Not having sex with someone because they don't have the right genitals is transphobic. No prizes for guessing who's claiming this

[Doyoumind]

RM is busy trying to justify their support for a particularly unpleasant tweet yesterday. For those of you who are blocked, I'll add some grabs.

Genital preference for your sex partner - bad, terrible, phobic, educate yourself, try harder.
Genital appearance for yourself, requiring medical intervention - human right.

Describe yourself as a woman, not cis - not allowed.

Legal recourse for misgendering - yes.

It’s beyond parody.

If pansexuality is no longer the only moral orientation, are lesbians now morally allowed to be homosexual??

Asking for a friend.

Isn't the end point of agp sex with men who want sex with men where both of them believe that one of them is a woman?

Isn't it called GAMP?

Dont want to google...

Only McKinnon can manage to make McKinnon realising that McKinnon was wrong everyone else’s fault

Can you reverse ferret by proxy?

So RM now say RM's point of view was wrong.

But it was wrong of anyone to tell RM it was wrong.

And now it's wrong of anyone to say it's wrong for RM to now say we were wrong to point out RM was wrong before.

It must be either fucking exhausting or nauseatingly boring in that brain.

Well. it seems transing is going though stages of changing and emerging sexuality which are obviously difficult for them to accept so this is all sorts of bluster and obfuscation.

There is a sexologist who could probably help, but sadly they all want to avoid that and invent new imaginings...

I wouldn't think it possible for someone to eclipse Yaniv in sheer batshittery, but here we are.

(The former has been oddly quiet lately. I saw on KF the police have been at the apartment complex regularly, but not sure if that apartment specifically. Odds-on for sure though...)

BuzzShitbagBobbly hmmm, interesting.
Now you mention it...no, it’s too far-fetched...has...has anyone ever seen Yaniv and McKinnon together? As in, in the same room at the same time? Anyone?

I predict a veritable flood of ferrets in reverse before all this is over. I wonder what provoked Rachel's? Was there a suggestion that the money might dry up?

So RM says that it's because of Penis that transwomen aren't welcomed in homeless shelters, ladies rooms, etc. Once again leaving out the fact that Penis Ladies are attached to large, dangerous, entitled, aggressive males who can beat the crap out of us. The entire argument about physical intimidation is entirely sidestepped.

I for one am sorry GoAwayRachel has "changed her mind" as I think her contention is entirely logical. If you have to pretend that trans women are women when they're playing sports, why not when theyre having sex.

I'm more and more seeing that the issue is you can't argue with a narcissist

No, you can’t. But you can ridicule them.

In “Rules for Radicals”, Saul Alinsky argues that ridicule is a very effective weapon against weapon. It’s also VERY effective against narcissism, because narcs can’t okay: they have no sense of humour.

This is why Posey Parker’s so effective and why they loathe her so: she has a fast, sharp wit and she’s not afraid to use ridicule as a weapon.

What she did to Harrop was comedy gold.

Ditto Julie Bindel laughing and telling Jane Fae, “You don’t know you were born.”

Of course, narcs don’t like being ridiculed, and that makes them dangerous.

But maybe it’s time some of us quit assuming logic and intellect wins against power and start playing the Fool instead.

Just saw this on FB. It's a public post but I've cropped the author off just in case.

It's a photo of a screen so it's not great quality but hopefully you can zoom in.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Bet the MRAs love that one!

Bicker, I think that's why so many of them get their XY- fronts in a twist on here.

Those narcs definitely had surgery - humour bypasses.

The Harrop sketch really is the gift that keeps on giving, along with "It's ma'am!"

and it's part of the reason the MN 'special rules' for FWR irk me so much

some people just need to have the piss taken out of them

if you don't want people to find you ridiculous, don't act ridiculously

That means that I faked 95%+ of the orgasms. Sex in that role (with those genitals) never felt right

Have we got a head-scratching emoticon yet?

How d'you fake ejaculation? not sure I really want an answer to this

"How d'you fake ejaculation?"

Maybe it has something to do with fake lesbians and their "girldicks", they probably produce trans semen which identifies as "rainbow juice".

Yeah, but if RM is producing rainbow juice then surely that's not actually faked? Unless there's some sort of mechanical gubbins hooked up to a bottle of something taped to the side of the genitals.

Or is RM saying that 95% of their ejaculations weren't actually orgasms?

Or is it that in 95% of cases RM's female partner had no line-of-sight and no physical contact and so didn't notice that ejaculation wasn't occurring?

Or is it just that RM believes "faking 95% of orgasms = super-feminine" and is bullshitting accordingly?

I don't know why this is bothering me so much.

Identifies as a fake orgasm obvs. "Women" fake em all the time you know

I suspect RM means RM came but didn't really mean it.

Not worth wasting time on RMs orgasms. If RM is asexual sex in any role is not really going to feel right, is it? RM deceived former wife by failing to admit to being asexual before marriage. It says nothing about the wife. The rape claims are vile for so many reasons.

I haven't dared look into what the 'my wife raped me' thing is all about - please tell me it's not some sort of "I'm asexual thus never wanted sex thus every single time was rape by default" thing?

Still not sure how one can be both asexual and sexually attracted to women either. I suspect RM's definition of asexual is, like RM's definition of lesbian, not the same as everyone else's definition. Buggered if I'm trawling for further data on this one though.

The whole "asexuals can have/want/enjoy sex!" thing has always sounded like "vegans can love a good steak!" to me. Perhaps I'm insufficiently woke.

See, my response to "vegans can love a good steak!" is "Intriguing. What definition of veganism are you using?"

Asexuals can have sex - obviously, yes.

Asexuals can enjoy sex - um, could maybe buy this depending how we're defining asexual, and how we're defining sex.

Asexuals can want sex - back the fuck up there. So "asexual" has nothing to do with lack of sexual wossnames then? So what does it mean? Attracted to neither sex yet wanting to have sex... With whom, precisely? Or what?