I have tried to list off every anti-trans policy done by the Trump administration as of January 2026. My hope is to help other trans people figure out what risks we genuinely face from the Trump administration.I am NOT tracking which policies are currently in place. The courts are continually telling the Trump administration not to do things, and then the Trump administration is continually defying court orders, and it’s a big mess that I don’t want to get into.I am also NOT counting every time someone in the Trump administration says something mean about trans people. I aim to stick to actual, material harm.My primary source is GLAAD’s Trump accountability tracker. https://glaad.org/trump-accountability-tracker/https://thingofthings.substack.com/p/trumps-policies-towards-trans-people
Documents The Trump administration has ordered that passports reflect trans people’s assigned sex at birth and not their identified gender. Nonbinary people can no longer get a gender-neutral passport with an X on it. If someone uses a passport with an X on it, the airline is required to enter that they are either male or female.The Social Security Administration no longer allows people to change their sex listed in the Social Security database. Your sex doesn’t appear on your Social Security card. You will need to list the sex in the Social Security database to apply to Medicaid, Medicare, or Obamacare health insurance. Some but not all programs that use a social security number to verify people’s identity check the person’s listed sex, which could potentially out trans people. However, the version of the program used by private employers does not compare sex.
Sex segregated spaces Federal agencies are required to separate sex-segregated spaces by assigned sex at birth, not gender identity. For example, when visiting federal agencies, people are now required to use the bathroom associated with their assigned sex at birth. At Veterans Affairs medical facilities, sex-segregated spaces (bathrooms, inpatient facilities, etc.) are segregated by assigned sex at birth and not gender identity.Trump’s Title IX Investigation Team is intended to keep trans people from using the bathroom of their identified gender at schools that receive federal funding. It has threatened schools in (for example) North Virginia, New York City, and Denver with loss of funding or legal action because they allow trans students to use the sex-segregated spaces that match their gender identity.
Healthcare access for adults The Trump administration has begun the process of removing coverage for transition care from the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB), which provides healthcare for federal employees and retirees. The Trump administration will make case-by-case exceptions for people who are already receiving transition care.Veterans Affairs doctors are now permitted to discriminate against veterans because of their political beliefs, a baffling decision which Veterans Affairs claimed was necessary to comply with Trump’s anti-”gender ideology” executive order. Veterans Affairs has also stopped providing most transition care.
You will never be a woman.
Healthcare access for minorsThe explicit intent of the Trump administration is to prevent minors from biomedically transitioning. For example, the CDC’s website says:This review, informed by an evidence-based medicine approach, found medical interventions, such as puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries, that attempt to transition minors away from their sex are unsupported by the evidence and have an unfavorable risk/benefit profile. Based on that evidence, it is a CDC priority to protect children from these practices, and, to the extent allowable by applicable federal law and any relevant court orders, CDC programs will deprioritize programs that engage in these practices where permissible. CDC funds will also not support the costs of such practices where not required by the law or court order.The government has threatened the funding of hospitals and medical schools that provide transition care to people under the age of 19. Many hospitals have complied and are no longer treating trans youth.A proposed rule would block federal Medicaid funding for transition care for patients under the age of 18 and CHIP funding for patients under the age of 19. Another proposed rule would bar all funding to all hospitals and medical schools that provide transition care to people under the age of 19.The Department of Justice has subpoenaed doctors that provide transition care to minors. The Department of Justice is considering pursuing legal action against those doctors under laws against female genital mutilation, promoting drugs using false information, and filing false claims in federal healthcare programs.Federal-government-provided insurance, such as TRICARE (military insurance) and the health insurance that covers federal employees, no longer covers transition for people under the age of 19.
>>528055555The Trump administration has also tried to make youth gender transition harder in ways that are frankly goofy. For example, in order to get federal funding, Northwestern University has agreed not to perform gender-affirming surgeries on minors, even though it already didn’t perform gender-affirming surgeries on minors. And people who work at nonprofit organizations that support youth transition are no longer eligible for student loan relief the way other nonprofit employees are.
Information The Trump administration has taken down numerous webpages (from federally funded non-governmental organizations as well as the government itself) that provided information relevant to transgender people. It has also spread misinformation about trans people. A handful of examples:The State Department no longer advises transgender people about where it is safe to travel.The National Center on Missing and Exploited Children no longer has reports on trans youth.The Department of Justice no longer collects information about hate crimes against trans people.HHS has issued a report about pediatric treatment of gender dysphoria which is a politically motivated misrepresentation of the state of the science about treating gender dysphoric youth.The Trump administration has terminated many science grants focused on researching transgender health. We know very little about transgender health, and grant funding to research transgender people concretely improves the health and longevity of transgender people.
Discrimination The Trump administration no longer investigates cases where the defendant was accused of housing discrimination against transgender people. Homeless shelters face contradictory and confusing guidance about how to handle transgender people, which has made it more difficult for homeless transgender people to find shelters.The Department of Education has instructed K-12 schools and universities to interpret Title IX as prohibiting discrimination based on assigned sex at birth, not based on gender identity. Anti-trans discrimination in schools is not presently considered to be sex discrimination by the federal government.The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has dropped all lawsuits related to discrimination against transgender people.The federal government has stopped processing internal claims related to sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination.
>>528055555I think this should be higher still. Make it 21 like alcohol and tobacco.
>>528055555>Healthcare access for minorsThis is where you went too far. If you had simply left the children alone, you could have had everything else. But you didn't.
Nihilistic violent extremism The Trump administration has targeted “gender identity extremism” in its counterterrorism work. As all good civil libertarians know, counterterrorism work has a bad habit of entrapping LARPing idiots who, without the undercover law enforcement officer egging them on, would never have gotten beyond bragging about how they will definitely blow up a building someday. Any presidential administration—and particularly one as authoritarian as the Trump administration—might use counterterrorism efforts as a way to target its political enemies.PrisonsIn federal prisons, the Trump administration has moved some trans people to administrative isolation (solitary confinement) and others to the prisons associated with their assigned sex at birth. It has also denied trans prisoners transition care and the opportunity to socially transition.The auditors who check whether prisons are in compliance with the Prison Rape Elimination Act no longer consider whether trans people are housed in appropriate accommodations on a case-by-case basis, or whether sexual assaults could have been motivated by bias against an inmate for their transgender identity. This is in preparation for a full revision of the rules.>>528055854I disagree. I think the age for alcohol, tobacco, handguns, etc should be lowered to 18
>>528055835>>528055767>>528055676>>528055555>>528055453Suicidetrannies cannot and will not cope with forever being a man with a mutilate penis and ballsThe number killer of trannies are himselves
The MilitaryTrans people are no longer permitted to serve in the military. Some transgender veterans who would have qualified for early retirement have been denied early retirement benefits, such as pension benefits and military health insurance.SportsThe Trump administration believes Title IX bans trans women from playing in women’s sports at schools. Trump has created a new Title IX Investigations Team, one purpose of which is to keep trans people from playing on the sports teams of their identified gender. The Department of Justice has threatened (for example) California, Minnesota and a school district in Connecticut with loss of funding or legal action about their policies permitting some trans female athletes to play on women’s sports teams.The Trump administration has harassed several trans athletes, including an absolutely bizarre amount of vitriol directed towards swimmer Lia Thomas specifically.The U.S. Olympic Committee won’t allow trans women to compete in the Olympics as women. Olympians will have to be tested for the presence of a Y chromosome before they can compete.Trans female athletes are no longer able to get visas to compete in women’s sports. It is unclear if this change affects, uh, anyone.
MiscellaneousThe national suicide hotline no longer has a specialized hotline for LGBTQ+ youth, who must now use the main suicide hotline.The Trump administration has threatened to remove sex education funding from states which continue to teach about trans people in sex ed.A trans female refugee has been deported, even though a court found that her life is in danger from antitrans hate crimes in Mexico.
>>528055185You know if you fucking losers spent as much time on literally ANYTHING else in your life as much as you spend obsessing about trannies youd all probably be confident and successful men your day to day
>>528055854It should be 30, since "le science" says human brains don't stop developing until late 20s.
Do you think this actually convinces anyone? That anyone who's willingly seeking this place out is gonna take your side and think well of stinkditches because the orange nigger was a bit mean to them once?
>>528056003>>528055461Trans women are women https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mtwv-S8JNucLet me first tell you what I think the terms man and woman refer to. There are a series of traits typically possessed by and associated with biological females. Not all women share all of these traits but having them is correlated with being female. These traits include:Possessing secondary sex characteristics.Using she her pronouns to describe oneself.Having long hair.Various personality differences. For instance, men tend to be more interested in things and women tend to be more interested in people on average. Women tend to be more nurturing and caring.Painting one’s nails.Having a high voice.Being born female.
>>528055676Hands off the kids, frog. If you creeps would've just kept to yourselves and left kids alone, none of this would be happening. Reap what you sow, fucker.
>>528056326And so on. In short, these feminine traits are what determine whether when you interact with a person, you think of them as a woman. Intuitively it’s easy to think of, say, Blaire White as a woman, even though she has small gametes. This is because she has a significant number of feminine traits. The same points apply, in reverse, to the word man—it refers to people with a significant number of masculine traits.Chris, in contrast, thinks that the term woman univocally and unambiguously refers to members of the female sex. In what follows, I’ll give some arguments against that. But first, let me give an analogy for broadly how I think about the word woman.For a while, the word parent referred primarily to a biological characteristic—namely, the person whose sex act produced a child. It comes from the Latin parens meaning “one who begets or brings forth.” But then over time, the term parent came to have a broader meaning and include, for instance, step parents. We saw that step parents are relevantly like parents in various important respects, and so the biological definition was too narrow. For this reason, the term was broadened to include those who fulfill a broader parenting role.
>>528056326Proof that trannies are more sexist than the average man.
>>528056282holy fucking fuck what the fuck jesus christ whatthefuck
>>528056394This was quite a fortunate development. Counting step parents as parents is quite a good thing! Because they should be treated like parents in all sorts of ways, broadening this definition was a good thing. It would be silly to insist that parent must be a biological term because it has been in the past.I think the word woman is similar. For a while it was primarily used to mean adult human female. But over time, the definition changed, largely based on normative considerations. It would similarly be silly to cling to the old definition when the definition has changed.1 Multiple usages My first argument is that the terms man and woman are used in lots of different ways. At the very least, this should mean that the term is polysemous—having multiple permissible meanings—rather than, as Chris asserts, univocally meaning adult human female and male. When chemists talk about something being toxic, they mean something differently from when therapists do. But neither of them are wrong—there simply are two distinct permissible meanings.Similarly, if all Democrats used the term “fish” just to mean “aquatic animal of some sort” that would start being a permissible definition. A definition is only impermissible if it goes overwhelmingly against common usage. But the definition that I’ve given simply doesn’t do that! Lots and lots of people use the term woman to include trans women and vice versa.In light of this, it seems that at the very least there will be multiple permissible definitions. Thus, given that Chris is committed to the terms 'man' and 'woman' univocally reference biological sex, his position is implausible.
>>528055185>My hope is to help other trans peopleWhat you need is not more politics.
>>5280564672 Better captures intuitions My second argument is that my definition of the term woman captures linguistic intuitions much better than the alternative. Consider Blaire White, for instance. It feels highly unnatural to refer to Blaire White as a man. While Chris claims that treating trans people as the sex that they identify as stems from ideological commitments, one only treats Blaire White as a man if they are ideologically committed to doing so. Conservatives often struggle to refer to trans women as men because they seem like women so much.Similarly, consider Buck Angel. Buck Angel sure does not seem like a woman. Yet Buck was born female. There are many people like this—Janet Mock, for instance.There are all sorts of other ways that Buck Angel seems like a man. For instance, most people would hope that Buck would use the men’s restroom. But presumably it should be men that are using the men’s restroom. Similarly, if a male was attracted to Angel, they’d probably be gay. But being attracted to women generally doesn’t make a person gay.Now, this isn’t totally dispositive. You can imagine cases where being attracted to a woman would be evidence that a person is gay—for instance, if the person looks really, really like a man. But if a person very consistently has a feature that makes one gay if they’re attracted to them and makes it so that they should use the men’s room, well, it seems natural to simply conclude that they’re a man.
>>528055185Lol. Everyone point and laugh at the dickless wonder!
>>528056517A definition that implies that Buck Angel is a woman and Blaire White is a man simply doesn’t fit with common usage. It would be highly unnatural, when asking about Blaire White, to say “who is that man?” I think it’s a desirable feature of language that you don’t have to use your language as a shibboleth to express your ideological commitments. When woke people use land acknowledgements, they’re doing little more than signaling their ideological commitments. Yet using woman in the way Chris thinks people should without signaling one’s ideological commitments is impossible and highly unnatural.If you find yourself having to go out of your way to use pronouns different from the ones a person uses to identify themselves, something has gone badly wrong.Notably, this is generally how we go about deciding upon definitions—looking at how terms are ordinarily used. If a person defined the term water as simply meaning “a clear liquid substance,” well, that would include apple cider vinegar. It’s therefore a bad definition. So if Chris’s definition also implies counterintuitive linguistic claims, that’s a bug not a feature!
It is literally a trans genocide.
>>5280565893 Normative considerations My third main argument is that Chris’s definition goes against various significant normative considerations. I think that the term woman, like many terms, has a normative component. If we’re arguing about who counts as a priest, for example, or what counts as marriage, our argument won’t just be about who most people use the term priest to refer to. Instead, it will be about who should be treated as a priest for certain relevant purposes—who, for instance, has valid sacraments. Most people with the traditional view on marriage would presumably hold that even now marriage doesn’t refer to gay marriage, and most people with the more liberal view would hold that even many decades ago, before gay marriage was widely accepted, nonetheless, the right definition of marriage included gay marriage.Similarly, the term woman has certain important normative implications. You’ll find a great degree of correlation between who one believes a woman to be and who one thinks should be allowed to use the women’s restroom. Similarly, it seems who one believes to be a woman correlates with who should be permissibly referred to using she/her pronouns.Think of it like the word parent. One reason why it’s right to call step parents parents is that they should have all sorts of roles associated with parents. Normative considerations are relevant to deciding whether step parents count as parents.Now, this isn’t to say that trans women should be treated the same way cis women are in all contexts. Step parents are parents, but if one needs a blood transfusion from a parent, step parents won’t do. For that reason, even if you think trans women are women, you could still, in principle, hold they shouldn’t be allowed to compete in women’s sports—just as even though superman is a man, he shouldn’t be allowed to play men’s football.
>>528056641I think in this way, using the term woman the way I use it better fits with our normative intuitions. Say what you want about Buck Angel, he shouldn’t be using the woman’s restroom! For many trans men—which is to say biological females who transitioned to be men—people would be very uncomfortable if they used the women’s restroom.Similarly, I think that trans women should be referred to using she/her pronouns. Referring to a trans woman as a man is just pointlessly cruel—it’s just liable to upset her for no reason. My understanding is that Chris generally goes out of his way to avoid using pronouns to describe trans people when they’re around, because he doesn’t want to offend them by using the pronouns that he believes to be accurate. But if you can’t use pronouns without being a jerk, that’s a real cost of your definition! I’m perfectly happy to use pronouns to describe trans people—and for good reason! Talking without using pronouns is annoying and inconvenient.Now, this isn’t dispositive on its own. If a person has Schizophrenia, it might be mean to call them a Schizophrenic to their face, even though it’s true. Sometimes saying true things is hurtful. But if a definition makes it almost impossible to permissibly use pronouns without being a jerk, to describe trans people, that makes it require a highly unnatural way of speaking. That’s a serious defect.
>>528056326what is a woman?
Wow I wonder what this "person" who rants like this looks like. You are a mentally ill gay man who has chemically castrated himself. Just kys already it's over and not only do people not take you seriously, they laugh at you.
>>5280567134 Far-off cases My fourth main argument is that using the term woman to refer to adult human gets clearly the wrong result in certain far-off sci-fi cases. Now, this may sound irrelevant. If a definition gets the right result in all the normal cases, who cares if it gets the wrong result in weird science fiction scenarios?But far-off cases are often used to assess proper definitions. When discussing the definition of knowledge, for instance, philosophers often discuss highly strange cases involving hallucinations and fake barns. When discussing the meaning of water, philosophers discuss cases where there’s a clear liquid made of different chemicals other than H20. If a person defined the word woman as “an adult human female in the observable universe” even though all actually existent women are in the observable universe, this would be a bad definition, because there could be women outside of the known universe.Thus, if the definition of the word woman as “adult human female” has counterexamples in far-off cases, it is wrong.Now, the first case that strikes me as an obvious counterexample is superman. Superman is clearly a man. But he presumably doesn’t have small gametes. Certainly he’s not an adult human male as he’s not even a male! Thus, the definition of men as adult human males can’t be right as there could be non-human men.>>528056772someone with a sufficient number of feminine traits
>>528056940A second counterexample: suppose that Jesus had become incarnate as a person who produced no gametes at all! Chris defines a man as someone with “a body developed toward production of typically small, motile gametes.” If Jesus himself made a body that didn’t produce small, motile gametes, it seems that his body couldn’t be “developed toward” production of small, motile gametes. After all, if God makes something for purpose X, it’s hard to see how it could be made for some purpose other than X. Similarly, if God made Adam without the ability to produce small motile gametes, and without some specific genetic defect preventing his production of small motile gametes, it would seem on Chris’s definition that Adam wouldn’t count as a man. But this is absurd!A third counterexample: imagine that I, perhaps the single most masculine male in the history of the species, got into a serious car accident. My entire body was destroyed—only my brain was preserved. Scientists took out my brain and placed it into a robot body—one that produced no gametes but had traditional male secondary sex characteristics. Thus, I still had the same mind, looked male, and was functionally male in important respects.In this case, I don’t think I’d have stopped being a man! Having a robot body doesn’t make one stop being a man! But on Chris’s definition, because I’d no longer have a biological body geared towards producing large gametes, I’d no longer be a man.
>>528057005A fourth counterexample: Christians often think that between the resurrection and our earthly deaths, we are bodiless souls in heaven. Now, I know Chris doesn’t agree with this, as he’s a physicalist. But suppose that this were true. While in limbo, would men stop being men and women stop being women? Ironically, if this is true, then if this Christian view is correct, most everyone will be transgender at some point in their life.Now, Chris might object that this scenario is impossible. Chris is a physicalist so he thinks that to have a mind you must have a body. Chris is, of course, wrong about this, but that’s not what we’re here to debate!However, even if a scenario is impossible, it can still serve as a counterexample. Imagine if you defined the word number as “an integer except the number five if it is the second digit of pi.” Now, this would be a bad definition—if five were the second digit of pi, it would obviously be a number. But crucially, five being the second digit of pi is impossible. Nonetheless, this still serves as a counterexample. Similarly, even if disembodied minds are impossible, as a matter of fact, they can still serve as a linguistic counterexample if, were they to be possible, they’d falsify Chris’s definition. Similarly, it would be highly weird if to figure out whether someone was a woman, you’d need to know if physicalism about the mind was right.
>>528057057A last counterexample: imagine a mad scientist took my brain and placed it into the body of a biological woman who transitioned to look male—perhaps Buck Angel. By Chris’s definition, it seems I’d stop being a man. But this doesn’t seem right!5 Definitions My fifth argument is that even if you don’t think my definition is right, you should still think that women aren’t adult human females. Chris is on the affirmative, so if we’re both wrong, then his position is still false in the debate. Now, I’ve given a series of objections to Chris’s view. Suppose you buy those objections but also buy Chris’s objections to my view. In such a case, I’d suggest, you should still reject Chris’s view.It turns out to be famously tricky to define terms. Even innocuous terms like knowledge have generated thousands of years of philosophical debate as to the right definition. There’s often some obscure counterexample to every proposed definition.People on Chris’s side of the issue like to ask people on my side what a woman is—and if they can’t answer, treat this as a major problem. Now, I’m obviously happy to discuss this subject—in fact, that’s what this debate is about. But even if you can’t define a word, you can know that another definition is wrong.Philosophers now mostly agree that knowledge isn’t just justified true belief. If it were, that would imply that if you believe true things by accident and are justified, you have knowledge. For instance, if you justifiedly think that you’ll be hired for a job, and are named Fred, you might believe “Fred will be hired for this job.” If they hire someone else named Fred, while your belief was true and justified, it sure doesn’t seem like you had knowledge that Fred would be hired.
>>528057112If defenders of the justified true belief definition asked laypeople what knowledge meant, they probably couldn’t get a very cogent definition. This wouldn’t mean that their definition is right—it would just be a cheap gotcha. Similarly, even if a person on the street can’t define the term woman, I don’t think that makes them necessarily unjustified in their belief that trans women count as women.Thus, even if you end up disagreeing with my definition, so long as you think there are counterexamples to Chris’s, you should think that my side of the debate is broadly correct.6 ConclusionAnd with that, I conclude my opening statement. Excited to discuss these points more in the coming open discussion.
>>528056772>soiboy doesnt know what a woman isColor me surprised
>>528056326In the debate Chris asks if you have examples of socially constructed identities (“something like parent…”) for which there is a word in virtually every human language. You replied that you wouldn’t be surprised if parent is one such word, to which Chris said it wasn’t on the Swadesh list of universal concepts.But right after “woman” and “man” on the Swadesh 207 list are the words: child, wife, husband, mother, and father (the latter two of which are, of course, elaborations of and just as socially constructed as the term “parents”).https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swadesh_listI think this is funny and also demolishes his argument that a word being on such a list of core vocabulary proves that it the word cannot have a sociocultural definition.WRT your point about sci-fi cases, have you read Marcus Arvan's "Trans Women, Cis Women, Alien Women, and Robot Women Are Women: They Are All (Simply) Adults Gendered Female"? He explores those kinds of cases in depth.
>>528056940>someone with a sufficient number of feminine traitssuch as? are only girls allowed long hair? dresses? makeup? what about birthing ability? ovulation? periods? how about hip to shoulder ratio? torso and leg length? hairline? skin celluar structure? testicles? how many points = woman?
>>528057471>are only girls allowed long hair?No I think you can be a man and have long hair >dresses? No I think you can be a man and also regularly wear dresses >what about birthing ability? ovulation? periods? I think you can still continue to be a woman after you’ve gotten a hysterectomy >how about hip to shoulder ratio? torso and leg length? hairline? skin celluar structure? testicles? how many points = woman?You have to decide for yourself.
>>528056409>Rather than focus on silly hypotheticals where "adult human female is problematic", how about consider actual situations where the alternative is problematic. "Men can have babies" so "abortion isn't just a women's issue". How about "men can have babies too" as a rebuttal to "child bearing is a significant barrier to women's equal participation in the workforce". How about "men can menstruate too". A tad misleading?>If you think child bearing, menstruation and male on female violence are socially, economically and politically significant, then non-biological definitions of gender make communication harder, not easier. You are centering what should be a qualifying footnote, robbing women of easy language to describe some of the most fundamental aspects of their lives.Trans rights activists are the REAL sexists.
Trans women are women.
Bump
>>528058427why the qualifier? real women dont need trans rights
>>528055185Why do people insist on coming to the anonymous image board famously associated with doxxing people to share their publications?
>>528055185You are the gender you were born. You cannot transition from one gender to another. No one is morally obliged to deny reality just because you do. Get on your knees every day and thank God you live in a society that doesnt hunt you down and kill you. Their tolerance of your insanity is blessing enough, you insane, ungrateful, faggotards.
>>528059080>people who adopt children are parents why the qualifier?real parents dont need adoption rights
>>528059384>You cannot transition from one gender to another.>no reason given for why
>>528060567Because you are still a man with a dick and balls, no matter how feminine you may be perceived you will never own anything close to female anatomy, no womb, no vagina, no ovaries the list goes on.
>>528061665>>528061665So if a woman who was assigned female at birth gets a hysterectomy and has other female body parts removed or altered is she no longer a woman?
>>528060567> no example of anyone who actually did itNigger, i cant prove unicorns dont exist either, take a night class or something.
>>528062071Even people BORN into "sexless" situations still heavily sway into a certain sex just due to biology and puberty.I would say a woman with no children and no female anatomy is less of a woman than a woman WITH children and the anatomy but not in the same context as you would.Okay so there's Genetically manufactured sheep/human hybrid organs, you replace a humans internal organs with sheep organs to satiate x persons desire to become a sheep that work on humans, is this person now a sheep because they identify as such?
>>528056135Was there any particular threat to this individual as opposed to any other Mexican trans? We should not import every Mexican trans
>>528055185People like you are why I would now vote for Hitler
YOU GOT TRICKED BY EPSTEIN AND HIS JEWISH PEDOPHILES FRIENDS TO CASTRATE AND DEFILE YOURSELFAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH
>>528055461>You will never be a woman.TPNITrans/homosexuality is a mental illness. It needs to be treated. All homosexuals should be put in hospitals. Trans should be put in high security type hospitals. It's a disease caused by parasites in the brain.picrel of anon who wrote a little summary for those who still don't know about toxoplasmosis.
>>528060567Okay then I'm black and a victim of your colonization. Gibsmedat.
>>528062071You seem confused. You do not get ADDED to a gender/sex, you are one by default and that's all you get, but can *can* be DISQUALIFIED. A dude "transitioning" doesn't become a woman, he becomes a failed man. You can never gain, only lose.
