Why Is Sex Change Surgery Good But Normal Plastic Surgery Is “Misogynistic”?

It’s okay to have a team of doctors carve someone out a pseudo-vagina, having removed their penis and testicles, but not okay to increase the volume or firmness of a woman’s breasts. Why? The former is apparently about “being your true self” and the latter is about “sexism against women and damaging expectations about their appearances.”

It is more than a little strange that surgery keeping a patient mostly the way they are (e.g. a breast enhancement or tummy tuck) is vilified, yet procedures that drastically and irrevocably alter someone’s genitalia, hormones, and other bodily functions is apt to be called bravery.

Most analogously with the issue of surgical “modification” (more like destruction) to “change” someone’s sex, so-called designer vaginas, where mostly straight women change the external appearance of their genitalia, have been attacked for being a patriarchal policing of women’s bodies. Despite challenging women to accept the current state of their vaginas as normal, I would imagine that none of these critics would urge those considering “sex change” surgery to accept their current bodies as normal.

The supreme irony is that the status quo now glorifies giving a man a “vagina” and “breasts” where he did not have them before but balks at a woman making what she sees as improvements to her existing genitalia or breasts. And what about women with children or those above 40, who are only seeking to recapture their past selves when they head to the operating table?

Conventional plastic surgery is based on something we already know

“Victim of the patriarchy” Ivanka Trump. Most women would prefer to have her post-plastic surgery body over her original one and most men would definitely favor the “augmented” Ivanka, too.

There is no doubt that most straight men are hardwired to appreciate large, firm and unwrinkled breasts and round, gravity-defying buttocks. And just as men desire for themselves the good musculature that most women find attractive in them, women would rather have the youthful qualities for their breasts and buttocks that men prefer. These complementary aspects of heterosexual bodily preferences are beyond contestation.

By contrast, on what basis can we justify sex change surgery? Psychologists may point to particular causal factors that explain someone’s continual dissociation from the gender they were born into (conveniently forgetting that almost every “sex change” candidate has no underlying chromosomal abnormalities).

Neuroscientists may take a different path and claim that a certain man or woman’s brain is either feminized or masculinised respectively (similar to how autism might be considered an example of a hyper-masculine mind).

Transgender people without “sex change” surgery should be miserable, but women with small breasts aren’t allowed to be?

So Bruce Jenner had a right to be devastated about his body before his “sex change” surgery but a woman who wants to have a fuller bust or ass just has to accept their present body?

I do not believe plastic surgery should be outlawed, but neither do I encourage it as a fix for everything. Flaws appear on human bodies almost every day and plastic surgery is a slippery slope that can easily spiral out of control. Moreover, Father Time will be ruthless with all of us in the end.

What I find especially condescending, though, is how SJWs believe they can tell a young woman with a non-existent or plain droopy butt that she should not be upset as they simultaneously exhort generally confused and isolated “women in men’s bodies” to take that final step and harvest their male genitalia with the medical equivalent of a hacksaw.

Cultural conditioning such as this has now flowed into the corporate world. Apple has been meticulous in banning the sale of “sexist” children’s apps about plastic surgery, ones it sold until being accosted by the SJW brigades. The emphasis is on politically-designing or regulating games aimed at children because, somehow, plastic surgery is super-sexist.

Yet in our society, before children have even entered puberty properly, they are being taught about people “changing” their sex without any fundamental explanation as to why it is permitted to happen.

You must challenge the SJW narrative and bring up the hypocrisy

Should she have been happy with her former self? Maybe. But this change is far more justifiable than “changing” your sex without your chromosomes being altered.

Details and specificity are anathema to SJW narratives. They focus on feel-good rationales of “being yourself”, “embracing tolerance,” and “ending the stigma.” A ten-year-old boy can’t sign a cell phone contract most of the time but he can, say the do-gooders, make an informed decision to craft himself a new vagina before he even knows his basic sexuality.

Like multiple electrical switches, SJWs seek to cut the flow of some ideas as they allow others, the ones they endorse, to circulate freely. Attacking radical leftist positions is an option you can consider, but better yet is the approach of showing through juxtaposition how very narrow their conception of tolerance and freedom of action is.

If SJWs truly believe in people being themselves, they should start applauding breast enhancement as much as they relish testicles falling off an operating table.

Read More: Progressives Use Ray Rice Scandal To Paint All Male Interests As Inherently Misogynistic

157 thoughts on “Why Is Sex Change Surgery Good But Normal Plastic Surgery Is “Misogynistic”?”

  1. I’m surprised SJWs haven’t come out in droves to oppose weight loss surgery for the same idiotic reasons.

  2. But really, who cares?
    Questions like these aren’t necessary because it presumes the enemy’s social issues are important.
    Is misogyny, as defined in the west, even a bad thing?
    I’m fairly sure most developed countries would do better with more misogyny, not less.

    1. True, take the gloves off. There’s a critical mass being reached…….call it militant red pill, if you wish. Once a man realizes he is hated, there’s nothing to talk about. Indifference is key. Perversion always spreads, until there’s a sufficient reaction to kill it out.

    2. We should point out the hypocrisy to the masses to remind the normal sane people that sex change is wrong. What the SJWs are trying to do is repeat the same BS over and over until the masses think it’s normal. We need to keep reinforcing that this is ABNORMAL. Constantly pointing out the silliness in SJWs will help us see when we are slowly being brainwashed and put a stop to it.

      1. Consistently hitting back with “mental illness” is a great counter strategy. The “say it long enough and it becomes true” only works if there is no counter argument being constantly repeated.

    3. Nowadays being called a sexist or a misogynist should be a badge of honor. It means we have said something that pissed the SJWs, that we have take a stance against not being shamed into believing their crappy ideology. That we are willing to fight and not concede an inch to them. That we no longer fold by their use of language.

  3. Actually I rather like the original Ivanka. Something about fake boobs puts me off.
    Yet in our society, before children have even entered puberty properly, they are being taught about people “changing” their sex without any fundamental explanation as to why it is permitted to happen.
    Which is offset 100% by an active father in the child’s life. It’s an easy thing to solve.

      1. They look nice. They certainly don’t feel right like an over inflated beach ball. Not sure how advanced the implants are today.

        1. They are extremely advanced. They include turbo tax with a 1 year free subscription

        2. Only on wi-fi enabled hooters. Depends on your data plan too…easy to go over, ya know?

        3. So a stripper can write the cost of the surgery off as a business expense or is that classified as a captial expenditure and depreciates over time?

      2. I’ve heard that they’ve improved greatly, but my experience with them on women is that they are hard and plastic feeling. Keep in mind my experience with them is not from the 21st century. Even today though I think most of them, all saline these days, still lack sensation for the woman so it’s kind of like stroking a mannequin if you’re looking for sexy reactions from her. I’ve heard that there is an ‘under the muscle’ implant technique now which negates that, but I’m not certain how prevalent it is.
        I’m just a big fan of natural. Not some kind of political statement or “better than thou” take, just my preference. Ivanka looked like a large A small B cup in original condition, I don’t mind that at all. And that size ages a *hell* of a lot better than the big ol’ boobies. heh

    1. Agreed. Also the augmented face of the Asian girl is quite a case of false advertising. If you mated with her thinking she would provide your offspring with a petite shapely body, you would likely end up with the round blob she really is.
      The only time I think any type of modification surgery is warranted is with girls who are completely flat breasted–I dated two and they simply didn’t feel very feminine because they lacked breasts. That being said, I’m not convinced I would have preferred a post-op plastic version of their chests either.

      1. I think Carlin had a bit on this didn’t he? Something about finding out after the fact that you were actually fucking an ugly person?

        1. Haha, please share if anyone finds this. He was one of my absolute favorites and I own his audio box set, but have never heard this one…

        2. Yeah, it’s why I’m not entirely sure. It was either him, or Ron White or somebody equally as irreverent. My memory fails me.

      2. That looked like a necessity. She looked like Kim Jong Un. I’d change my face of I looked like that.

        1. Also, she has resting bitch face in the before pic and a pleasant smile in the after. Just smiling makes a huge difference. They always do this in before/after comparisons to exaggerate the effect.

        2. Standards of beauty are generally universal. A woman that looks like a man is generally viewed as unattractive. Unless the viewer is gay.
          Of all the races,I prefer Asian women. Your statement has been invalidated.

        3. I was talking about SJWs ranting about how double eyelid techniques in East Asia, and skin lightening in South Asia, is allegedly white washing when in fact it comes from traditional standards of beauty in those cultures.
          Yeah, standards of beauty are universal i.e. the Marquandt mask fits on faces of all ethnicities.

      3. There’s an image out somewhere on the web of two very good look Asians, a couple, and their kids. The couple looks good, but their kids have the fat-face squint-eye look to the max.
        Calling out the SJWs on their double standard is important. Oh, want the weenie hacked off? Fine. Oh, you look like a walking racial stereotype and want that fixed? EVIL! BAD!
        It’s a good thing the SJWs look and act alike. It’ll be easier to send the padded trucks out and round them up when decent reactionary government is finally in place.

      4. Nonsense, unless you’re inadequate yourself. Its all in the nipples. Why do you think they cover up/censor a woman’s nipples in photos? Because that’s the erotic part, not the meat sacks they’re attached to!

        1. This is true, although I find it so silly that on television or other public settings they will often show EVERYTHING from the waist up except the nipple, when the nipple is the only part of the breast that men and women share. I’ve seen female nipples that look just like mine would if I shaved my chest. Yet somehow theirs are unfit for public consumption. Really, the prudishness with female breasts should have died out centuries ago (and did in most cultures)

      5. That’s “manjaw” reduction surgery, it’s not fat related. Many women have a wide jaw line that is considered masculine in Korean culture.
        But “manjaws” are no longer discussed as either a beauty or anti-beauty feature by most in the West. I wonder why.
        As an aside, let’s think about how divorce is illegal in the Philippines but is considered a fact of life in the US.

    2. I’m with you GoJ. I like the pre surgery Ivanka better. I like a small breasted woman better though.
      Also correct about the father though the hands of the father are tied when the school teaches one version of life and father teaches another. “What is that Mr. Soandso you don’t want me to teach your five year old that wanting to have the pe is removed is perfectly normal. Ok. What was your address again? The police will be there shortly”

      1. “What is that Mr. Soandso you don’t want me to teach your five year old
        that wanting to have the pe is removed is perfectly normal. Ok. What
        was your address again? The police will be there shortly”

        Nah, it’s not even close to that. I taught my son and daughter many counter-revolutionary “arguments” aka notions of traditional liberty and history. My son even did a full presentation on why the 2nd Amendment was not only about the individual right to carry whatever arms you wished, but was also put in place so that we could defend ourselves against our own government. Got an A+. He also did a report detailing the horrors of the Soviet Union and extrapolated that to exploring other socialist and communist regimes, with detailed body counts of “death by government”. Got an A.
        Lots of men, especially in the manosphere, tend to have a rather exaggerated perception of what the game on the ground is currently regarding the educational establishment and your power as a parent. While I don’t scoff at the notion that it may come to what you state, it’s nowhere near that yet, at least not in flyover country.

        1. Sounds great. My understanding of education comes from university in NYC (before I went into my current field I was a professor) and I am pretty sure they would turn you straight into Cait at some of the places I taught.

        2. i agree where i live (so,il) we still say the pledge prayers before football games ect,and you can bet that if sometranny showed up at thelocalbar he be catching awhoopin real fast

    3. Big boobs or not, any man in his right mind would be in that like meat in a taco.
      I prefer the fakies on her.

      1. She clearly got the best genes from both parents. Girl is a knockout.

    4. Fake boobs only look good until the bra comes off. Even with a shirt on, sometimes they look very fake because they proportions are all off.

    5. All that’s really needed is a man in the room to say “That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard of”.

      1. Really honestly, yes, that normally is all it takes. I think we build up a lot of boogeymen in our mind here in the ‘sphere, and that tends to serve as justification for inaction or an excuse in any event. Most of the time, especially given a lot of new socio-political issues we actually have the majority on our side, they’re just a bit too scared to speak. One man with courage speaks up and then they all jump on the bandwagon.

        1. Donald Trump is a great example of this. I oppose his immigration views but I think the biggest reason for his success is he talks plainly and rejects the PC garbage that EVERY other politician speaks.
          It’s not as much that he would make a great leader, but that in a debate he immediately shuts down the career politicians that everyone is sick of and looks superior by comparison.

        2. I’ve said similar about Trump on other boards. Like him or hate him, at least he’s attempting to teach the GOP that they can be politically incorrect without real life consequences.

        3. Why would you oppose his immig views? Arent enough jobs anymore, peak private employment was back in 2000…

        4. I knew from day 1 that Trump was going to troll the GOP and having dealt with the GOP in the past, the GOP deserved it.
          The “Cuckservative” label is pure gold.

        5. Aye. It would be nice to have a new political party. One based on the principles of Classical Liberalism, but not necessarily the modern notion of “libertarianism”. I agree with libertarians on almost everything, even consider myself one, but man oh man did they get the whole “no borders” thing absolutely, positively wrong.
          In a world of similar cultures, it could work, in theory. For example, in the world of 1880, when most of Europe was classical liberal like the States, that would be fine. In a world that is almost wholly socialist loving and collectivist, inviting in a horde of socialists into your nation is the surest way to bring your country down in short order. That simple. The economics behind it really don’t even come into play. Invite your enemy into your house, expect your house to be burnt down in short order.
          Everything else I’m on board with them though, albeit some of their more fringe positions seem less like positions than speculation about what color to paint the Oval Office once they’re elected. But still.
          In any event the GOP is a wholly bought and paid for entity of the Progressives, meant only to give us the illusion of having an actual voice in the process. That’s the thing about democracies, they allow you to feel a part of the process even if you never get your way, and thus act as a dandy pacifier against rebellion and revolution.

        6. He seems to think immigration is the biggest issue facing America. Net immigration from Hispanics is zero and has been for a few years. Plus the idea of building a Berlin Wall along the Rio Grande is insane and embarrassing. It’s all just playing to hatred of brown people to drum up votes.
          Also as a classical liberal I reject the idea that more people, even when they are born in different geographies, translates into a smaller economy; it’s quite the opposite. If anything, immigration has resulted in a larger economy than we would have had otherwise. Finally, I find the conservative family values of most immigrants superior to those of the white SJWs here.
          If Trump was talking more about reforming the tax and justice systems, balancing the budget, reforming the military, ending wars, reinventing health care, reversing third wave feminism, reforming social security, reforming the Fed, things he could actually accomplish, then I’d be impressed. Even if everything they say about immigration is true, it is way way down on the list of important issues this country is facing.

        7. Eh, with you on everything but immigration. I don’t mind legal immigration, at all. That process is very broken and needs fixed, not out of fear of brown people, but in respect to those coming in who are trying to do the right thing and want to abide by rule of law. Border jumpers who, by and large, walk in and plop themselves immediately on the welfare roles, I have a big problem with, even if they have no net growth (or loss). My solution to illegal immigration is to eliminate the welfare system entirely. Ants generally stop congregating on the sidewalk once you take the dropped lollipop and throw it in the trash.

        8. I’d encourage you to challenge the idea that people are giving up their homeland, their families, their friends and culture to come here so they can live in a ghetto and collect $400 a month. The right likes to parrot this a lot, as if it were true (it reminds me of Reagan’s black welfare queen line) but at least in my area (Southeast) the immigrants here are more hard working than the good ole boys, working 6 days a week, dusk till dawn, typically saving 50% or more of their paychecks, using them to support their families, banding together and living below their means, looking out for themselves, typically not using any government services, not even the police (for fear of deportation), highly religious going to church every Sunday. In other words, a conservative’s wet dream.
          But somehow they are disliked.
          Immigrants are not eligible to collect social security benefits, although they are often forced to pay social security taxes. I don’t know if they qualify for food stamps or “welfare” but I will say that the vast majority on those programs are of an entirely different demographic.
          I used to hire a good bit of immigrant day labor. Almost none of them wanted to live here permanently. They wanted to work here for a number of years, with plans on eventually returning home to their families.
          I admit immigration is an issue few people change their minds on. I just consider any nation’s border an arbitrary line. One can freely move between EU nations and US states without border controls. Imagine if every time you went from Indiana to Michigan you had to talk to a bureaucrat, pay a fee, have your person and vehicle inspected, etc. Almost no one would argue that’s a good idea, but a lot of people think so with national borders. Basically if I want to go move, live, work, or retire somewhere else, I want to be free to do so. Throughout history man has been free to do so, only until the last hundred years or so have rules regarding who can live where come into place.

        9. I don’t have a problem with the working types. And having traveled in central and south America, $400 a month is an amazing amount. Also, I’m not wont to give people jumping borders consideration, their participation on welfare roles is atrocious (which is why I say abolish welfare totally, that way it’s not favoritism). If they want in, that’s fine, I have no problem, but come in through legal channels.
          The reasons we have free movement between states is that all the states agreed to that explicitly. Same with the EU. I don’t recall such agreements being put in place between us and Mexico/central/south America. That’s the difference there.
          Throughout history you might be able to migrate from Syria to, say, England in the year 1650, but if you brought in 80,000 Syrians in one month I guarantee that the English would have begun stringing you up on ropes and burning down your houses. They barely tolerated rather small groups of French fleeing the Reign of Terror, and I mean barely.
          EDIT: Don’t worry about discussion here, we’re all men and don’t have to resort to SJW tactics. I don’t mind a spirited debate with adults in a civil discussion.

        10. You should watch some of Sargon of Akkad’s videos. He identifies as a “bleeding hear liberal” but of the classical persuasion…not the modern day progressive variant. I lean more towards the conservative side of the spectrum but still find myself agreeing with a lot he has to say.

        11. The complaint about immigrants isn’t that they don’t work hard, it’s more along the lines of the “hunkering down” hypothesis by having areas where everyone speaks a different language from their neighbors.
          Check out the book “Bowling Alone” for a look at the negative effects of diversity. They’re not talking about race but actual differences in culture.
          Like having 3 groups of whites or blacks who speak different languages and are different religions from one another, in one area is worse than having blacks, whites and Hispanics who are all assimilated to American culture.
          Sure, in the long run, the white groups could mix together into a homogeneous group, but in the short run it’s best to have both black and white people of the same religion / language together.
          BTW. I’m a minority / nonwhite / nonchristian so not being racist here.

        12. Whether a Person Likes Trump or Not he is changing politics in America , all the Great political Minds on Fox including Krauthammer thought Trump would fade out, but Trump continues to defy their opinion’s and is Growing in Popularity.

        13. Is this true though? I think that Trump is in the position of being able to say what ever he wants because he is not going to win and knows it.

        14. Originally when he entered the race, sure, agree. Now he’s polling so far ahead of the rest of the pack, except for Carson, that the “won’t win” thing no longer applies. Clinton is in the throes of self destruction and Biden is such a blooming idiot that even the Left doesn’t take him seriously. Trump could well win this.

        15. I’m not sure I put much stock in polls. Its one thing to make common sense comments. Its another to convince the nation that you know how to run a country and deal with foreign policy.

        16. It depends. When the MSM is against somebody, wholly, and the GOP is as well, yet the polls show that person leaps and bounds ahead and they report it grudgingly while snarling, that counts for something.
          Besides, the country doesn’t need “convinced” of competency. Obama had zero experience even running a lemonade stand, and he got elected.
          I’m not stumping for Trump, personally I would prefer a Rand Paul/Ted Cruz ticket for the GOP, just noting what I’m seeing.

    6. Especially when they are as hard as a rock. Happened to me and I couldn’t believe it. Nipples perched upon a rock-hard plastic base; a complete turn-off!

    7. SJWs have an issue with anything that implies personal development and improvement. This is because it strikes at the heart of what they are trying to achieve: a world in which “they decide who does what to whom”. It is important that their victims believe they are helpless and need the SJWs to do everything for them. This of course, is what Socialism is all about.
      So a man who is getting a sex change is clearly flawed, i.e. mentally ill. This man is of no threat to anyone, in particular the Socialist Regime. A woman who gets a breast enhancement will be a woman who likely has access to funds and will now received increased favorable attention, thus increasing her independence from the Socialist Regime.
      As such, this attack on plastic surgery for self-improvement is analogous to the attack on strength, represented by the illegal status of most anabolic steroids or negative stereotypes of strong men, or the attack on health, represented by the promotion of harmful cereal grains and dangerous drugs sold by pharmaceutical companies.
      The key is ultimately, to convince you that you are weak and need protection by the State and at the same time, ensure your weakness by feeding you toxic food and drugs.

    8. An ex decided to get implants. I cautioned her against it, and she was such as mink that her tits didn’t really factor. She went from a A to a D, which on a 110 pound size zero frame is rather impressive.

  4. The whole issue is based on envy and status competition— and the attempt of hide that fact.
    As for the Asian women trying to change her looks. Just adopt a few needy white children and raise them. That will help more permanently solve your perceived problems with your looks. But alas, that’s NOT the reason for the face change is it??

  5. sexually confused would be criminals: come to NY state and commit your crime here; once in jail, your sex change will be paid for by the taxpayers.

  6. Guy who spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to like Bieber just committed suicide…

  7. Oh dear, what kind of a bizzaro world is this. Enough already. Does a person have the “right” to, more or less, do as they please to include mutilating themselves? Yes. And they had those rights even in those so-called backward patriarchy days of yore (1950s), however, that also includes rights for other people to maintain certain values, opinions, worldviews etc. In other words, you can act dress or undergo surgery to masquerade as the opposite sex, that is within your rights and/or free will, but, other people have their rights to their opinions on that kind of behavior AND, importantly, have the right to choose to avoid such people. This includes being disgusted and repulsed. But, it seems that rights only apply to the “trans” people because, drum roll, they have feelings. ???
    Now then, staring right back at these “feelings” and the real polices based off of them is the simple irrevocable truth – human beings are part of the animal kingdom and are therefore composed of males and females. Indeed, very primitive animals such as slimy slugs, plants and the occasional fish can be asexual or both sexes but last time I checked humans are none of those things. Oh and yes in extremely rare cases humans can be hermaphrodites, but, this is about “trans” people and not them who, I should add, are never heard from even though they are the most technically true case of “trans” “gendered”.
    And that’s the issue with “trans” – you can’t insist that you are something that your are not…you can pretend and live in denial. That is, for good or ill, within a person’s rights, even though its incoherent imbalanced and delusional. However, what you cannot do is insist that other independent people endowed with their free will believe what you believe especially by force. And that’s what “trans” “rights” boils down too.
    And that’s really the end of it. I simply can’t stand explaining to people that the sky is blue anymore.

    1. I agree with you, but you strike an interesting point that isn’t often discussed: do mentally ill people really have a “right” to disfigure themselves? If you’re sane, and you disfigure yourself for attention whoring purposes and don’t expect me to cover the medical costs of your stupidity, I suppose you are acting within your rights because you are acting of your own free will and volition and taking responsibility for the consequences of your choices. But is someone who is compelled by mental illness really acting within his “rights” when a doctor cuts off his penis? Or has the doctor violated this person’s rights?
      For what its worth, on a daily basis I see the human suffering caused by allowing the mentally ill to exercise their rights to be free and not take their meds. They sleep on concrete, filthy and exposed to the elements and to criminals. They shit and piss in alleys and on the streets. They suffer the effects of untreated disease, and most appear to literally not be able to distinguish reality from the tortured fantasy in their heads. They often die of exposure. But heaven forbid we stand in the way of letting them exercise their rights! How inhumane!
      I’ve often heard that your right to swing your fist ends where it hits my nose. The mentally ill certainly have rights. But do they really have the right to shit on the street where I might step on it? Do they have a right to die slowly in public in view of everyone? Do they have a right to disfigure themselves and force me to foot the medical bill through state-sponsored health care?
      I think a lot of these questions go unanswered, and frankly, unasked because … well, heaven forbid we hurt a crazy person’s feelings.

      1. If a doctor refuses to perform a sex change surgery, the doctor has not violated anyone’s rights. The doctor has a right not to wanting to do it. He has a right to not be a doctor.
        A sexually confused whack job has the right to mutilate itself, by itself without the aid of a surgeon. If said whack job screws up and needs immediate medical attention from its own stupidity, we should not have to shoulder the cost.

        1. A doctor can say that sex change surgery is not his expertise. They can’t make him perform it. Just like they can’t force a foot surgeon to perform brain surgery.
          I do see where you’re coming from, though.

      2. I would say that “regular” people have the “right” (at least in western cultures) to disfigure their bodies with shrapnel (piercings) and graffiti (tattoos) and neon hair. However, mentally unstable people lack the ability to give..
        wait for it..
        doin a bump of kratom in anticipation…
        yes its the proper use of the word…
        and therefore it would be unethical to follow such a request. I believe mentally ill people are also unable to sell property, enter into legal contracts etc. for the same reason.

      3. Good questions that you notice no politician has the balls to ask. It’s a tough line in the sand to draw. Do we go back to forced sterilization because “three generations of imbeciles are enough?”

        1. I’m willing to give up on forced sterilization if we could repeal universal suffrage and migrate to a more rational system where I don’t get to vote myself cash and prizes unless I have some skin in the game, or a demonstrable ability to think using logic and reason.

        2. Absolutely.
          My requirements for voting:
          1. Male
          2. Own real property (not a one inch parcel that the Left would then issue “deeds” to)
          3. Pass a basic math test (6th grade level, with addition, subtraction, multiplication, division and decimals)
          4. Pass a random generated (computer) test on the Constitution, scoring at least an 80%
          5. Demonstrate competency at balancing a budget.
          That’s a lot, to be certain, but to offset this, the Constitution would be in place and *enforced* such that no matter who you elect, they can’t really do much of anything to begin with.
          A bit unrelated to voting, but still, reforms:
          Term limits on SCOTUS.
          And a House of Repeals, whose sole job is to repeal laws that have been on the Federal register for more than 7 years
          No person can serve in political office more than a combined 10 years. No matter the office, no matter the combination of offices he’s served in.
          Restoring the way the Senate is supposed to be elected
          Repeal the 16th Amendment, and almost every amendment after it as well
          I could go on…

        3. Oh man, I could go on and on too.
          On voting, I wouldn’t limit it to just men. You don’t want it subject to an equal protection clause challenge, nor do you want to exclude rational (though rare) female voters. We all know females are the prime originators of misogyny, and as such, they are often the first to call women out on their own bullshit. So long as it’s non-hive-mind females voting on non-emotional bases, I’m OK with it. Besides, the other requirements will weed out 97% of females anyway.
          I also wouldn’t require real property ownership because then you might just encourage slum lords to hoard property which may hurt the economy and cause civil strife. But I would require some kind of net positive balance on your asset sheet. In other words, you have to own more than you owe, indicating that you are a contributor rather than a taker.
          Other voting qualifications:
          1. A valid government ID. If the poor can obtain one to buy their cigarettes, booze, lotto tickets, cars, meds, claim government benefits, etc… they can fucking get one to vote or fuck off. I don’t really care which option they choose.
          2. If you receive support payments or entitlements of any kind from the government, you are ineligible to vote. Enjoy your free ride, but you have no more say in how much of it you will receive. Going off the public dole restores your voting privileges unless you are a habitual offender. If you go on and off more than two times, your vote is gone forever.
          I’m also in favor of the idea that you give a vote to everyone impacted by an issue that affects them. So, if the voting class elects a president who wants to send the country to war, perhaps everyone who could be called to fight, or has children in this category gets to vote in a referendum on that decision. That referendum could be overridden by super majority in congress in case of national emergency. Same on taxes, it they will be increased, anyone who pays taxes should have a vote on it.
          I had never considered your idea of a house of repeals before, but I like it. But you need to build in a mechanism to keep those worthless fucks in congress from simply blanket reauthorizing everything without seriously considering it. Perhaps we require them to produce a detailed report with current data (within the past year) that justifies the continued existence of the law).
          Other structural Reforms
          I also think we should consider an amendment that says that unless something is in the Criminal Code, you cannot be arrested, charged, fined, or imprisoned for it. It should be easy to look up the laws and know what you have to do to comply, and it should be the government’s burden to demonstrate that this is possible.
          Jury trials should be abolished. The legislature should be able to overrule any unjust verdict by a judge in a criminal trial, and in any civil trial that reaches the appellate level. In fact, one of their duties under the constitution should be to do just this at least once every six months. There should be an government office whose sole job is to review DoJ prosecutions and convictions and recommend whether they should be overruled.
          Payment for legal services should be based on the English system (loser pays) in civil cases. In criminal cases, there should be mandatory punishment for malicious prosecution, to include withholding evidence, etc… Further, false accusations should result in the same punishment reserved for the offense.
          When we change a law to decriminalize something, all prior convictions under this law should be commuted/pardoned, and records expunged.
          The commerce clause should be edited out of the Constitution.

        1. Whether the mind exists separately from the physical brain or not is still in debate.
          Even if the mind does exist, where does it come from that it can have an illness?
          And even if it can have an illness, who says the psycho-cult can accurately describe its illness, let alone provide the cure?
          The psycho-cult just went miles ahead of the debate, leaving behind a huge leap of reasoning. And they won’t stop, because “mental illness” is too convenient a tool for acquiring power and loot.

        2. “Mental illness is too convenient a tool for acquiring power and loot.”
          So is moral relativism. Which is the only reason that SJWs have any influence in today’s society at all.
          All things – from family, god and country to community, atheism and anarchy – have the power, when abused, to become tools for acquiring power and loot. But it is a logical fallacy to disregard these things as false just because they could theoretically be abused.
          You could replace the terms “mind” and “brain” in your comment with “gender” and “sex” and you have just made the SJW argument that the two are separate and distinct, ergo transsexuals should be allowed to mutilate themselves because we have not proven the two are the same.
          Whether or not the two are distinct on some philosophical level is irrelevant to the reality we live in. If you were born with a dick, you cannot chop it off, carve an orifice into yourself and claim to be a woman just because you identify with the female gender. You are still a man. From your other comments, we agree on that point.
          Similarly, whether transsexualism exists in the mind or the brain is irrelevant. The fact is that transsexualism is abnormal and harmful, both to the individual and to society. Accordingly, it is not something we should embrace, ignore or encourage. And it is not something that transsexuals have a “right” to force on us. Whether this abnormality should be labeled an “illness,” or something else is beside the point. The point is you don’t have a right to change your sex just because you identify as a different gender (which is also completely aside from the point that this is impossible). You also don’t have a right to force society to foot the bill for it. Nor do you have a right to be accepted by society just because you are different.

        3. “But it is a logical fallacy to disregard these things as false just because they could theoretically be abused.”
          That is not my argument for one single second. My argument is that mental illness is not a thing BECAUSE it’s far from established that the mind itself is a thing either, not because mental illness can be abused.
          “You could replace the terms “mind” and “brain” in your comment with “gender” and “sex” and you have just made the SJW argument that the two are separate and distinct.”
          No, that’s not the proper way to interpret my comment. I’m not saying brain and mind are separate and distinct but in fact the opposite: I’m saying the physical brain does exist WHILE the existence of the mind is at best debatable. So if you were to extrapolate my words you should say that, in the same fashion, sex does exist but gender is at best debatable. And that’s consistent with my position on gender as well, which is that there’s no “gender”.
          “Whether or not the two are distinct on some philosophical level is irrelevant to the reality we live in”. Philosophical level? I’m clearly talking on a very material level! Hint: I’m talking about the physical brain. It’s like you’re reading a whole different comment.
          I never said transexualism is normal or acceptable. I’m saying it’s not a mental illness… because there’s no mental illness. When you use meaningless terms like “mental illness”, you play right into the hands of your enemy.
          That said, I believe a transexual has a right to chop off his dick. Why? Because it’s his own fucking dick. Just like I have a right to chop off my hand because it’s my own fucking hand. I don’t understand such a decision, I’m not sure it’s morally defensible, I don’t justify it either, I don’t think there’s some sort of great insight behind it, but I respect an individual’s autonomy to do whatever they want with their body parts. And yes, transexualism should be ignored for the most part. Attention, especially from detractors, is what keeps this kind of bullshit alive and in the spotlight.

        4. Fair enough. We appear to agree on most things.
          Where we disagree, I think, is on this:
          “I’m saying it’s not a mental illness… because there’s no mental
          illness. When you use meaningless terms like “mental illness”, you play
          right into the hands of your enemy.”
          If it’s not mental illness, then what is it?
          Also, I agree to an extent that denuding language of meaning plays into a lot of the tactics SJWs use. But, a hypertechnical reading of language denudes language of meaning just as much as vagueness does.
          Call it shorthand or whatever, but my office overlooks a park where right now there are approximately 50 homeless people milling around, raving like lunatics, sleeping on benches, etc… Talking to any one of them for 5 minutes would lead you to conclude that there is something wrong with every one of them. Commonly, we call that “mental illness.” Your point appears to be based on an overly literal reading of language that obliterates a term we use to describe these people. So if not “mental illness,” what is it? Because it’s pretty apparent that it’s something.
          Side note, I agree philosophically with your last paragraph, but I don’t agree that this right exists now. The problem is that if you chop off your hand, an army of emergency responders and medical professionals are going to be called to your aid, and then you will be integrated into the entitlement system to compensate your disability, all of which happens on my dime. If we lived in a world where you could cut your hand off, and I could just say, “tough shit, dumbfuck” while you either bled out or fixed the problem you created for yourself, I’d have no problem with the idea that you have a right to do this. But we don’t live in that world, and as I said earlier, your right to swing your fist ends where my nose starts. If society expects me to sign on to the idea of a social safety net and help pay for it, then I get a say in whether you have rights you get to exercise that may cause you to end up tangled in it.

        5. The problem is that mainstream outlets use “mental illness” as a technical term with all of its extra-medical implications. When we use meaningless made-up concepts like “mental illness”, “gender” or “Consumerism”, we’re promoting the normalization of the enemy’s language
          The concept of illness is biological. It’s been established after thousands of years of study and evidence. There’s a well defined, objective criterion for how a healthy body operates, so we know when there’s illness or not, When the doctor says you have an illness of the liver it’s serious business and there’s no place for philosophical ramblings. The psycho-cult craves that respectability and has hijacked the term so when they pull an “illness” out of their assess it’s received with the same veneer of authority. But since these mental illnesses don’t have any biological grounds, there’s no defined, objective criterion. You can choose five symptoms and combine them in ten different ways and you got yourself ten illnesses. The only criterion seems to be some notion of mental/behavioral normality that’s subject to the whims of the psycho-wizards, who often act under social and political pressures. As a result, the DSM has run crazy with new disorders and we’re approaching a situation where every behavior is a symptom of some made-up mental illness. But the worst part is the disproportionate impact this has in real life. Psychologists, psychotherapists, psychiatrists, they all claim to be physicians and scientists, but no others physicians or scientists have nearly as much power.
          Now, the “classical” mental illnesses, like dementia or schizophrenia, have biological grounds. There’s evidence of physical changes and of structural differences between the brains of the demented and the schizophrenic and healthy brains. They are already illnesses as far as their relation to the physical body goes, so there’s no need for involving the “mind” or the “behavior”. I’m not saying that we renounce to treat everything we call “mental illness” now but that we stick to a reliable criterion: biology. That way we can do away with monstrosities like ADHD, NPD, BD, OCD, autism or Asperger’s,
          Well, the safety net bit is not an issue for me because I’m also opposed to socialized welfare. I’m a supporter of individual freedom, and I understand that there cannot be individual freedom with collective responsibility. However, my course of action wouldn’t be to deny someone else’s right to chop off their own hand on the basis that I’d have to shoulder the bill for the consequences, but to end the socialized healthcare system.

        6. I agree with everything you’ve said here. However, I am curious – do you not think there is a biological basis for transsexualism that would constitute an illness?
          I am of the opinion that there might be (hence my original description of them as mentally ill), though I am unaware that this has ever been studied on a biological level.
          I’m also of the opinion that we know so little about how the brain works that there may be biological markers for many illnesses that we still have not learned to detect.
          However, I agree with you that most of these disorders are bullshit that are only vaguely defined by collections of symptoms than can be reordered and reshuffled to suit whatever needs we have, including to unclassify disorders entirely to fit the prevailing cultural winds.
          There are so many disorders that the vast majority of the population has one, which brings us back to the points about language – if everyone has some disorder, are any of them really “disorders”? The term disorder implies that there is a normal “ordered” state where the condition doesn’t exist, but if everyone has a condition, then no one has a disorder because having a disorder is normal.
          Of course, that points to one of the real things that I think is going on here – these fucks are trying to normalize deviant behavior instead of allowing society to insist that people act according to the norms and values that have governed us for hundreds, if not thousands of years. Because you can’t hurt feelings anymore. Because….uhhhh…..it’s not nice or some other bullshit.
          And of course, there is a monetary incentive in this for the practitioners. If you invent a new condition, you are automatically the leading expert in this field, and can charge a king’s ransom to “treat” it. That no one can verify or disprove the condition also works to your advantage.

        7. I wouldn’t completely discard a biological basis for transsexualism but as you say there’s little research on that. Anyway, transsexualism is so absurd a notion that I get a headache just from trying to discuss its internal workings.
          However, this issue ties nicely to the second part of the argument against mental illness. Illness is by definition something that happens to you, so you can’t be held responsible for it. They make things like obesity, alcoholism and anorexia, which are clearly the result of conscious choices, into “mental illnesses” so these “patients” can escape condemnation of their decisions. In that logic, almost every negative behavior that is the result of bad choice can eventually be labeled a mental illness. If I lie, I’m not a liar but a mythomaniac; if I steal, I’m not a thief but a kleptomaniac; if I assault people it’s because I have anger management issues. Between the psycho-cult blaming disease and Marxism blaming oppressive social forces and structures, we’re moving towards a situation where no one is accountable for anything.
          And this is precisely what the transsexual lobby wants: the unaccountability. They want transsexualism to be treated, for all practical purposes, as an illness so they can escape condemnation and get financial aid from government. However, they don’t want the stigma associated with mental illness, which is why the psycho-cult, as always responding to social pressure, says the disease is not “transsexualism” or “transgenderism” but “Gender Identity Dysphoria”, which is not actually a disease but a “condition” linked to transsexualism. It’s win-win for them.
          In the heat of the debate on whether transsexualism is a disease o not, we have lost sight of a probable explanation: that it’s the result of repeated conscious bad decisions born from exposure to misleading ideas or conducts, enabled by a lack of proper direction and reinforced by wrong feedback; or, in the words of our elders, the result of ill-raised children. I think the same could be said for anorexia, obesity or compulsive gambling.
          My point is, we don’t need transsexualism to be an illness in order to disqualify it. There’s plenty of other reasons for that. That said, we all still say transsexuals are mentally ill in casual conversation and we know what we mean, but the fact that everybody uses that term also in its more formal sense implies keeping the door open for many more made-up diseases. I think the cost is too high.

  8. Doctors who perform sex reassignment surgery on transexuals should lose their licenses. Transexuals are mentally ill. Their desire to change their sex is a tragic symptom of their mental illness. Period. If a doctor prescribed a steady diet of hamburgers and cigaretes to someone with heart disease, he’d likely lose his license for making the condition worse. I see no reason that the plastic surgeons who cater to transexuals should not also be punished. They are modern day Dr. Mengeles performing sick experiments on tragically ill people to satisfy the cult of good feelz. Fuck them.

      1. Sadly, were this comment posted in the vast majority of other outlets, it would be +300 million downvotes. Such is the fucked up world we live in.

        1. I dunno. I’ve had some success in real life, at least with other men, calling out the Trannies and their “doctors”. Most men tend to take the default position at first, then stutter a bit…that’s when you keep driving the point home, use the “if he wanted to be a dolphin, you’d have him thrown in the looney bin” line of logic and they almost all, to a man, end up relaxing, smiling and giving a semi-whispered “Yeah, when you put it that way, it makes sense”. Hey, at least it’s a start.
          Women on the other hand, fuggidaboudit, unless she reeks such hardcore Christian tradcon that she practically puts the words in your mouth for you. The default chick position these days is whatever the latest media headline is, reinforced by whatever they saw on Entertainment Tonight. Pointless.

        2. Oh, believe me, I use this exact approach. And I use it on women too. You’re right that they don’t buy it, but when I drop that bomb, it usually at least shuts down the discussion and I don’t have to listen to that stupid shit anymore. I’m contemplating another tactic though – the “your feelings get people killed” tactic. Basically, as a follow up to the logic above, when it is inevitably implied that I am “mean” and don’t care about other people’s feelings, I’m going to point out that it is actually people like me who care about these people and want them treated. By contrast, in their vapid obsession with feelings, women are willing to let these poor sick people kill themselves so that they don’t have to say something hurtful, but true. I haven’t yet rolled this tactic out, but I’m very tempted.

        3. I got my hardcore feminist pot dealer who has actually traveled with trannies to get their surgery to admit that maybe surgery isn’t a healthy option. I considered it a small victory.

        4. Every small victory we make adds up if enough of us get them.

        5. hardcore feminist pot dealer who has actually traveled with trannies
          As Dave Barry would say, that sounds like a great name for a rock band. heh

        6. Haha, to be fair she is a mother and successful small business owner, so it wasn’t like I was arguing with a 20 year old who just took her first women’s studies class.
          I’m not sure if my worldview would line up with the often conservative nature of the manosphere. Basically, I just explained my reasoning that being born with traditionally male/female genetics and physiology, and never experiencing the world and puberty with the opposite genetics and physiology means that you can never actually ever change from a man into a woman or vice versa. I have no problem with genetically and physiological men expressing themselves in traditional female ways. I have no problem with people banging/marrying whoever they want to bang/marry. I just believe that psychological/behavioral treatment to accept/deal with any uncomfortableness one feels in one’s body is probably a better solution than drastic surgery.
          Use winning friends and influencing people strategy. Don’t raise your voice, let the other person speak, acknowledge their viewpoints and feelings, don’t take any bait/projection, etc.
          I actually minored in women’s studies in college and have been involved in women’s groups in my post-grad education so I have been arguing with feminists for 15+ years now. It’s an art.

        7. I actually minored in women’s studies in college
          So, you are planning on going into politics 😉

        8. Are you vying for The Stupidest Comment On The Internet 2015 award I take it?
          Do you even *know* what actual slavery is, and if so, then how would people who have no desire or need to “transition” by self mutilation be, somehow, a slave?
          Let me guess…you’re a “transgender” or one of your family or friends are? Amirite?

        9. So to repeat my question – Are you “transgendered” or know somebody you “love” who is? Or is this a case of some feminist chick bothering us here on a male oriented site?

    1. Like many social problems in America, the reasoning still comes back to the same thing: Pathological compassion, in this case for trannies

    2. You can’t “change sex”. It’s not possible. Chopping your dick off does not make you a woman. Having an artificial appendage implanted does not make you a man. You’d have to change everything, down to your genetic make-up. You’d probably also have to be born again and live your life as the sex you want to be.

      1. I agree, which is why when I hear these people say “I’m a man/woman” I just roll my eyes.
        You aren’t a man just because you have a fake cock.

  9. When you start discussing sex changes, gay marriage, and any other leftist crap indicative of a dying and fucked up society, things get REALLY confusing. The left likes to ignore the fact that objective reality is measurable and you can’t just make everything relativistic.

    1. But does it get confusing? I’m not confused, it’s the leftists who try to throw out bomb after bomb to derail the conversation and obfuscate meaning who are the confused ones. The best tactic against them is to ignore their attempts and keep pressing your point home with facts and logic. They fold eventually, usually with a flurry of ad hominem and bitter sneering. That means you won.

      1. I could write the outcome for every time I have a leftist debate on a SJ issue on the back of an envelope before getting started. Something like: rable …rable… Your an a-hole, troglodyte etc….. Feeelllings hurt.

  10. Some plastic surgery I understand and support. The best example is a boob or nose job. There’s really nothing that a woman can do to make her boobs bigger or nose more attractive other than surgery.
    However, many of these women going in for “lifestyle issue correction” piss me off. Lipo is the number 1 culprit, hit the fucking gym fattie; there’s not reason to have fat sucked out your body rather than burning it off.

    1. After the liposuction, they still continue their eating habits and gain it all back only to repeat the procedure again.

  11. This article is right on! All of the left’s “body positive” BS goes down gets brushed aside when it goes against their agenda. It’s really just an excuse to justify their gluttony or plain ugliness.

  12. Women don’t get plastic surgery to impress guys. They do it to compete with other women. They want to flaunt their huge boobs and botox bloated faces to all their friends and have them envious of them. Yea, male attention is part of it, but if that was all I really believe the market for plastic surgery would not be what it is.

    1. Extrapolate that out, why would women care about competing with other women in the looks department if not for the fact that looks are the primary asset that women have to attract men? Essentially the competition to weed out rivals is indeed biologically driven by the need to attract the best or most men.
      By way of contrast, lesbians, with no impulsive need to attract men, will generally get real frumpy, real fast even before they “settle down” with the bulldyke of their choosing. They short circuit their biology and that “one upsmanship” disappears, to be replaced by trying then to hit all the markers that bulldykes look for, which are usually masculine-in-women crap.

      1. Ah, that explains why the hardcore no-men bull dyke lesbians are hideous and shapeless while the “lipstick lesbians” or college lesbians who do it for attention or just for fun but still enjoy men remain attractive, thin, and in shape.

      2. “By way of contrast, lesbians, with no impulsive need to attract women,”
        Did you mean need to attract men?

        1. Dang it, I corrected that already, now it’s back to the original.
          Fucking Disqus. Thanks for alerting me, I caught it literally minutes after I posted it.

  13. Look no further than the fact that if you take anabolic steroids to get more muscle, you will be thrown in jail. Of course if you do it through a doctor, and you didn’t need it, you and the doctor get thrown in jail.
    But if you want to take girly hormones and grow titties and stuff like that, well, that’s OK and not only do you NOT get arrested even if you acquire the stuff dubiously, you should get “help” in the form of taxpayers paying for it.
    The answer to this article is simple: cuntocracy. And especially if you want a cunt. But if a real woman wants to fight back the wall or get some help in maintaining her SMV, well, that’s a crime.
    (A crime for women who, though born women, look like men with cunts – there’s a pattern here).

    1. Ah, so I suppose if a MAN takes anabolic steroids to get more muscle he would be thrown in jail, but if a WOMAN takes anabolic steroids to grow more muscle because shes a tranny, then she’s brave and courageous and the cops wouldn’t dare touch her.

      1. Yeah well that is hard to enforce when we have had female US Attorney Generals with thick bull necks.
        We know what’s really going on.

    2. Look no further than the fact that if you take anabolic steroids to get
      more muscle, you will be thrown in jail. Of course if you do it through a
      doctor, and you didn’t need it, you and the doctor get thrown in jail.
      Wait, is it? In the US?? How is that Cenegenics youth clinic allowed to advertise if this is the case??

        1. Do either of your questions matter if I’m ‘baitin’?

        2. LOL, I know Im gonna lose my job soon once the computer does that auto-layoff thingy, but how are these clinics legal if what you say is true?

    3. “But if a real woman wants to fight back the wall or get some help in maintaining her SMV, well, that’s a crime.”
      Of course it is! Looking prettier than the average green-haired, bull-pierced, sailor-tatted hambeast undermines the overarching objective of much of this nonsense – the redistribution of sexual market value from each according to her ability, to each according to her needs.
      How else does a fat useless fuck like Lena Dunham compete with a Taylor Swift, for example? Lena Dunham will always look like the bastard offspring that would result if my uncle bred with an elephant. But if Taylor is somehow handicapped into being fat and ugly, Lena could get a shot at the same top-shelf cock that Taylor enjoys.
      Duh, shitlord!

      1. Sad ain’t it? For the likes of those harpies, even plastic surgery would not help. Too bad they can’t accept discipline and change of habits and attitude would help significantly.

    4. “The answer to this article is simple: cuntocracy. And especially if you want a cunt.”
      It’s all about WHO GETS TO BE A WOMAN.
      Ever notice how women are always so quick to accept mtf trannies as full-fledged women?
      But men won’t. No amount of propaganda will make men accept Chaz Bono as a man.

  14. I thought the Trump girl looked good to start with. Those Asian doctors are some bad muthafuckers. They pulled off a deception that will cause a child of that woman to look like a case of adultery.

  15. For God’s sake, stop putting pics of that dickless dude in ROK articles, traffic is traffic and he doesn’t need any more of it!

  16. I say we have both MtoF transition surgery as well as conventional cosmetic surgery. It’s not an “either/or” situation here.

  17. “A ten-year-old boy can’t sign a cell phone contract most of the time but he can, say the do-gooders, make an informed decision to craft himself a new vagina before he even knows his basic sexuality.”
    If ten-year-olds are mature enough to know their sexuality then why can’t they get married? If doesn’t work out they can always get a divorce, whereas claiming their sexuality is for life, right?

    1. You can’t ask questions such as this because feminists have taken over the government and its institutions, and they do not operate on logic.

  18. I’ve always wondered why the progs only consider hormone therapy an option when someone wants to (aesthetically) “change” their sex? (nevermind their issue with having a mental health professional Dx these people for co-morbid effects)
    Why isn’t HT an option for a dude who identifies sexually with femmes, or a chick who identifies sexually with boys aka sissies and lezzies?
    I’ve often theorized that a lot of these “born homo” people are simply dealing with an anomalous adrenal disorder (idiopathically originating or the result of enviro-pollutants deleteriously affecting their intra uterine proper gestational development) or some other issue that causes their normal proportion of testosterone to estrogen to be thrown askew…why can’t HT be administered to them to help ease (if not rectify) their sexual attraction difficulties there?
    Oh wait i forgot…in the land of progressive make believe you can only use HT for a person who is born in the “wrong” body, not for someone who believes they are born into the wrong sexuality/orientation.
    Silly me.

  19. The apparent madness fits their (feminist, SJW, etc.) narrative:
    1.) Shame men (and sometimes women) for that which men are naturally attracted to (youth and beauty)
    2.) Promote that which decreases fertility and increases family disruption
    3.) Do all in thy power to silence the opposition (which just happens to be the majority, albeit silent majority, of people)
    What may appear to be a simple case of hypocrisy, is in reality part of an organized scheme.

    1. And promote all kinds of abnormality because they “feel bad” for small groups of people. The social justice mindset itself is a disease.

  20. The general rule is:
    mutilation – good
    enhancement – bad
    This appears to be a universal rule among SJWs and “ethicists” in the West. And not just plastic surgery. It applies to genetic enhancement, pharmaceutical enhancement (steroids, nootropics), etc.

  21. What does this have to do with Pol Pot and Nazi Germany? I’ll tell you. There is real unthinkable and utterly skin crawling evil at work. Its one thing if a grown adult decides to go down this path. But to put this shit onto children is where I start to take a huge issue! Back to Pot and Hitler…both had organized the youth and in doing so created little monsters that fought desperate and already lost battles to children that presided and even participated in the torturing and murder of their own family members many times mothers and fathers. You say how can it happen…how is it possible for a child to one day turn on their very own parents? Answer – because kids are impressionable (people are too) and if a person of perceived authority does the right song and dance children can be molded into anything. Proof – they were molded in murderers…murderers of their own parents! Enough proof? So when I have to even remotely glimpse a before and after pic of some young boy or girl that has then gone through with this irreversible and permanent “transition”…something really stirs in me. Its a combination of sadness, pity, anger (at the people that pushed it on him or her) and even fear (although not a phobia in the sense that these sickos like to say). Because there might be one or two individuals that are “confused” about their sex or “identity”, but there are certainly many others caught up in this because they’re impressionable. You can take a swastika armband off, you can even undue the ideology of a prison guard but you cannot reattach organs. And in many ways the sycophants that push this shit onto kids are just as awful as the nazis and khmer rouge.

  22. man whine about his body = “haha xDD ur insecure cz insecurity is unattractive”
    woman whine about her body = “its the PEYTREE-ARCHIE !!”

  23. Heres a question. Why is it socially acceptable for bruce jenner to take drugs and mutilate his body to be a woman…yet im crazy if i want roids to be a little more masculine?

    1. Because masculinity is to be minimized and put on the back shelf, at best. To be more masculine is to come out against the social programming.

  24. Transgender mutilation makes me wonder if the emasculation of men makes it easier for the weak to simply survive and have some form of identity in a technological age where the traditional roles have been feminized.
    Women taking on “male” roles (Military etc.) is simply eroding roles that functional well and have been proven over time. We lower standards for woman to be firefighters we make it easier for men that couldn’t qualify too. We introduce risk to other firefighters as well as the people they are trying to save.
    These SJW fools and cultural marxists are destroying working systems through bullshit constructs than are rather recent and unproven. We are getting close to critical mass and the long terms effects may prove disastrous. Women are becoming psychotic trying to fill roles they are not biologically suited to and men are becoming weak and apathetic.
    Boys don’t have good role models to become men. They no longer have the skills to build, produce or compete. We build off of the past and hone skills from previous achievements to improve. Since our past acheivements (The patriarchy) are demonized and life is physically easier (rather than plowing fields) is blurs the lines of gender. We already know that as technology increases the infrastructure becomes more fragile. Once a massive solar flare wipes out the grid or any number of things that could cause a catastrophic failure the SJW trend will quickly erode. It will no longer be beneficial or productive.
    Who ever promotes this shit (or those behind it) is waging a covert war against western civilization in the hopes of brainwashing people into accepting diversity, multiculturalism and gender crap knowing the outcome is debilitating and playing the “long game” to redefine it in a false image (or theirs) after a clash.
    This “Syrian refugee” shit is just that, shit and Western Europe needs to quash that now and imprison the people pushing that agenda. You don’t have to look hard to see who’s behind it. Problem is, a greater number of people need to acknowledge it and reject it.

  25. To be honest, I dislike both types of surgeries. I have zero appreciation for fake tits, fake asses and enlarged lips. Natural beauty is best.

  26. I have never been a tit man. My only criteria is that the boobs balance the ass. On the one hand, I have fucked girls who – by their own assessment – had “the body of a 14 year old boy”. That was absolute shit. Slim, fatless and under 100 pounds. . .it was an epic bang.
    At the other extreme I had a girl with G cups. She climbed on top of me and I made a face. When she asked I explained that it was like watching the Macy’s parade. Admittedly, she was a fatty but her tits balanced things out (and tossing my salad and general submissive traits added to that).

    1. I had a girl with G’s once…i was in heaven.
      She wouldn’t fit in to the image of what one would traditionally consider a “fatty” (if you’ll pardon the irony of the remark there) although she was thick enough to support those giant tits and a nice corresponding booty:)

  27. So many genetic defects are hidden with surgery these days that the children of the future probably will have multiple genetic disorders >_>

  28. Uh, there is no such thing as “woman born as a man”; it’s just a sick homo trying to further push what is already too far.

  29. And why can’t I get my rhinoplasty procedure funded by OHIP? My nose is “causing me great mental distress, affecting my self-identity”.
    By the way having a fake vagina does not a true woman make.

  30. Guy takes steroids to build muscle. “OMG that’s disgustingly gross! Ew ew ew!”
    Guy takes all sorts of hormones and gets his weiner chopped off for a sex change. “OMG, that’s empowering! You go girl!”

Comments are closed.