Is this clip really demonstrative of how Trump voters feel about the trans community?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i'm cisgender and in no way consider being called cisgender offensive. It's like being called heterosexual, which I also don't think is offensive.

right, but does that matter? I think what matters is if anybody is offended by it. If somebody feels sad because they are called cisgender, then the word should be banned.

what? That's...not how words work. "Banned"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i'm cisgender and in no way consider being called cisgender offensive. It's like being called heterosexual, which I also don't think is offensive.

Okay, but you don’t get to speak for everyone. I’m a registered Democrat who voted for Harris, and I find the word profoundly offensive. Why? Because it is, in my view, a religious slur. I am not part of and do not believe in gender ideology, and I do not want to adopt its religious tenets, nor do I want to be referred to using the derogatory term that adherents use for non-believers. There are many terms that religious groups use to insult (and provoke violence against) outsiders. I am not going to repeat the most vile of them here, but consider how the term “infidel” is used by some religious groups. “Cisgender” is just another version of “infidel.”

And the point is that even if you disagree with me completely, as is your right, there are many people—many of whom did not and would never vote for Trump—who consider the term cisgender to be extremely and deeply offensive. So, why is it acceptable to keep using the term?

....You are this disturbed at being called "cis"? Amazing. Would you be ok with "not trans"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Her tweet sticking up for herself after the fact was worse than the event. She's a classless bully.

jsteele wrote:Mace's goal is to provoke attacks on her that she can later use to portray herself as a victim and fundraise off of. Her fundraising will be something along the lines of "I stood up for keeping men out of women's sports and bathrooms and was attacked for it". She will not disclose her own provocation because that would not be effective in raising funds simply because most Trump supporters don't support such behavior.

Jeff has it pinned down exactly right. She's made it clear it she wants to run for Governor in 2026. She's desperately trying to get as notorious as possible until then, and is practically screaming "pick me pick me" for Trump's attention.

I'm one of her constituents and today Thomas Ravenel, former Bravo reality star and a short-lived state Treasurer who had to leave office to serve jail time for a cocaine conviction, announced he wants to run too. If it pans out that they run against each other as Republicans, I would hold my nose and vote for Ravenel in a heartbeat.

You'd vote for a male coke-addicted felon over a woman who hurt your feelings. If that doesn't tell the story of you pro-trans misogynists, I don't know what does.

DP. The bigger issue is the absurdity of two such low quality, inappropriate individuals running for public office at all, especially governor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i'm cisgender and in no way consider being called cisgender offensive. It's like being called heterosexual, which I also don't think is offensive.

Okay, but you don’t get to speak for everyone. I’m a registered Democrat who voted for Harris, and I find the word profoundly offensive. Why? Because it is, in my view, a religious slur. I am not part of and do not believe in gender ideology, and I do not want to adopt its religious tenets, nor do I want to be referred to using the derogatory term that adherents use for non-believers. There are many terms that religious groups use to insult (and provoke violence against) outsiders. I am not going to repeat the most vile of them here, but consider how the term “infidel” is used by some religious groups. “Cisgender” is just another version of “infidel.”

And the point is that even if you disagree with me completely, as is your right, there are many people—many of whom did not and would never vote for Trump—who consider the term cisgender to be extremely and deeply offensive. So, why is it acceptable to keep using the term?

....You are this disturbed at being called "cis"? Amazing. Would you be ok with "not trans"?

Why is this so hard for you? Cis is a slur and is used as one. “Not trans” is descriptive language inasmuch as “not Catholic” is descriptive, in both cases not being slurs. Therefore, using cis is not okay, while saying “not trans” is okay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:i'm cisgender and in no way consider being called cisgender offensive. It's like being called heterosexual, which I also don't think is offensive.

Good for you, I hate it and find it offensive. I am not a subset of my sex, I am woman.

And if you don’t respect my wishes, don’t plan on me respecting yours.

[Anonymous]

The cruelty is the point. Not a single conservative even cared about women's sports until Trump made it another way to show hatred towards people who aren't like them.

The NCAA announced that there were only 10 transgender athletes competing in women's sports. It's such an inconsequential issue as to boggle the mind why anyone would care. The point is not to help "real" women, it's to vice signal that they hate anyone who doesn't stuff themselves into a box that conforms to their narrow and ignorant worldview.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Her tweet sticking up for herself after the fact was worse than the event. She's a classless bully.

jsteele wrote:Mace's goal is to provoke attacks on her that she can later use to portray herself as a victim and fundraise off of. Her fundraising will be something along the lines of "I stood up for keeping men out of women's sports and bathrooms and was attacked for it". She will not disclose her own provocation because that would not be effective in raising funds simply because most Trump supporters don't support such behavior.

Jeff has it pinned down exactly right. She's made it clear it she wants to run for Governor in 2026. She's desperately trying to get as notorious as possible until then, and is practically screaming "pick me pick me" for Trump's attention.

I'm one of her constituents and today Thomas Ravenel, former Bravo reality star and a short-lived state Treasurer who had to leave office to serve jail time for a cocaine conviction, announced he wants to run too. If it pans out that they run against each other as Republicans, I would hold my nose and vote for Ravenel in a heartbeat.

You'd vote for a male coke-addicted felon over a woman who hurt your feelings. If that doesn't tell the story of you pro-trans misogynists, I don't know what does.

Says you, someone who voted for a male adderall-addicted felon over a woman who hurt your feelings.

I see you didn't deny what I wrote. I'm glad you know yourself.

I’m not the PP who said who she would vote for and I don’t live in South Carolina but Nancy Mace is a ridiculous famewhore who came out blazing and talking like a normal person after January 6 but immediately switched course when she found that wasn’t the way to get anywhere in the Trump cult that functions as the GOP now. She’s as embarrassing as Marjorie Taylor Green and if I lived there I would never want her in charge of anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The cruelty is the point. Not a single conservative even cared about women's sports until Trump made it another way to show hatred towards people who aren't like them.

The NCAA announced that there were only 10 transgender athletes competing in women's sports. It's such an inconsequential issue as to boggle the mind why anyone would care. The point is not to help "real" women, it's to vice signal that they hate anyone who doesn't stuff themselves into a box that conforms to their narrow and ignorant worldview.

Women’s sports didn’t require care and feeding until males decided to push their way into them. Once the gates had been breached, it required a response.

And for every transgender woman athlete, there is a significant blast radius that affects dozens of women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i'm cisgender and in no way consider being called cisgender offensive. It's like being called heterosexual, which I also don't think is offensive.

Okay, but you don’t get to speak for everyone. I’m a registered Democrat who voted for Harris, and I find the word profoundly offensive. Why? Because it is, in my view, a religious slur. I am not part of and do not believe in gender ideology, and I do not want to adopt its religious tenets, nor do I want to be referred to using the derogatory term that adherents use for non-believers. There are many terms that religious groups use to insult (and provoke violence against) outsiders. I am not going to repeat the most vile of them here, but consider how the term “infidel” is used by some religious groups. “Cisgender” is just another version of “infidel.”

And the point is that even if you disagree with me completely, as is your right, there are many people—many of whom did not and would never vote for Trump—who consider the term cisgender to be extremely and deeply offensive. So, why is it acceptable to keep using the term?

....You are this disturbed at being called "cis"? Amazing. Would you be ok with "not trans"?

Why is this so hard for you? Cis is a slur and is used as one. “Not trans” is descriptive language inasmuch as “not Catholic” is descriptive, in both cases not being slurs. Therefore, using cis is not okay, while saying “not trans” is okay.

I see "cis" in the same category as "white", which by itself is just descriptive. It's not a slur.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me put a different question to those here who think what Mace did was shocking and offensive.

Why do you insist on using the term “cisgender” or “cis” to describe heterosexual people?

It’s been made abundantly clear over the last several years that there is a large percentage of the heterosexual community, female and male alike, that consider the term offensive and a slur. Yet it’s still used as a defacto default term for heterosexual people. Why is this happening? You KNOW it’s an offensive term, but you use it anyway.


How is this ok?

cisgender is not the same as heterosexual. Gay people can be cisgender (and most are).

“Cisgender” means traditional gender aspects and mannerisms consistent with sex assigned at birth, including masculine or feminine traits and social mores, and a sexual attraction to the opposite biological sex. Unless a gay man was only attracted to other gay men who themselves are transgendered and identified only as heterosexual women, it would be difficult to suggest that that gay man was cisgender.

Ok, when is Cis affinity month ? And when is the parade ? Everyone else gets a parade, I want mine (because I’m special for being Cis).

ESAD normie. You already run the world. You don’t get a damn month too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i'm cisgender and in no way consider being called cisgender offensive. It's like being called heterosexual, which I also don't think is offensive.

Okay, but you don’t get to speak for everyone. I’m a registered Democrat who voted for Harris, and I find the word profoundly offensive. Why? Because it is, in my view, a religious slur. I am not part of and do not believe in gender ideology, and I do not want to adopt its religious tenets, nor do I want to be referred to using the derogatory term that adherents use for non-believers. There are many terms that religious groups use to insult (and provoke violence against) outsiders. I am not going to repeat the most vile of them here, but consider how the term “infidel” is used by some religious groups. “Cisgender” is just another version of “infidel.”

And the point is that even if you disagree with me completely, as is your right, there are many people—many of whom did not and would never vote for Trump—who consider the term cisgender to be extremely and deeply offensive. So, why is it acceptable to keep using the term?

....You are this disturbed at being called "cis"? Amazing. Would you be ok with "not trans"?

Why is this so hard for you? Cis is a slur and is used as one. “Not trans” is descriptive language inasmuch as “not Catholic” is descriptive, in both cases not being slurs. Therefore, using cis is not okay, while saying “not trans” is okay.

I see "cis" in the same category as "white", which by itself is just descriptive. It's not a slur.

“White” is definitely a slur.

Literally no one wants to be called “white”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i'm cisgender and in no way consider being called cisgender offensive. It's like being called heterosexual, which I also don't think is offensive.

Okay, but you don’t get to speak for everyone. I’m a registered Democrat who voted for Harris, and I find the word profoundly offensive. Why? Because it is, in my view, a religious slur. I am not part of and do not believe in gender ideology, and I do not want to adopt its religious tenets, nor do I want to be referred to using the derogatory term that adherents use for non-believers. There are many terms that religious groups use to insult (and provoke violence against) outsiders. I am not going to repeat the most vile of them here, but consider how the term “infidel” is used by some religious groups. “Cisgender” is just another version of “infidel.”

And the point is that even if you disagree with me completely, as is your right, there are many people—many of whom did not and would never vote for Trump—who consider the term cisgender to be extremely and deeply offensive. So, why is it acceptable to keep using the term?

....You are this disturbed at being called "cis"? Amazing. Would you be ok with "not trans"?

Why is this so hard for you? Cis is a slur and is used as one. “Not trans” is descriptive language inasmuch as “not Catholic” is descriptive, in both cases not being slurs. Therefore, using cis is not okay, while saying “not trans” is okay.

I see "cis" in the same category as "white", which by itself is just descriptive. It's not a slur.

I think if you go to a bar in middle America on a Friday night, and call the biggest guy in there a “Cis”, you’ll probably get punched in the mouth. And everyone will think you deserved it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i'm cisgender and in no way consider being called cisgender offensive. It's like being called heterosexual, which I also don't think is offensive.

Okay, but you don’t get to speak for everyone. I’m a registered Democrat who voted for Harris, and I find the word profoundly offensive. Why? Because it is, in my view, a religious slur. I am not part of and do not believe in gender ideology, and I do not want to adopt its religious tenets, nor do I want to be referred to using the derogatory term that adherents use for non-believers. There are many terms that religious groups use to insult (and provoke violence against) outsiders. I am not going to repeat the most vile of them here, but consider how the term “infidel” is used by some religious groups. “Cisgender” is just another version of “infidel.”

And the point is that even if you disagree with me completely, as is your right, there are many people—many of whom did not and would never vote for Trump—who consider the term cisgender to be extremely and deeply offensive. So, why is it acceptable to keep using the term?

....You are this disturbed at being called "cis"? Amazing. Would you be ok with "not trans"?

Why is this so hard for you? Cis is a slur and is used as one. “Not trans” is descriptive language inasmuch as “not Catholic” is descriptive, in both cases not being slurs. Therefore, using cis is not okay, while saying “not trans” is okay.

I see "cis" in the same category as "white", which by itself is just descriptive. It's not a slur.

I think if you go to a bar in middle America on a Friday night, and call the biggest guy in there a “Cis”, you’ll probably get punched in the mouth. And everyone will think you deserved it.

If the biggest “guy” at the bar had breasts and ovaries, I probably wouldn’t call him cis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The cruelty is the point. Not a single conservative even cared about women's sports until Trump made it another way to show hatred towards people who aren't like them.

The NCAA announced that there were only 10 transgender athletes competing in women's sports. It's such an inconsequential issue as to boggle the mind why anyone would care. The point is not to help "real" women, it's to vice signal that they hate anyone who doesn't stuff themselves into a box that conforms to their narrow and ignorant worldview.

Can you tell me what other issues you only care about when there are a small number of victims being harmed, and for those issues, what your threshold number of victims is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i'm cisgender and in no way consider being called cisgender offensive. It's like being called heterosexual, which I also don't think is offensive.

Okay, but you don’t get to speak for everyone. I’m a registered Democrat who voted for Harris, and I find the word profoundly offensive. Why? Because it is, in my view, a religious slur. I am not part of and do not believe in gender ideology, and I do not want to adopt its religious tenets, nor do I want to be referred to using the derogatory term that adherents use for non-believers. There are many terms that religious groups use to insult (and provoke violence against) outsiders. I am not going to repeat the most vile of them here, but consider how the term “infidel” is used by some religious groups. “Cisgender” is just another version of “infidel.”

And the point is that even if you disagree with me completely, as is your right, there are many people—many of whom did not and would never vote for Trump—who consider the term cisgender to be extremely and deeply offensive. So, why is it acceptable to keep using the term?

....You are this disturbed at being called "cis"? Amazing. Would you be ok with "not trans"?

Why is this so hard for you? Cis is a slur and is used as one. “Not trans” is descriptive language inasmuch as “not Catholic” is descriptive, in both cases not being slurs. Therefore, using cis is not okay, while saying “not trans” is okay.

I see "cis" in the same category as "white", which by itself is just descriptive. It's not a slur.

Okay? And I disagree completely, and consider it a profoundly offensive slur.

And now that you know many women find it offensive, you’ll stop using it, right?