Charlie Kirk assassin was living with trans roommate

One clear misunderstanding in that article is the suggestion that the GC persepctive is that Gender Identity is innate and is tied to Sex. In fact, GC rejects the idea of a fixed 'gender identity'.

You are either male or female regardless of how you identify.

We have had Transmaxxers explain this to us on a thread they started a few years ago here on FWR. It was most enlightening

No. 99% of people don't recognise the word as referring to male people.

In fact, MBM did a poll about it and found there was great confusion about that specific term. And I am noticing that less and less people are using it in real life now too.

why should society use the terms they demand to be described by? You already called them deluded. So please tell us why we should feel that we have to use the terms you are saying we should use.

murrayblackburnmackenzie.org/2023/08/07/clarity-matters-how-placating-lobbyists-obscures-public-understanding-of-sex-and-gender/

I've supported same sex marriage for a very long time and so I've had disagreements with Christians but in those pre social media days there wasn't the violent memes etc. We just ignored people and got on with life.

Yes, I haven't delved into it too much, but I now understand that online outrage and anger is somewhat addictive.

i'm guessing it's because when you're anonymous behind a screen, you can give vent to feelings that you would normally moderate. You couldn't get on in the real world if you said even a tenth of what people say online.

So there's something liberating about being able to say fuck no, that's shit, you're an idiot.

Add in the victim complex, with all your online mates egging you on.
And you've got furious outrage wrapped in a persecution complex, with zero exposure to real-world mitigation.

And yes, that is indeed why it can be very sad. Because when they come up against the massive brick wall of real life, everything shatters.

I see that we’re now finding the meaning of “to exist” as tricky as the meaning of “to share” in previous threads.

Big cross-over between LGB and T these days. In that lots of gay people end up adopting trans identities.

I read an article this morning the chap, Nick Fuentes, who leads the Groyper Army group has said

“To all of my followers, if you take up arms, I disavow you,” adding: “I disown you in the strongest possible terms.”

https://archive.ph/5jcAq

www.telegraph.co.uk/us/news/2025/09/14/charlie-kirk-death-tyler-robinson-language-of-far-right/

Regarding the rest of the article, although I only read it today it is from a few days ago. It's fair to say events have overtaken it.

I have heard this is a theory
Transmaxxing: the Incel-To-Transwoman Pipeline

Yes, people who believe in all sorts of things 'exist'. But just because someone believes something about themselves it doesn't necessarily translate as other people agreeing with or accepting what it is they believe about themselves. Surely that is obvious?

Just becaue that is what 'they' want it doesn't mean that others have to gift it to them. Other people have desires and needs too. Males are not female.

I couldn’t care less what they want to be considered.

They’re still men and I refuse to call them anything else.

I won’t use any of that ‘cis’ nonsense either.

In other thoughts I just can't help finding it a sad situation. Evidently for Kirk and family predominantly.

Also a young man making the decision to shoot someone because in their view he preaches "hate" - i.e. opposed same sex marriage and transgender care.

I've supported same sex marriage for a very long time and so I've had disagreements with Christians but in those pre social media days there wasn't the violent memes etc. We just ignored people and got on with life.

I imagine he'd get the death penalty, I'm British so I'd prefer he went to prison for a long time with hopefully the prospect of rehabilitation and seeing things differently.

I do also see a blame at activists that use these aggressive terms and celebrate Kirk's death.

Well, it establishes what it was created to “establish”. Whether that turns out to be the truth or not is still to be seen.

“But these are gamers. It sounds more like an exchange between two Victorian misses.”

and there you have it.

That's how they bullied their way into my lesbian social group and tried bullying, the young naive lesbians to have hetero-sex with them because 'they want to be considered women.'
NO

Yes, depending on region up to a third of survey participants thought a “trans woman” was a female person identifying as a man. Which is in fact logical, especially when you consider the little weasel word “cis” applied to a woman meaning a genuine woman rather than a man who identifies as a woman.

Actually someone else will have the stats but a lot of the general public don't know that transwomen are biological men.

It's up to individual posters what terms they use.

I don’t give a shiny that they “want to be considered women”. It hurts actual women.

They want to be considered as women. They're generally referred to as transwomen. It's the accepted descriptor and 99% of people will recognise the word.

Men that claim to be women, exist, yes, but I don’t see them as distinct from other men particularly and I’m not going to use activist jargon like “trans woman” with or without the space. It’s a loaded term which presupposes that in some way these men are women. They are in no way women, I don’t relate to any of their tropes, as a woman. They are just men.

I don't have an issue. I'm generally on the GC side. I just don't like this recent trend of people thinking that if they say something enough it makes it true. Like 'white people can't experience racism' which is always followed by some long waffling justification despite the definition of racism being pretty clear and unchanging since time immemorial.

Transwomen are men that believe they're women, or want to be treated as a woman. There's even legislation making gender reassignment a protected characteristic. It's illogical that this would be the case without any subjects/demographic for it to apply to. If they don't exist then what's all the fuss about?

People that don't exist can't present any threat to women's rights surely?

Me neither. It seems to establish quite a lot in very short order, which is handy.

But these are gamers. It sounds more like an exchange between two Victorian misses.

on the other hand, there is absolutely, unequivocally, no accounting for folk.

Yes, but I think you’ll find those posters are still clinging to their theories that it’s all made up to make “trans people” look bad.

Just reading the messaging between the two roommates

Some earlier arguments from posters about there being no relationship etc were wrong

I now prefer ‘men who say they are women’ or ‘males who claim to be female’ because both phrases imply critique of the self made proclamation.

When surgical or medical interventions are part of the discussion I sometimes use ‘men who have undergone artificial feminisation’ (and obvs the same but vice versa for women who say they are men).

Yeah, I had enough men, gay and straight, crashing my lesbian social group. We're fed up with men colonizing the term woman and lesbian.
Twigg was self-aware to speak condescendingly of 'cisfags'. Just like he was not a sloth or whatever furry fantasy he tried on, and you're not calling him one, he has nothing to do with being a woman.