📚 Megathread Tranny Sideshows on Social Media - Any small-time spectacle on Reddit, Tumblr, Twitter, Dating Sites, and other social media.

I don't understand how women in the past, with no HRT or surgeries, and who CLEARLY look like women in the pictures we have of them, passed better and unsuspected back then than the bearded manlets of today do.

Billy Tipton's life is a fascinating case study. Her kids (adopted) all say they had no idea she wasn't actually their father.

Willful ignorance? But this was during a time when such practices were still viewed as morally rephrensible, and carried pretty big social stigmas. Just, how?

Probably because people saw what they wanted to see. None of them publicly said they were living as men. It just wasn't something that was done. So everyone just assumed that if you wore a suit, had short hair, and introduced yourself as Fred that you were a 100% true and honest man.

Humans have an unbelievable capacity to see only what they want and expect to. If you believe in aliens, you're more likely to believe you were abducted than if you don't. Go looking for Bigfoot? You are more likely to see "him" in the shadows.

Now we all know about trannies and they do everything short of tattooing TRANNY on their forehead. So if we see one we recognize it for what it is.

I'm pretty sure it's that simple.
 
Screenshot_2022-07-06-06-58-46-59_1c337646f29875672b5a61192b9010f9~2.jpg

Lol this bitch is insane. Nobody normal has ever loved their passport photo. Also, she looks like shit.
 
Does anyone still have the screenshots of that " Why Dipper from Gravity Falls is a trans " thread ?
 
Bette Midler apologized. You know what happens.
Ver archivo adjunto 3462339

This transsexual is so narcissistic and deluded that he thinks his farts are newsworthy.
Ver archivo adjunto 3462299

He looks like something out of Aphex Twin's "Come To Daddy" video.
Ver archivo adjunto 3462317

Ver archivo adjunto 3462319 Ver archivo adjunto 3462310

Ver archivo adjunto 3462328 Ver archivo adjunto 3462331

Nice fiveheads, ladies! (There must be a factory somewhere that makes these things.)
Ver archivo adjunto 3462324 Ver archivo adjunto 3462327

Ver archivo adjunto 3462333 Ver archivo adjunto 3462337
Ari Drennen, or as he should be known Zach Dallmeyer-Drennen, was recently doxed in the Keffals thread. Some notable images not shared here in this thread:
36553BB4-B98D-4DBF-9C4F-D6583A515D31.jpeg
This tweet is still up, even after being included in the dox.
5CC7DC2C-038C-4ED0-BE55-FFF6FC603F65.jpeg
 
Maya Forester won her most recent legal battle. They ruled that it was unlawful to discriminate against her like they did.



PRESS STATEMENT: MAYA FORSTATER’S VICTORY IN EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL: A WIN FOR FREE SPEECH AND SEX-BASED RIGHTS

6th July 2022: Maya Forstater, who took a claim for belief discrimination against her former employer, the Center for Global Development, has been vindicated by a ruling that she was unlawfully discriminated against by her former employer on the basis of her protected belief.
This follows a ruling at an Employment Tribunal in June 2021 when Ms Forstater successfully established a binding legal precedent that gender-critical beliefs were in principle protected by the Equality Act. Following that appeal, her case continued at the Employment Tribunal, to determine whether she was unlawfully discriminated against by her former employer on the basis of her protected belief.
The Tribunal unanimously found that, as acts of unlawful discrimination on the basis of Ms Forstater’s beliefs, CGD:
1. Did not offer her an employment contract;
2. Did not renew her visiting fellowship; and
3. Removed her from its website.
Among the findings in the judgment are that Ms Forstater’s tweets and comments, which formed the basis of CGD’s treatment of her, were statements of her protected gender-critical beliefs. The negative consequences which flowed from them were therefore unlawfully discriminatory.
The statements that Maya Forstater made in this regard included:
- “A man’s internal feeling that he is a woman has no basis in material reality”.
- Describing Pips Bunce, a male who identified as a woman for part of the
week, as a “part time cross dresser”.
- Drawing an analogy between self-identifying transwomen and Rachel Dolezal.
- That “the places that women and girls get assaulted and harassed are ‘normal life’”; in the context of a discussion of whether recognising transwomen as female potentially posed a risk to women and girls. This was not, as CGD’s counsel had argued, “catastrophising” but was instead “an unobjectionable observation in the course of the debate … [which was] not an objectively unreasonable observation to make”.
- That describing self-identification as a woman as “a feeling in their head” was not to equate self-identification with mental illness and “did little more than assert Ms Forstater’s gender critical belief”.
The Tribunal also recognised that Ms Forstater had been entitled to criticise those holding an opposite view to her, and had done so legitimately. The Tribunal found in particular that the mere fact that offence may be taken to a particular statement was not sufficient to render it incapable of legal protection. This included describing opposing views as “stupid, dangerous or unfair” and the statement that allowing male-bodied individuals access to women-only spaces gave rise to “an increase in risks, threats and discomfort” to women.
Forstater, a public policy researcher, who co-founded human rights organisation Sex Matters a year ago, welcomed the verdict.

“My case matters for everyone who believes in the importance of truth and free
speech.
“We are all free to believe whatever we wish. What we are not free to do is compel others to believe the same thing, to silence those who disagree with us or to force others to deny reality.
“Human beings cannot change sex. It is not hateful to say that; in fact it is important in order to treat everyone fairly and safely. It shouldn’t take courage to say this, and no one should lose their job for doing so.
“I am pleased that the Tribunal has allowed me to put on record what happened to me at the Center for Global Development. The tribunal has found that I was a victim of discrimination because I stated that biological sex is real and important, a view shared by the vast majority of people in this country. I hope employers will take note of the judgment.
“I would like to thank my family, who have gone through this with me over the past three years, and my legal team: barristers Ben Cooper QC and Anya Palmer, and my solicitor Peter Daly. Above all I want to thank the thousands of women and men who sent me their support, and in particular JK Rowling for standing by me in the darkest of days.
“To hear that my case has helped other people to speak up against unfair and
discriminatory practices at work makes the hardship of the last three years easier to bear. All those who are fighting similar battles — and there are many such people now — have my solidarity and support.
“I also want to thank all the brilliant organisations fighting to protect sex-based
rights. They will make the world a safer, fairer place for women and girls. They are stepping into the democratic space that well-funded organisations like CGD have vacated through cowardice.
“CGD’s unfair treatment of me, and prejudice against people who believe that sex is real, changed my life. If the organisation hadn’t ended my employment, I would never have co-founded Sex Matters. I would never have had the opportunity to be part of the amazing movement in the UK to re-assert the importance of sex-based rights.
We have had enough of being sidelined in language, law, policy and public spaces. This judgment is further evidence that the tide is turning.”
Notes for editors:

1. Maya Forstater is available for media interviews on the Tribunal judgment.
Please email interview requests and questions media@hiyamaya.net
2. For technical questions on the judgment and its significance for employment
law in the UK, contact Peter Daly at Doyle Clayton Solicitors
pdaly@doyleclayton.co.uk .
3. High-res photographs of Maya Forstater are available for download and use
here https://hiyamaya.net/photographs/(including with JK Rowling).
4. About Maya Forstater: Maya Forstater worked for many years in the field of
international development, with a focus on taxation and sustainable development. She was a visiting fellow at the European arm of the Center for
Global Development, a Washington-based think-tank, between 2017 and 2019, before losing her job in March 2019 after she publicly advocated against
planned changes to the Gender Recognition Act (2004), which the government later shelved. Since April 2021 she has been executive director of Sex
Matters.
5. About Sex Matters. Ms Forstater is Executive Director of Sex Matters, which is the not-for-profit human-rights organisation she and others co-founded in
2021 to campaign for sex-based rights. Sex Matters lobbies for clarity on sex
in law and institutions; in areas including single-sex services, sports, schools
and freedom of speech.
6. About Forstater’s legal case: Forstater took her claim to the employment
tribunal in March 2019. In November 2019 a preliminary hearing was held on the question of whether her gender-critical beliefs were protected under
discrimination law. On 18th December 2019 Judge James Tayler ruled that
her beliefs were not protected and failed the Grainger criteria for protection
under UK human-rights law by being “not worthy of respect in a democratic
society”.
Forstater appealed that judgment to the Employment Appeal Tribunal. In a
precedent-setting ruling on 10th June 2021, Tayler’s decision was overturned
in its entirety. His Honour Judge Choudhury, President of the Employment
Appeal Tribunal, held that Forstater’s belief fell within the protection of Article 9(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, and therefore was covered by UK discrimination law. Forstater’s claim was sent back to the EmploymentTribunal to determine whether the treatment she had received at the hands of CGD was unlawfully discriminatory on the basis of her belief.
The most recent case was heard remotely in the Employment Tribunal from
7th to 22nd March 2022, by a tribunal of three members chaired by
Employment Judge Glennie. This was the hearing on the facts of the matter,
seeking to determine whether Forstater was, in fact, discriminated against on
grounds of her belief. The judgment handed down on 6th July 2022 concluded CGD has until 17 August 2022 to apply to the Employment Appeal Tribunal for permission to appeal this judgment.

7. Further background information on Forstater’s case and her employment at the Center for Global Development can be found on her website: hiyamaya.netPRESS STATEMENT: MAYA FORSTATER’S VICTORY IN EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL: A WIN FOR FREE SPEECH AND SEX-BASED RIGHTS
6th July 2022: Maya Forstater, who took a claim for belief discrimination against her former employer, the Center for Global Development, has been vindicated by a ruling that she was unlawfully discriminated against by her former employer on the basis of her protected belief.
This follows a ruling at an Employment Tribunal in June 2021 when Ms Forstater successfully established a binding legal precedent that gender-critical beliefs were in principle protected by the Equality Act. Following that appeal, her case continued at the Employment Tribunal, to determine whether she was unlawfully discriminated against by her former employer on the basis of her protected belief.
The Tribunal unanimously found that, as acts of unlawful discrimination on the basis of Ms Forstater’s beliefs, CGD:
1. Did not offer her an employment contract;
2. Did not renew her visiting fellowship; and
3. Removed her from its website.
Among the findings in the judgment are that Ms Forstater’s tweets and comments, which formed the basis of CGD’s treatment of her, were statements of her protected gender-critical beliefs. The negative consequences which flowed from them were therefore unlawfully discriminatory.
The statements that Maya Forstater made in this regard included:
- “A man’s internal feeling that he is a woman has no basis in material reality”.
- Describing Pips Bunce, a male who identified as a woman for part of the
week, as a “part time cross dresser”.
- Drawing an analogy between self-identifying transwomen and Rachel Dolezal.
- That “the places that women and girls get assaulted and harassed are ‘normal life’”; in the context of a discussion of whether recognising transwomen as female potentially posed a risk to women and girls. This was not, as CGD’s counsel had argued, “catastrophising” but was instead “an unobjectionable observation in the course of the debate … [which was] not an objectively unreasonable observation to make”.
- That describing self-identification as a woman as “a feeling in their head” was not to equate self-identification with mental illness and “did little more than assert Ms Forstater’s gender critical belief”.
The Tribunal also recognised that Ms Forstater had been entitled to criticise those holding an opposite view to her, and had done so legitimately. The Tribunal found in particular that the mere fact that offence may be taken to a particular statement was not sufficient to render it incapable of legal protection. This included describing opposing views as “stupid, dangerous or unfair” and the statement that allowing male-bodied individuals access to women-only spaces gave rise to “an increase in risks, threats and discomfort” to women.
Forstater, a public policy researcher, who co-founded human rights organisation Sex Matters a year ago, welcomed the verdict.
“My case matters for everyone who believes in the importance of truth and free
speech.
“We are all free to believe whatever we wish. What we are not free to do is compel others to believe the same thing, to silence those who disagree with us or to force others to deny reality.
“Human beings cannot change sex. It is not hateful to say that; in fact it is important in order to treat everyone fairly and safely. It shouldn’t take courage to say this, and no one should lose their job for doing so.
“I am pleased that the Tribunal has allowed me to put on record what happened to me at the Center for Global Development. The tribunal has found that I was a victim of discrimination because I stated that biological sex is real and important, a view shared by the vast majority of people in this country. I hope employers will take note of the judgment.
“I would like to thank my family, who have gone through this with me over the past three years, and my legal team: barristers Ben Cooper QC and Anya Palmer, and my solicitor Peter Daly. Above all I want to thank the thousands of women and men who sent me their support, and in particular JK Rowling for standing by me in the darkest of days.
“To hear that my case has helped other people to speak up against unfair and
discriminatory practices at work makes the hardship of the last three years easier to bear. All those who are fighting similar battles — and there are many such people now — have my solidarity and support.
“I also want to thank all the brilliant organisations fighting to protect sex-based
rights. They will make the world a safer, fairer place for women and girls. They are stepping into the democratic space that well-funded organisations like CGD have vacated through cowardice.
“CGD’s unfair treatment of me, and prejudice against people who believe that sex is real, changed my life. If the organisation hadn’t ended my employment, I would never have co-founded Sex Matters. I would never have had the opportunity to be part of the amazing movement in the UK to re-assert the importance of sex-based rights.
We have had enough of being sidelined in language, law, policy and public spaces. This judgment is further evidence that the tide is turning.”
Notes for editors:
1. Maya Forstater is available for media interviews on the Tribunal judgment.
Please email interview requests and questions media@hiyamaya.net
2. For technical questions on the judgment and its significance for employment
law in the UK, contact Peter Daly at Doyle Clayton Solicitors
pdaly@doyleclayton.co.uk .
3. High-res photographs of Maya Forstater are available for download and use
here https://hiyamaya.net/photographs/ (including with JK Rowling).
4. About Maya Forstater: Maya Forstater worked for many years in the field of
international development, with a focus on taxation and sustainable development. She was a visiting fellow at the European arm of the Center for
Global Development, a Washington-based think-tank, between 2017 and 2019, before losing her job in March 2019 after she publicly advocated against
planned changes to the Gender Recognition Act (2004), which the government later shelved. Since April 2021 she has been executive director of Sex
Matters.
5. About Sex Matters. Ms Forstater is Executive Director of Sex Matters, which is the not-for-profit human-rights organisation she and others co-founded in
2021 to campaign for sex-based rights. Sex Matters lobbies for clarity on sex
in law and institutions; in areas including single-sex services, sports, schools
and freedom of speech.
6. About Forstater’s legal case: Forstater took her claim to the employment
tribunal in March 2019. In November 2019 a preliminary hearing was held on the question of whether her gender-critical beliefs were protected under
discrimination law. On 18th December 2019 Judge James Tayler ruled that
her beliefs were not protected and failed the Grainger criteria for protection
under UK human-rights law by being “not worthy of respect in a democratic
society”.
Forstater appealed that judgment to the Employment Appeal Tribunal. In a
precedent-setting ruling on 10th June 2021, Tayler’s decision was overturned
in its entirety. His Honour Judge Choudhury, President of the Employment
Appeal Tribunal, held that Forstater’s belief fell within the protection of Article 9(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, and therefore was covered by UK discrimination law. Forstater’s claim was sent back to the EmploymentTribunal to determine whether the treatment she had received at the hands of CGD was unlawfully discriminatory on the basis of her belief.
The most recent case was heard remotely in the Employment Tribunal from
7th to 22nd March 2022, by a tribunal of three members chaired by
Employment Judge Glennie. This was the hearing on the facts of the matter,
seeking to determine whether Forstater was, in fact, discriminated against on
grounds of her belief. The judgment handed down on 6th July 2022 concluded CGD has until 17 August 2022 to apply to the Employment Appeal Tribunal for permission to appeal this judgment.
7. Further background information on Forstater’s case and her employment at the Center for Global Development can be found on her website: hiyamaya.net

Edit: Monty proves how not smart he is. Legal briefings are really not hard to understand unless they involve already complicated things like property law or unfamiliar to layperson doctrines of legal practices. Most of the time you can skip those bits and still grok the whole thing.

Judges try to write things clearly enough for laypeople in their decisions. They know the person receiving it doesn't speak lawese and want them to understand it.

The fact that Monty can't understand them is very telling. We have cows here that are tards, but still capable of Vaguely understanding legal stuff. At least enough to file lawsuits, which they then lose.

FBDEA646-3F94-4243-914B-B38CAF0C595D.jpeg
 
Última edición:
Someone mentioned in the topic about the "problem of bottom growth"
What's the problem with these clitoris besides looking awful?
do these hurt?
i cant imagine
The fact that Monty can't understand them is very telling. We have cows here that are tards, but still capable of Vaguely understanding legal stuff. At least enough to file lawsuits, which they then lose.
Is Kate retarded?
It is simply impossible not to understand the essence.
Obviously lazy asses just want the gist of it in one tweet.
 
Última edición:
Probably because people saw what they wanted to see. None of them publicly said they were living as men. It just wasn't something that was done. So everyone just assumed that if you wore a suit, had short hair, and introduced yourself as Fred that you were a 100% true and honest man.

Humans have an unbelievable capacity to see only what they want and expect to. If you believe in aliens, you're more likely to believe you were abducted than if you don't. Go looking for Bigfoot? You are more likely to see "him" in the shadows.

Now we all know about trannies and they do everything short of tattooing TRANNY on their forehead. So if we see one we recognize it for what it is.

I'm pretty sure it's that simple.
It was unfathomable, so when someone back then was confronted with a ((guy)) named Fred who sounded like a woman and maybe sort of had a feminine face, they wouldn't default to 'a woman in disguise' they'd default to 'goddamn what an unfortunately feminine man.' Probably with the same sort of pity you'd afford to a midget. Unfortunate, but what can you do?

This still happens today, I can attest to this because it happened to me. I was trying a bbq chain near me (dickies, never go there it's total shit) and there was a fat blue haired thing taking my order. My first thought after it opened its mouth wasn't "tranny" it was 'poor kid's never going to get laid when he/she's this fat and sounds like a queer.' I didn't realize what it was until I saw the 'they/them' name tag.
 
Última edición:
Ver archivo adjunto 3462677

Lol this bitch is insane. Nobody normal has ever loved their passport photo. Also, she looks like shit.
She looks like a chemo patient.

This one made me chuckle.
So, young men can just crossdress and call themselves as women, but THIS ONE IN SPECIFIC is a male?
Curious, very curious.
Have to wonder how they can tell his "gender" just by looking, They insist nobody else has that power.
 
This TiF recently made the rounds on grift twit because she got pregnant and lives in Alabama, and can’t get an abortion unless she goes to Georgia. I wondered if she flipped out on Twitter and she did so here’s the milk: A44934AB-B0B7-4F20-8814-090BB1680796.jpeg 78FB3BCF-812D-4E33-930A-DD6447631DFF.jpeg 6CF831FF-99E8-48E8-BC2B-A15E901584C9.jpeg 4F37EDDE-E9EF-4AD5-9689-B0C20DFA0745.jpeg D5431D7C-4E93-4345-8AAC-5C1FCB1F7CD6.jpeg

4D5E3359-FC1A-47E7-A21D-597F40487719.jpeg
“Not ready to be a dad” you’re going to be a MOTHER and even if they can turn your busted box into a dick, you’ll be a ceiling decoration in a year anyway once Junior starts asking questions. I’m sure her parents are just so proud that their daughter baited gay men into bed and got pregnant because of it 🙄 This shit really is just straight with extra steps.
 
There are many reasons. This is similar to how in strictly sex-separated and anti-gay societies people do not, for example, clock men as homosexual who you and I would recognise as absolute flamers. I've met the gayest gays ever in an Islamic country and no one there suspected they were gay, or if they did they repressed it. They were the single brothers of the family who didn't marry and took care of the parents, and that was it.

In a society is which gender roles are quite rigid people simply don't expect troonery, and thus they don't recognise it, or they ignore it if their brain tells them something is off. People were also far more private and formal in the past: no one was going to ask if the short and rather effeminate man was actually a woman - it's just not done, and if you asked other people would have shut you down because even the concept was considered ridiculous. People also often wore more formal clothes even around when family, which also hides the FTM.

Another thing is that the current crop of FTMs is extra and unusually small, short, feminine and neurotic (as often noted in the SRS/GRS thread), so not necessarily reflective of the women who would dress and live like men in the past. A 5'5-5'7 working class woman might have easily passed as a somewhat malnourished man if she dressed the part. People were far less healthy and less well nourished even just a few decades ago, so more variety in bodyshape was expected.

My least favorite example of historical transing is Margaret Anne Bulkley/Dr James Barry. (Enjoy the careful no-pronouns writing style of the Wikipedia article.)

.

Born into a decent but broke family in 1789, it seems to me that she was part of a minor conspiracy of family and friends to get her enrolled in medical school, posing as male. I’ve read that the original plan was for her to graduate and then revert to open womanhood and travel to somewhere in South America where she could practice medicine as a feeeemale, but that didn’t work out and she continued to live as a man, and became a British army surgeon.

The trans cult is pretty into this woman, variously claiming as evidence that her family’s seeming lack of interest in marrying her off was evidence that she might be iNTeRsEX, and of course insisting that she was a true and honest dude.

Counter evidence: she was essentially her own and her mother’s sole support at a time when jobs for gentlewomen were extremely limited and poorly paid (to maintain your social status you were pretty well limited to being a companion or a governess), and the way people casually assert that her family’s seeming lack of interest in marriage meant anything is retarded. It was very difficult for a woman of no dowry, social connections, or unusual degree of beauty to marry well. Like a third of noble girls at this time didn’t marry because there just weren’t enough men who could support a family to go around. It is evidence of nothing.

Anyway, I’m also a tard, but my read of things is that Barry was unusually intelligent and driven and her passing as a man and becoming a surgeon was a way for her to escape the circumstances of her birth, make money and have an interesting life. There is evidence that she had what sounds to me like a heterosexual affair while deployed to Africa, and when she died, there are claims that a party dress from her youth was found hidden in her trunk. There are also claims that pregnancy stretch marks were found on her body at death.

Her female sex was not revealed until her death, but a number of times throughout her life and career, people were openly skeptical that she was just another dude. When she enrolled in medical school, she was so short, slender and hairless than people suspected she was actually an adolescent boy, later in her life there was an incident where she as very sick and the young doctors caring for her were apparently deeply shocked by what they found while undressing her (but remained silent), and in later days, there’s an anecdote where a young officer saw her in a military context in Canada and was apparently like “…what is wrong with all of you? That is obviously a woman???”

And still it wasn’t until her death that the truth came out. In her own time people seemed very clear that she was a woman pretending to be a man, not “a man”. Which is funny and sad, that Victorian Britons had a better sense of why a woman might do such a thing than we moderns.

TLDR, I agree that in a culture where men and women inhabit separate spheres and dress very differently from each other, a performance of maleness might not have to be that good to get most people to go along with it. The alternative would have been, for instance, for the officer-gentlemen Barry served with to acknowledge something deeply taboo, that a lady sat and dined with them while they said rude things, that a lady rode with them under dangerous circumstances, that a lady had seen them naked and tended to their wounds. All utterly haram to men socialized in the mold of 19th century English gentlemen.

Our own culture is so blurry and messed up about sex that IMO it’s really difficult to understand how weird this would have been for people. Something like if your dog started talking about physics, maybe your brain would just blank it out.
 
These playful claims of being special because of autism really drive me mad. A member of my family is highly autistic and while he is brilliant in a number of fields, he is so dysfunctional that he will probably never be able to live on his own and working a regular job with other people is extremely stressful for him. Now I know it is a spectrum and not all cases are that severe, but can do I hate those people who celebrate mild autistic symptoms as something that makes them interesting and cool like neopronouns or a tattoo.
For real full spectrum autists, it is a crippling disability with serious impacts on their own and their families lives. It's not a fun occasion for a cake. People like Ella here disgust me.

I'm a bit behind, so apologies in advance of these were posted before.


It's always uplifting seeing so many black women stand up for their rights:


Ver archivo adjunto 3462591

Owen Jones wrote an article in which he explained to all those feeble minded women out there that by not dedicating their lives to supporting men in drag, they are actually supporting the patriarchy. You know, the system in which men tell women what to do and think.

Ver archivo adjunto 3462592
Finally, another story proving once and for all that nobody can tell the difference between a neovag and a regular one. (This story might have been posted before. After all, there are.many such cases.)

Ver archivo adjunto 3462593
Stuff like this really annoys me, he doesn't smell good cause it's not natural nor healthy down there, these people have instincts and they are just ignoring them for someone else's deluded feelings. I don't know how someone can do this repeatedly...I pity the women who are being forced to put their mouths on a hive of infection.

And I hate the society that is telling them, gaslighting them to do it...'no it's perfectly normal, are you a transphobe?'

Most of all I despise these freakish men that have somehow convinced these women that they are women.
 
Última edición:
Atrás
Top Abajo