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

I think it turned out the "affordable housing" was going to be something to the tune of 300k a house, which isn't really affordable, and the contractor was getting kickbacks for some shady shit. Again, just what I think was going on, don't have any corroborating evidence on hand at the moment.

From what I gather, he lives in a quiet little town and some developer wanted to carpet the place with shitty-looking cookie cutter houses, which is something he and the other locals didn't want.

He denies being against "affordable housing", tho fwiw nobody's against affordable housing. They're against the kind of people who come with affordable housing, because those people very often make life miserable for their neighbors. You're just not supposed to say this out loud for whatever dishonest clown world reason, but anybody who grew up in shitty neighborhoods knows it's the people who make it shitty.

Troons and shitlibs are assblasted about this, because as a black man Dave Chapelle isn't allowed to have the same concerns white or asian property owners have, or something? Actually no, it's because they're still mad at his jokes. :story:
 
From what I gather, he lives in a quiet little town and some developer wanted to carpet the place with shitty-looking cookie cutter houses, which is something he and the other locals didn't want.

He denies being against "affordable housing", tho fwiw nobody's against affordable housing. They're against the kind of people who come with affordable housing, because those people very often make life miserable for their neighbors. You're just not supposed to say this out loud for whatever dishonest clown world reason, but anybody who grew up in shitty neighborhoods knows it's the people who make it shitty.

Troons and shitlibs are assblasted about this, because as a black man Dave Chapelle isn't allowed to have the same concerns white or asian property owners have, or something? Actually no, it's because they're still mad at his jokes. :story:

That is an excellent point. I'm not against affordable housing either, provided you could vet the people beforehand, but most people who'd end up living there would be monsters from the E-Beggars thread here haha
 
From what I gather, he lives in a quiet little town and some developer wanted to carpet the place with shitty-looking cookie cutter houses, which is something he and the other locals didn't want.

He denies being against "affordable housing", tho fwiw nobody's against affordable housing. They're against the kind of people who come with affordable housing, because those people very often make life miserable for their neighbors. You're just not supposed to say this out loud for whatever dishonest clown world reason, but anybody who grew up in shitty neighborhoods knows it's the people who make it shitty.

Troons and shitlibs are assblasted about this, because as a black man Dave Chapelle isn't allowed to have the same concerns white or asian property owners have, or something? Actually no, it's because they're still mad at his jokes. :story:
It was also one of those awful suburban developments to promises "5% of units will be affordable" or some similar bullshit promise that isn't actually followed through on. Affordable housing is just another hashtag for the assorted idiot lib ideologies on twitter to bark like seals at. "Build more slums" is not the slam dunk policy proposal to fix house prices climbing the way they think it is.

Plus, I mean, he lives in Ohio. Dayton ain't exactly San Francisco when it comes to housing prices. I don't know what "affordable" housing looks like in a place where you can get a 2 bedroom home for 160,000$. It's all such a fucking joke.
 
Surely they are suffering from some type of self hypnosis. Like with anorexia, believing they look something contrary to the reality everyone sees.
I think some of them are, but most of them are just con-men. They don the party city wigs to get something, wether it's e-begging dollars, attention, female roommates to clean up after them, time off from work, or the satisfaction of making others capitulate to their demands.
"Enby" is the biggest con of all. Just add a little bit of nail polish, and you can get all the oppression points and online ass-pats you could ever ask for.
 
Universities are places where theory formulation is encouraged to further human knowledge. Other than the presence of ethics boards that may prevent some studies from ever happening, they serve as safe spaces for ideas that may be ludicrous when subject to the general populace. The surge of critical <insert noun here> theory is an unfortunate consequence.

Add that with young impressionable minds, and well...
The bigger part is that the arts have been infiltrated with ideologues. The sciences are immune, for the most part. If the "peer review" process involves sending ideas out to people, and those people need to approve the ideas before they are published, then you get 1) people allowing nonsense to be published because it supports their social cause, and 2) the same people pushing back against ideas that do not support their social cause, regardless of how well argued it is.

The sciences (even Psychology, although meh) are more immune to this because there are typically very standard procedures for how a specific measure is supposed to be used, and what you can and cannot claim based on results using it. When your "research" is a bunch of post-modern nonsense, then there is no clear standard for how that should be approached, so anything is fair game (actually, the post-modernists do not even like the idea of standards or clear methodology).
 
Surely they are suffering from some type of self hypnosis. Like with anorexia, believing they look something contrary to the reality everyone sees.
Maybe CWC was onto something with those binaural bullshit playlists (imbued with fabulous Magi-chan powers) to turn you into a reeeeeal lesbian woman. Some YVAN EHT NIOJ kinda shit but with troonery.
Actually I think I've seen troons on the wild with a fetish for "sissy hypnosis", whatever that is. I'm not risking it without a Kiwi operative on the ready to shoot me in the heart and brain in case I turn.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
Crying in class makes TIM feel "pathetic, vulnerable, and weak" just like a girl!:

cryinginclassmakestimfeelpatheticvulnerableandweakjustlikeagirl.png
 
:thinking:

1644516901924.png




Pornographic websites in Britain will soon be legally required to verify user ages as government ministers revive the so-called “porn block” ban.

Ministers said on Tuesday (8 February) that the Online Safety Bill, expected to reach the House of Commons in March, will be tweaked to shield children from explicit materials.

To keep under-18s away from porn sites, users will have to provide personal data such as their credit card or passport details to prove they are over 18.

The measures will apply to commercial porn sites, as well as subscriber-based content platforms such as OnlyFans. How such checks will be enforced are not yet clear, and it will be up to the companies to decide how to comply with the new regulations.

The Department for Digitial, Culture, Media and Support said other potential age verification checks could include reviewing a user’s age against mobile phone provider data. The Age Verification Providers Association has even suggested analysing a person’s selfie.

If a provider fails to comply, media watchdog Ofcom would be given the power to impose fines of up to 10 per cent of the company’s annual turnover and even block them from operating in Britain via blacklists issued to the country’s ISPs.

“Parents deserve peace of mind that their children are protected online from seeing things no child should see,” said digital minister Chris Philp in a statement.

“We are now strengthening the online safety bill so it applies to all porn sites to ensure we achieve our aim of making the internet a safer place for children.”

The policy has not clarified what guarantees – if any – the law will protect people’s privacy and data.

After all, a database of pornographic users would be a treasure trove for hackers or blackmailers, especially for LGBT+ users, online privacy group Open Rights Group has previously warned. The new proposals do not protect people from scammers tracking and profiling porn viewing, they said.

The Conservative Party first pitched the idea of age checks for pornography in 2015 during the general election campaign. They were due to come into effect in 2019, but eventually dropped after delays and technical hurdles.

Government ‘porn-block’ plan is a ‘quick win’ without tackling the real problems, say activists

Though some sex work activists and experts have welcomed measures to “ensure adult consensual engagement with commercial sex websites”, others argue that improving sex and relationships education would be a more meaningful way of reducing harms faced by children.

Jason Domino, porn actor and sex worker rights activist, fears that the “true nature of the bill is about not only censorship, but about the government wanting to have leverage against organisations”.

He told PinkNews: “The reason why it seems that way is because it’s not paired with any real dedication towards improving sexual relationships education. So there isn’t any movement to make real changes in pleasure-focused inclusivity.”

Reducing the harms children face online, Domino said, could be “more effectively achieved by contextualising for children the fact that there is sex, there is reality, there is fantasy. The understanding of consent is also really important within this conversation.”

He warned that simply barring young people from accessing porn without taking steps to educate them, too, may push some on to the Dark Web.

“And as soon as you push people into that sort of space,” Domino added, “you open up a whole raft of opportunities for them to discover things that the government do not want them to discover.”

The porn sector not being consulted in policy-making, Domino added, signals that the government does not care about sex worker’s concerns around access, privacy and safety. It also suggests lawmakers are ignorant, or indifferent, to how such restrictions would impact queer young people and sex workers alike.

“There are very few steps into normalising LGBT+ sexuality, relationships and understanding about the body,” he continued. “There is nothing about increasing the protections there.

“The queer community has a heritage of things being illegal, and so often sexual content has been more ‘get away with what you can’ because there haven’t been the spaces for people to do it in a way that is supported and nurtured, for people who don’t know what they like can feel safe. There’s none of that being suggested.”

Ross Anderson, professor of security engineering at the University of Cambridge, pointed out to Sky News that the “porn block” could out LGBT+ teens to their parents, and that many young people are savvy enough to circumvent basic age verification barriers.

Teela Sanders is part of Beyond the Gaze, a group that researches and promotes better working practices, regulation and safety for online-based sex work in Britain.

“The research conducted for Beyond the Gaze very much centres how online technologies can act to keep sex workers and content creators safe, with the ability to introduce a range of precaution and safety measures,” Sanders, also a professor of criminology at the University of Leicester, told PinkNews.

“However, there has been little attention regarding who can view content and this is a welcome move to ensure adult consensual engagement with commercial sex websites.

“There needs to be further checks and balances to ensure that content for adults and children are separated and age verification processes could be a quick win and put the responsibility on platforms and not parents.”

The “porn block” is part of the Online Safety Bill. Touted as a way to restrain Big Tech, it has already sparked concern among free speech campaigners, with fears raised about how it could be used to silence people on social media.

 
Ostatnio edytowane:
The bigger part is that the arts have been infiltrated with ideologues. The sciences are immune, for the most part. If the "peer review" process involves sending ideas out to people, and those people need to approve the ideas before they are published, then you get 1) people allowing nonsense to be published because it supports their social cause, and 2) the same people pushing back against ideas that do not support their social cause, regardless of how well argued it is.

The sciences (even Psychology, although meh) are more immune to this because there are typically very standard procedures for how a specific measure is supposed to be used, and what you can and cannot claim based on results using it. When your "research" is a bunch of post-modern nonsense, then there is no clear standard for how that should be approached, so anything is fair game (actually, the post-modernists do not even like the idea of standards or clear methodology).
I think there can be a certain value in trying to probe for biases in seemingly neutral facts or logic. I mean, things like phrenology were sworn by for a long time with no convincing evidence by modern standards, and people love p-hacking and playing with statistical validity to bolster fringe ideas in the hard sciences all the time. This isn't even getting into things like theoretical physics which can be just as much of an absurd free for all as Queer Theory, but is ignored because it's the province of insane eggheads that doesn't intersect with the real world much.

There was an American biologist, E. O. Wilson, that argued really well in a book I read called Consilience that the siloing of the different disciplines in knowledge production was a detriment to them, that you needed the different perspectives to be more interested in talking to each other than talking amongst themselves to really get the best out of them. I still think he's correct, especially with regard to the post-modern theories which are only useful as playing a devil's advocat sort of position to the assumed authority of other sciences. They don't deserve to exist on their own.
 
1644517242931.png

This says it all, women are "pathetic, vulnerable and weak". Dude should feel like a god damn pussy-ass bitch instead. Everyone should be afraid of this dude shooting up the classroom some day.

EDIT: Also nice little stab at the teacher who "caused this situation" by "subtly" implying he might be a gay pedo (also euphoria. ew). The guy probably was starting to be afraid he was going to be stabbed right there and then said the nicest thing he could muster.
 
Wyświetl załącznik 2974610
This says it all, women are "pathetic, vulnerable and weak". Dude should feel like a god damn pussy-ass bitch instead. Everyone should be afraid of this dude shooting up the classroom some day.

EDIT: Also nice little stab at the teacher who "caused this situation" by "subtly" implying he might be a gay pedo (also euphoria. ew). The guy probably was starting to be afraid he was going to be stabbed right there and then said the nicest thing he could muster.

The euphoria statement is always so gross to me. Because you know he's just sitting there leaking precum because he has a fucking pink beanie on his head. I don't understand how people can hear a trans person talk about their "euphoria" and not instantly clock that there's something wrong with the whole mindset. It literally sounds exactly like addiction seeking behavior. You wouldn't congratulate an obese person for the euphoria they experience eating an entire cake, would you?
 
The Green Party's LGBTIQA+ officer: -

1.jpg


2.jpg

Yet another science-denying nutjob who thinks their actual sex is not male, but if you don't go along with this crap, the Greens will eject you from the party.
 
Not hugely rare, but not exactly common either. UK numbers, there's about 130 gender indeterminate babies born per year out of about 150k births. So a generous 1 in 1000.

Edit to add: gender indeterminate just means it's not immediately clear and the kid gets chromosome mapped before anything is done, so that cope is bullshit in the UK at least.
So it basically is just, what, deformed genitals and not some sort of liminal state between male and female? That's weird wild stuff!
 
To be fair, the only people I'm high school I ever saw freak out over petty shit like this were boys.

Having tantrums in class is pretty common for emotionally stunted boys.
I have seen boys and girls throwing tantrums but it's nothing like this dude describes.
I've seen girls baw their eyes out when failing a test or because she can't attend anymore for reasons and will miss her friends and that kinda stuff.
I've seen boys shout and punch a desk before fuming out of the classroom, or getting all douchebro when refusing to take out a hat and trying to OWN the teacher with facts of da hood.
That said, I've seen more boys and men go fucking berserker and/or hysterical. Every other day there were a bunch of guys having "fights to the death (not really)" at the school and specially high school exit, while girls fighting was very very rare, but when they go they fucking go. Yet somehow manage to not get any lasting damage, boys usually went home with a bloody nose and/or with a black eye and........why yes my little corner of the world was a bit barbaric, thanks for noticing.

Ahem, anyway, with those things in mind, I've never seen a boy doing what this one describes. Keep in mind this is his version of events, who knows what he actually did and what he's not telling. We know how troons love to spin a story. Story goes spinny.
Seeing how there are very specific negations like "people can't tell when I cry" he was probably sobbing and doing weird noises and nobody dared to say a thing because even bullies know when shit's fucked up.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole