Twanzphobia ith a thin!
The godbotherers join the fun.
Typical godbothering blather, announcing that “transphobia” is a “sin” without explaining what “transphobia” is or what “sin” is. Let’s join up all the magicky words in a chain so that we can tie everyone up with it.
Transphobia is a sin, plus trans people are whole and holy. Wtf does that mean? What does it mean for a human to be “whole”? It has all its parts? Well, trans people who’ve had “gender-affirming” surgery don’t have all their parts, so in literal terms, whole is exactly what they aren’t. Or is it supposed to be “spiritual”? But then it means everything and nothing; it’s just churchy warm fuzzies. As for “holy”: warm fuzzies times a billion.
Transphobia is a sin. Trans people are divine. Trans people exist because their ancestors existed.
Lying is a sin, or rather lying is bad. The core dogma of trans ideology is a lie, the lie that people are whatever sex they say they are as opposed to the sex their body is. This dim-witted person doesn’t bother to say what counts as “transphobia” but doesn’t hesitate to call it a sin – so churchy, that is. Trans people are of course not “divine” because that’s a magic-word, and magic isn’t real. If the evangelist means “divine” as in “this chocolate mousse is divine” well then it’s a case of de gustibus non est disputandum. As for the last bit…well duh. All people exist because their ancestors existed. Are we supposed to think their ancestors were trans and that’s why they are? They come from a long and glorious line of divine trans people? If so, what are her sources?
Let us all call out and denounce the sin of transphobia in our communities and institutions and loudly, boldly and joyfully proclaim that trans people are created in God’s image to be their extraordinary selves.
Blah blah blah. Let’s get happy-clappy, kids – bring out your guitars and let’s all embarrass ourselves!
I can’t, for the life of me, figure out what that “they exist because their ancestors existed” bit is supposed to mean. Is it merely that if no ancestors, then no person? That’s rather _a priori_ and useless. Is it something else, like having ancestors entails being trans? That’s utter poppycock, as not everyone with ancestors is trans. So what, then? What is it with this ideology and nonsense word salad?
Some of my ancestors were reivers, some were Indian killers, some probably owned slaves. I exist because they existed.
So I guess reiverphobia is a sin.
No? I guess that depends on how one defines “trans”. And since the trans movement so obstinately refuses to define “trans” in any coherent way, maybe the definition can be: anyone with ancestor. So we’re all trans!
But more seriously, I think that the poster does think something like “their ancestors were trans and that’s why they are? They come from a long and glorious line of divine trans people?”, as Ophelia puts it. Maybe the poster thinks that being trans is like being black: You are trans, or black, because your ancestors were.
Many of my ancestors were priests of the Church of England. I exist because they existed, but I haven’t (even in my religious youth) considered following their example.
I have a whole set of ancestors who were Mennonites. Boy am I not a Mennonite.
The whole ‘transwomen are divine’ thing (transmen not so much) is fascinating–here’s an essay suggesting where that comes from:
https://virginiasroom.co.uk/2022/01/falling-from-humanity/
Still Orwellian; they’ve just changed texts: “Some animals are more equal than others.”
This is either a banal truism (everyone is holy, including trans people) or a claim that trans people are extra-specialer than boring old non-trans people. Just like claims to being non-binary, it’s either pointless (because nobody falls at either end of Barbie to GI Joe Gender Spectrum, meaning everyone is trivially “non-binary”), or a statement of exceptionalism, that the normal rules don’t apply to them because they’re above them. I think this claim is more the latter than the former.
This “holiness”, “divinity” (and from prior hectoring claims “sacredness”), is a claim to an elevated status, rather than a plea for equal treatment. Equal treatment is the last thing that trans activists are interested in, because equal treatment would mean that nobody would give a fuck about their precious identities, when what they insist upon is attention, submission and obedience. Not equality. What ithey are claiming is sainthood. Through self ID, TiMs are magically rendered harmless and blameless, no longer part of the male demographic or subject to its patterns of behaviour and offence, and, on that basis, are to be welcomed into women’s single-sex spaces. Or else. They are to be considered Pure and without Sin, perfect Angels incapable of predatory intent. Ever. they are ever and only the victims here; don’t you forget it. (They refuse to admit the possibility that baser creatures might pretend to be Angels in order to satisfy their gross appetites. Turns out it’s hard to tell the real Angels from guys wearing cheap wings on their backs, so it’s best to avoid this topic altogether, and summarily condemn as evil transphobes any and all women who bring this up. We can be thankful that their Inquisitorial aspirations are not more fully realized, empowered and enforced than they already are) They’ve had plenty of practice claiming persecution, martyrdom and incipient genocide. They have Suffered for the Faith, bearing the vicarious, psychic wounds of Actual Violence. Nametags sporting preferred pronouns are the equivalent of the halos in Western paintings of Holy People; we are supposed to abase ourselves as unworthy sinners in the presence of these Divine Beings.
I suspect that the word “ancestors” is supposed to mean “antecedents.” It’s another variation of “trans people have always existed.”
A relative of mine recently told me she thought “we are on the same page that people who identify as trans or non-binary exist and have always existed.” When I said we agreed that there have always been people who didn’t conform to the gender norms expected of their sex, she was astonished that I had rephrased a factual statement that she had assumed wasn’t really up for debate. But of course saying people in the past “identified as trans” imports a modern concept into very different situations.
What good is being a priest if you can’t invent new sins?
Also, not bringing me a sandwich is a sin now. Praise the Lord and pass the mustard.
@7 and @8:
Anyone remember this book?
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/35631647-cis-tears
The blurb says: “Further than even the moon or the stars can remember, the people referred to now as transgender were goddesses and gods; the true gods.
These goddesses and gods ruled among the commoners, the cisgenders, referring to those who only possessed one quality, of one spirit; ordinary and very common.
The goddesses and gods, however, were something quite special; extraordinary.
These goddesses and gods, quite rare, as is the case with goddesses and gods, possessed qualities of both spirits – a male body, with a female spirit and vice versa.
The goddesses and gods, caring and loving, guiding blessings into each citizens’ lives, guiding humanity’s evolution into progression. The goddesses and gods were the celebrities of the time; adored and admired.
Although capable of inflicting the unimaginable, goddesses and gods never misused their powers.
One day, the commoners, the cisgenders, grew very jealous, and very envious that they could not be as special. They did not want to continue to help build this worlds society, catering to the goddesses and gods will.
To an action that would now be comparable to Hitler, the cisgenders, outnumbering the gods, overthrew the goddesses and gods and continued to erase their history over time.
To this day, these goddesses and gods, now referred to and labelled as transgender, by the cis, power remains severely dormant.
The goddesses and gods, to this day, are still suppressed by the cis and infiltrated by deceptive demons, masquerading as transgender people to tarnish the godly name.
Seen in many ways today, such as drag, which is the blackface for trans people.
That is, until one day, a goddess’s dormant power state was awoken – and this time, it’s not going to be nice.”
Trans people exist because their ancestors didn’t sterilize themselves with puberty blockers.
@ iknklast #12
That was my thought. Today’s trans (the female ones) won’t be anyone’s ancestors, because they will have made themselves infertile at the drop of a hat, at very young ages.. Plenty of the male ones will be reproductively intact, though some of them will have deliberately excluded themselves from the reproductive pool too. If the notion is that there is a genetic component to transness, it’s not the regular folks who are genociding the trans. That’s all entirely self inflicted, through the stubborn insistence that drug/hormone/surgical intervention is absolutely mandatory, essential, and the only kind of treatment that counts for trans people. THEY are making themselves incapable of reproduction. It’s 100% on them that they will have no offspring.
In light of my @2 above, I would like to make clear that I have never stolen a sheep, killed an Indian, nor owned a slave. Nor do I ever intend to.
@11 haha no, and judging by the complete lack of review or comment no one else does either.
[…] a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? on Twanzphobia ith a thin! with emphasis […]
Ophelia #6 “I have a whole set of ancestors who were Mennonites. Boy am I not a Mennonite.”
Ditto
My father was raised in a Mennonite community, but never joined the church, & raised a bunch of devout atheists.
My mother’s father’s grandfather was a Mennonite bishop. The next generation moved from Indiana to Iowa and had a farm, and their oldest son moved to town (Washington, a little south of Iowa City), studied law, ran a newspaper, was a Chatauqua lecturer, and was Democratic candidate for governor of Iowa. That was my grandfather. I don’t recall ever so much as hearing the word Mennonite growing up. There was a lot of change in those four generations, which I think is quite typical. My Ma was a journalist. Secularization and leaving the farm.
Wow, you know a lot of your family history. I’m impressed! And your family has been in the US quite a while.
@WAM #2 – For a moment I thought you were referring to The Reivers and I was briefly excited. I saw them at a free show at the West End Marketplace in Dallas in 1989, and apparently I am one of the few people to buy a CD of their music. Star-Telegram is a particular favorite song.
If you go back far enough my ancestors had gills and lived in the ocean.
The point being…?
@Mike Haubrich,
I’m about half Scottish on both sides. My surname is from one of the famous Highland clans, one with a lot of romantic and tragic stories attached to it. But on my mother’s side it’s all borderland families. At a Highland festival some years ago I asked a guy about a couple of our surnames, and that’s when I first learned about reivers. Which I found highly amusing, as my mother came from one of the most highly-respected families in their upstate New York village, a family that made its living in the town’s woolen mills. Sheep stealers still.
And just why this sad bozo would publish an image of himself holding up a white piece of paper with an obnoxious message on it… it’s almost like he wants to become a meme.
For example:
https://imgflip.com/i/77wkhd
(Search “Bruesehoff” or “It is a SIN” to find the template on imgflip)
GW @ 19 – That’s the only bit of ancestor history I know. I got interested via a conversation with my mother’s older sister decades ago, and she had this trunk of papers in the attic, so I paid her a long visit and went through those papers. It was innaresting.
from Imgflip Meme Generator
https://imgflip.com/i/77x2lu
Let’s make him internet-famous