Biological Male Mansplains Why Biological Women Shouldn’t Be Offended By “Cis” Label
Jen Psaki Hilariously Says Joe Biden Is “An Amazing Story Teller.”
February 7, 2023
Rather Than Securing The Border, Biden Admin Distributes “Black Resistance” Flyers To CBP Officers
February 7, 2023Is anyone else tired of these biological males pretending to be females and then thinking that makes it totally OK for them to mansplain to us about how we shouldn’t feel or shouldn’t act or aren’t good enough women? I’m pretty tired of it. It’s frustrating enough that biological men are erasing women because suddenly, men can be women, compete with women, win women’s awards, get sponsorships to promote women’s products, etc. To add insult to injury, they keep telling us how women are supposed to feel about things, as though they get any say. These men don’t actually get to tell us how we’re supposed to think, feel, or act.
Here’s a biological male mansplaining to biological women about how we aren’t supposed to be the least bit offended by being labeled a “cis” or “cisgendered” woman, a term which means that we were born biologically female. This is, of course, juxtaposed with “trans” or “transgendered” woman, a term which means that they were born biologically male and are pretending to be a woman. This guy says it’s not offensive to relegate women to a subcategory of womanhood because trans women are just as much women as actual women. He actually tries to say that “cis” is not a subcategory of womanhood, then moves directly into a comparison of the current “trans” and “cis” subcategories of womanhood. Because yes, we are being relegated to a subcategory of womanhood, right there next to men with penises, balls, no uterus, no vagina, and a host of other biological differences that make them not women. It’s disgusting.
8 Comments
The whole militant trans movement is one giant walking hypocrisy. “All trans-women are women!” Well if that were the case, they wouldn’t need the ‘trans’ prefix. The douchebag above is just a woman, not a trans-woman. But removing the ‘trans’ prefix would hide or remove the special status they so desperately crave. “Being called cis is not a subcategory of womanhood.” Then proceeds to talk about, at length, subcategories of womanhood.
There are some trans-identifying individuals that I will refer to more respectfully because they aren’t trying to organize a firing squad for using their previous male name. Blair White is one that comes to mind.
But at it’s core, transsexuality is one of identity and feeling, not facts. If we take the DNA of a trans-identifying individual and clone them, that human will be born as the sexuality the person moved away from. So when they say ‘all trans-women are women,’ sorry hun, no they aren’t. Being a man or a woman isn’t a “feeling” or a “desire.” It’s an immutable fact based on certain physiological and biological characteristics.
He, and all the other trans douches who try and bully actual women, can ingest ALL the satchels of Richards.
Until HE has periods, get pregnant, gives birth, goes into menopause — and hot flashes, this deluded freak needs to STHU!
May this dude can mansplain to Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson what the definition of “woman” is. Apparently somebody needs to.
Yet, she relished at being the first black WOMAN appointed to the Supreme Court. She probably regards me as being neither black nor a woman since I’m a conservative. I don’t remember who she was, but some feminazi said that we conservative women aren’t “actually women”. However, she’d regard this freakshow as such, (but I digress). Since when does adhering to a certain ideology cancels out whom one is?
I’m tired of the word “gender” in it’s entirety. It’s horrendously malformed and misused and I could probably write an entire thesis about that but I won’t make anyone suffer through my ramblings.
I would just tell him to “man up” but it’s too late. Jeez….
He’d accuse you of being “patriarchal” and “trans-phobic”. The latter is a kooky, made up word used to evoke guilt manipulation in those who disapprove of one’s behavior, NOT hate the individual (per, the media’s spin) is straight out of George Orwell’s novel, “1984”. This is a facet of “newspeak” in “1984”.