thinking is already gaining traction."
This is actually quite scary as I think a lot of young people are already quite young for their age. I think I've seen talk of this elsewhere, they want to stay sort of in perpetual childhood. A friend has a 23-year-old stepson going on 15. It's not a conscious decision on his part to be a child but he essentially is - lives with his bio mom, plays video games all day, doesn't want to go to community college or get a job. And he identifies as a 'furry', which I have found seem to attract very young adults, and I mean young upstairs, not necessarily chronologically. And of course there's teh immediate application for pedos to take advantage of this. This is what scares me so much: Because I DON'T think the prog left has the brains to say no. Some will, many won't. I mean, these mornons frankly, couldn't envision how opportunistic predators might take advantage of gender-ID-on-demand. None of them think it's at all weird that so many male prisoners, as soon as a law is passed in a state, suddenly find their inner woman and want to be housed in a female prison because 'they feel unsafe'. No one thinks it's weird that roughly half of them have been convicted for sex offenses (US, UK, Canada) and I'm like ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME??? DO YOU THINK IDENTIFYING AS A WOMAN CURES RAPISTS OF RAPING AND CHILD MOLESTERS OF CHILD RAPING???
THIS is why I don't believe the prog left will put the skids on pedos. It's not just the LGBTQ set; everyone on the far left strikes me as too brain-dead (or perhaps too preoccupied with their new-found Nazi collaboration) to say no to this stuff.
And I admit, I always tend to suspect these ideas are male-generated. Hell, I pointed out years ago on a Pagan discussion group that when someone complained the coven/group they were in didn't do 'skyclad' rituals, they were always invariably male :) Gerald Gardner, founder of Wicca, was a nudist...hence his insistence on skyclad. Go figger.
Well bestiality's illegal now, so I don't know, maybe they'll start campaigning to repeal oppressive laws to allow the Love That Dares Not Bark Its Name?
> "suddenly find their inner woman and want to be housed in a male prison"
Typo? "female prision"?
(Just trying to help cleanup typos, which I make in abundance, "not" vs "now" being my worst misfire - I agree with your main points and am not disparaging you or your words).
Shit, thank you! Yeah, brain fart 😁 Thanks! Have a Merry, Sexually Dimorphic Christmas loll!
I spent a decade and a half leading/staffing pagan festivals, and the small minority of people who wanted to ban clothing optional spaces were all women in our case - a very small portion of pagan women, but we had no men trying to prevent anybody from being openly skyclad at all (even if they themselves stayed in the clothing required areas). From much experience, I don't believe the skyclad contingent were mostly men wanting to see women's bodies.
I was one of the main peacemakers, trying to find a compromise which met everyone's major needs if not all of their preferences. But that was in an earlier era; it's probably nastier today.