Iss woss in yer harrt
Wizzzdom.
Women are women regardless of sex, just as chairs are umbrellas regardless of structure.
You can be both or a mix of the two…all you have to do is dye your hair on one side. Presto! You are now both woman and man. Or you can get a Mohawk and become neither woman nor man. Isn’t life fascinating?!
Great liberation movements of recent history and their tactics:
Labour movement: Rational argument, impassioned rhetoric
Civil Rights for African Americans: Rational argument, impassioned rhetoric
Women’s Liberation: Rational argument, impassioned rhetoric
Transgenderism: Kawaii, glurge*
* (…false statistics, bad science, suicide threats…)
To quote Dorothy Parker, this tonstant weader fwowed up.
It’s interesting, isn’t it, how a cartoon that declares that “what really matters is inside of our hearts” appears to be also saying that what determines your gender isn’t some silly “superficial” thing like your body parts, but something much more profound and lasting like…. your clothes and haircut?
I mean, logically speaking, all of those figures should be equally placeable in each of the panels based on the supposed underlying premise. But it wouldn’t do to have a muscular, short-haired, bearded, flat-chested figure in jeans and a T-shirt in the “woman” panel, would it? Because even though it’s supposed to be “what’s in our hearts” that matters…. well, you kinda need to grow your hair long, shave the beard, and wear a shirt, or else it’s kind of awkward for our theory.
“I pity the fool who says I ain’t a man!” — Mr. T
What others have said above. Plus, if in your heart you’re a fantasist, narcissist and a misogynist…
If only someone had thought, in the years before Twitter and Tumblr, to create a movement dedicated to the principle that women and men should have equal rights. Kinda surprising that nobody came up with that before now.
I think the ones with their shirts off in the top row are the transgender people. Odd artistic decision to show a trans woman showing off her male chest and a trans man showing off his bound female chest.
“You can be both, or a mix of the two.” So 1. fully male and fully female, just as Christ is said to be fully human and fully God, or 2. limited to a total of one person, with a blend of male and female parts? Neat-o.
The bottom left panel is also amusing, as the artist couldn’t draw a group of attention seekers better. That was probably not their intent, but it reflects reality well.
(The creator of this is probably just the nicest person. I almost feel bad making fun of their mush brain.)
The old way seemed much simpler to me.
Women have female parts. Men have male parts.
But your parts don’t “have a say” in who you are deep down.
Funny how gender is an internal feeling, and is far more important than mere biology – fundamental to the person, even – yet it always boils down to surface details. Clothing, hair, demands that other people change their language, all of which are things that can be decided on a whim and dropped as easily.
No wonder there was so much furore when this same “logic” was applied to race. The obvious implication, that race is something that can be put on and taken off on a whim and is never forced on people against their will, explains the immediate rejection… and also explains why the trans brigade shies away from the comparison.
The
Posted too soon.
The silly cartoon also pulls the usual stunt in panel 5: that the gender critical people don’t regard trans people as people. So, another lie for the trans religion.
And the backhanded way, in panel 4, they insinuate that intersected conditions are equivalent to wearing counterculture hairstyles real nice of them.
And all of the figures are weirdly infantilized.
Maybe as a way of ignoring the beard question? But binding is still included…
John the Drunkard–the infantilization is a feature of trans propaganda. (See my comment.)
I suspect it has something to do with the level of rational thought being utilized by transgenderism’s proponents.