💬 Off-Topic Tranny/LGBTQ Historical Revisionism - Retroactive rewriting of history by degenerates

Destacado
1-800 dijo:
I honestly don't mind when trannies try to cope by saying "This king was gay and transgender!" because almost always upon looking further into it, it's obvious that it was a perverse fetish that whatever historical figure they're talking about had, and just makes troons today look all the more worse.
Presiona para expandir...
They desperately need for there to be gorillions of totally real and authentic troons throughout all of history, because otherwise their "born this way" narrative falls apart, and normal people naturally question why suddenly this Current Thing that didn't exist ten years ago is absolutely everywhere.

Same deal with "trans kids"...everybody recognizes that middle-aged men playing dress-up is a weird fetish that few are comfortable around. Kids are cute and before puberty easier to disguise as the opposite sex, so if they can convince people it's a Totally Natural Sacred Identity, it keeps normies from noticing that the disorder is spread via molestering, and involves chemical sterilization and surgical castration.

The correct approach is to point out that troonery never existed until the Great Awokening, but predators with weird fetishes did, and were rightfully shunned.
 
Dromedary dijo:
"In 1966, the press didn't like to report on 'uncomfortable' subjects." YES they did. Tabloids were thriving, the more lurid and sensational news the better. And since the trannydrag segment were on the lowest rungs of society there was little compunction about reporting when they were disruptive. "Queen Bees Stinging Mad at Police Raid!" were headlines. Police raids on gay bars were actually, authentically shitty. But newspapers didn't shy away from colorful stories where men in boas made a ruckus and clashed with cops.
Presiona para expandir...

If they threw coffee in the face of a cop, it's weird to me that this cop hasn't been named or come forward to corroborate the story. You'd think, also, that there'd be police reports on this sort of thing.

But no, the cop in question, who they can't name, but was apparently known to be abusive to the transgender community, apparently just exists like some sort of NPC in this story, with no life outside of this incident. Curious.
 
Any thoughts about this debunking of "two-spirit" by a TERF publication?



Also, revisionism by Guillaume Labelle. In the few instances where troons are forced to acknowledge John Money, they argue that he hurt transpeople, desperately trying to dodge the fact that the only reason why their vile ideology has survived beyond the Weimar Republic was because of a pedophile who mutilated a kid's genitals and forced his twin brother to molest him.

money.png

Kerr Avon dijo:
it's always been deviant

:story:
Presiona para expandir...

Ooohhhh boy.....

Especially when we get into what Canaanite/Phonetician/Carthaginian religion was like. It's not pretty in the slightest, and it doesn't surprise me that it's seldom ever brought up.
 
Última edición:
Tablet County dijo:
Knowing a little bit about Japanese history, how true is the historical faggotry which allegedly existed in their culture?
Presiona para expandir...
It's generally true since they had a terms for it like "love of Kukai" (IIRC) which was because a famous monk named Kukai supposedly had homosexual relations with his followers. There was also a long tradition of equating the "beauty of young men" to women which certainly crossed into actual homosexuality at times. And they also later sold literal gay porn right alongside normal porn (or what passed for normal porn, this was the same genre which gave us the earliest tentacle porn).
Aero the Alcoholic Bat dijo:
Any thoughts about this debunking of "two-spirit" by a TERF publication?

Presiona para expandir...
That article is a strawman argument since actual scholars will point to the many reports of Indians being described as "sodomites wearing women's clothing" and such in Spanish reports, or more modern 20th century anthropology which also points to men dressed as women who were married to men. The old term for it was "berdache"--the term "two-spirit" is very much new though and IMO only makes sense as a general classifier for crossdressing Indians who acted as women. Of course, the problem here is that two-spirits were almost always homosexuals who took the submissive role and existed because the Indian worldview had to fit everything neatly into boxes, and a dude who takes it up the ass from another dude didn't make sense, so logically he was a woman and should live as one. Some of these men were bisexual too, since some "two-spirits" later stopped wearing women's clothing and went back to being men.

Incidentally, there is to my knowledge almost no actual evidence of Indian woman who lived as men so FtM "two-spirits" are pulling it out their ass. The closest were some tribes where sometimes certain women partook in men's activities like hunting and wore men's clothes, but they were never called men and usually married men. Doesn't stop them from trying though.
 
Save the Loli dijo:
Since actual scholars will point to the many reports of Indians being described as "sodomites wearing women's clothing" and such in Spanish reports, or more modern 20th century anthropology which also points to men dressed as women who were married to men. The old term for it was "berdache"--the term "two-spirit" is very much new though and IMO only makes sense as a general classifier for crossdressing Indians who acted as women. Of course, the problem here is that two-spirits were almost always homosexuals who took the submissive role and existed because the Indian worldview had to fit everything neatly into boxes, and a dude who takes it up the ass from another dude didn't make sense, so logically he was a woman and should live as one. Some of these men were bisexual too, since some "two-spirits" later stopped wearing women's clothing and went back to being men.

Incidentally, there is to my knowledge almost no actual evidence of Indian woman who lived as men so FtM "two-spirits" are pulling it out their ass. The closest were some tribes where sometimes certain women partook in men's activities like hunting and wore men's clothes, but they were never called men and usually married men. Doesn't stop them from trying though.
Presiona para expandir...

What you just said, isn't that what the article more or less says too?
 
There is a YouTube channel by the name of Powered By Rainbows who essentially specializes in this type of propaganda. Having posted many videos over the years proclaiming that [insert historical figure] was actually some flavor of fag. I'm not a history nerd so I'm not gonna go out of my way to deboonk all the shit he says. The video I found him from is this one:

There is also the related phenomenon of channels like Alexander Avila (formerly Are They Gay) and Lily Simpson claiming that [insert fictional character] is gay/trans or whatever, but I'm not sure if those count as historical revisionism.
 
Of the instances there are in history it seems to be tied to some religious belief or control (castrating court eunachs so they do not try to do some nasty with unattended hoes or queens). It seems the receptive partner was seen for a long time to be taking the feminine roll so there was a lot of cross dressing going on in that regard and in an attempt to be more under the radar.

It is not true that being the top was ever seen as "okay". Maybe less humiliating? But sodomy was looked down upon and it takes two.

It's really only logical why ancient societies saw it as wrong. You don't have that high of a population, infant mortality is common which means all "mating pairs" as it were need to have multiple children for a family to be successful. Hygiene is something to keep in mind, there is no advance in medicine to treat or keep at bay disease. So while it was different to what we would consider being clean, cleanliness was on the mind of people in the past. Society def wanted to encourage good old hetero fucking, and a bunch of a dudes with blown out assholes pre diaper invention was probably best avoided. We really take for granted the advancement and luxuries modern society allows even the lowest of us.
 
There’s some shit that makes me go hmmmm when it comes to the question of certain historical figures and their sexuality, but let’s be real here it’s a much more modern obsession so we project all that nonsense backwards.
 
Relinquish dijo:
There's an extremely strange Wikipedia article on a "supposed" riot in response to "the violent and constant police harassment of drag queens and trans people". It's called Compton's Cafeteria riot.
If you check the sourcing, almost all of it goes back to a single source, a documentary from 2005, or sources that are circular back to the documentary
Burning down a newsstand didn't even get a single line mentioned in police reports? Vague date? A couple of others on the talk page had the same questions I had, but they were quickly shut down. There was a picketing of the restaurant in July 1966 which was documented, it seems odd a violent follow-up wasn't.

Look at this response to someone questioning the legitimacy of the article
1721385004496.png
1721385047983.png
Presiona para expandir...
Susan Stryker, whom they use to as the “reference”, is a tranny professor of queer and women’s studies at University of Arizona and is obsessed with trans shit.
IMG_0465.jpeg

He’s even got that classic creepy AGP smirk.
 
Irregardless dijo:
Man in the highcastle season 3, like 5 characters in the mid 1950's were suddenly gay after never being shown that way before in the series, along with apparent Nazi BDSM sex parties where apparently everyone was bi. Why the fuck would anybody believe that's realistic.
Presiona para expandir...
National socialists hated homos so much they would rather create mass rape camps with slavs, who they saw as animals, than entertain the possibility of faggotry spreading in the military. Even creating a special departament for combating homosexuality too.
The crossdressing part is because nowdays the revisionists are such deviants they can only see it as sexual.
 
Cherry Eyed Hamster dijo:
Meant to put this in my last reply, but it really should be obvious to trannies and TRA’s that all the examples of there being a “third gender” in these cultures are reserved for effeminate men, never women. Depending on the culture, effeminate men were either respected enough to be shamans like in some Native American societies, or they were seen as “failed men” and an insult to the male sex, so a “third/ambiguous” gender was created just for them. It’s a dehumanizing practice because it asserts that you have to act a certain way to be considered male, and it establishes women as being below men. You’d think in the 21st century people would want to move away from these practices, but instead leftists see it as political fodder to stick it to white people for “upholding a gender binary” and to fulfill a disgusting LARP.
Presiona para expandir...
It almost invariably amounts to "here's what we're going to call men who are insufficiently masculine so other men can hatefuck them in grotesque and often dehumanizing ways without being called a faggot - usually in exchange for some exceedingly meagre payment". So stunning and brave.
 
Im glad I wasn't the only one who noticed this shit when trannies and fags basically didn't exist when I was a kid and were nowhere near as prominent as they are today. Thank you for starting a thread on this.
 
Its been stated before but Joan Of Arc. I'm not a radical feminist but troons trying desperately to claim that she was non binary all because she wanted to join the military and had to pretend to be a man really angers me. Lets ignore the fact that she dressed as a boy and wore armor so she wouldn't get raped and killed. She didn't express any apparent sexuality and remained a religious virgin for life because that was important to her. I also love how after receiving backlash from people that the theatre who made her non binary had an official statement where they wrote that they were just doing a 'what if' thing and not actually claiming that Joan was not a woman. They knew exactly what they were doing, they were just trying to cover their asses.
 
Kerr Avon dijo:
it's always been deviant

:story:
Presiona para expandir...
It is important to look past our definition of sacred as mere “holy.” Typically, the sacred is that which is “set apart for sacrifice.” In the religions of antiquity, there were certain sacred figures who were to be set apart to practice actions forbidden or taboo among others, including sex acts. I’ll research it later, but there was a whole group of Babylonian priests who, in their worship a particular goddess, were set apart and only allowed to receive anal sex. (The first example of gay4pay in history???)

So I imagine these acts were viewed as deviant in general among these cultures, but acceptable when practiced in the sacred (set-apart) context.
 
Aero the Alcoholic Bat dijo:
John Money
Presiona para expandir...
They deliberately try to minimize Money's involvement in troonism as being limited to the Reimer case, however, the truth is much different:

money1.PNG

money2.PNG
Link

money4.PNG

Everything we see now has happened before:

money3.PNG

From the re-issue of Janice Raymond's The Transsexual Empire:

raymond.PNG

Hilariously/horrifyingly, Money observed a bunch of the degenerate shit we see today - he just didn't think it was a problem:

The weird chomo way they refer to themselves "girls"
money7.PNG

"Pink-pilling" type behavior
money5.PNG

AGP
money6.PNG
 
Destacado
Debes iniciar sesión o registrarte para responder aquí.
Atrás
Top Abajo