Войти в систему

Home
    - Создать дневник
    - Написать в дневник
       - Подробный режим

LJ.Rossia.org
    - Новости сайта
    - Общие настройки
    - Sitemap
    - Оплата
    - ljr-fif

Редактировать...
    - Настройки
    - Список друзей
    - Дневник
    - Картинки
    - Пароль
    - Вид дневника

Сообщества

Настроить S2

Помощь
    - Забыли пароль?
    - FAQ
    - Тех. поддержка



Пишет nancygold ([info]nancygold)
@ 2024-08-19 21:00:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Настроение: amused
Музыка:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqREZRh7nso
Entry tags:transitioning

Why I am not "evil"

People keep calling me "evil."

But what does it mean to be "evil?" What makes one "evil?"

There were many definitions of evil across time and cultures.

Generally it boils down to "evil is something bad for our group."

Both Russians and Ukrainians call each other evil.

And civilized people call both of these aboriginal tribes evil.

In the overpopulated world the death of a billion could be good.

In fact, Bible promotes drowning all sinners.

In Bible it is definitely not an evil to do a genocide.

So we may conclude, that the notion of "evil" is not universal.

Evil is always relative to some agent or a group of agents.

Are mosquitoes evil? If you're a mammal, then yes.

But for a dragonfly it is a food source.

So speaking about some evil in abstract vacuum makes no sense.

Yet authors like Joanne Rofling have insect brain.

The relativism is too complex for them.

They generalize their notions of good and evil.

But such hasty generalizations fail.

So the stupid beings get confused.

I'm not evil, because there is no evil.

I'm not good, because there is no good.

I'm just what I am.

Everything else is a social construct.

I watch the movies to enjoy seeing the characters facing complex problems.

I don't care if the characters are "good" or "evil" in any of the notions.

I only care that the problems are complex and interesting enough.

Hope that explains it.


(Читать комментарии) - (Добавить комментарий)


(Анонимно)
2024-08-20 14:14 (ссылка)
Yes, yes. Feuding with any group or individual you encounter. Q. E. D.

>That is totally different from transsexual.

Not totally different. Transgenderism encompasses transsexualism and doesn't consider individuals who don't pursue medical transition as literal ugly subhuman filth, who should off themselves, which is what you espouse, and probably what got you banned. Transsexualism per se also doesn't have any antagonism towards transgenderism. The supposed conflict between the groups a product of your needle in haystack search after probably getting banned.


>authoritarian political ideology.

Denhumanizing entire groups is the most authoritarian political ideology there is.

(Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)


[info]nancygold
2024-08-20 15:19 (ссылка)
Transgenderism insists that one doesn't need hormones and surgeries to be a woman. Even a bald bearded crossdresser and a diaper sissy grandpa are valid women. Medical treatment is seen by transgenders as an artifact of the past and anyone insisting that medical treatment is important is seen as conservative and right wing. They also insist that women can and should have the same responsibilities as men, including army service and performing other unhealthy jobs.

If taking estradiol and desiring to be beautiful makes me Nazi, then I'm Nazi.

(Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)


(Анонимно)
2024-08-20 15:30 (ссылка)
>anyone insisting

anyone insisting for others. Nobody would hinder a self-paying individual who wants to medically transition. It's literally absurd to argue otherwise. But you tend to insist for others, by devaluation and dehumanization statements, like you always do.

>Even a bald bearded crossdresser and a diaper sissy grandpa are valid women.

So their standards not nazi enough for you? Not enough rejection, not enough gatekeeping?

>If taking estradiol and desiring to be beautiful makes me Nazi, then I'm Nazi.

You are again lying. It's about imposing your standards publicly, fucking the acceptance standards up for "bald bearded crossdressers".

If only you were able to shut up, out of politeness, understanding and empathy, there wouldn't be any issues. But it's literally impossible for you.

>I'm Nazi.

You are a nazi. We all know that. But it has nothing to do with transgenderism being authoritrian. You are who's authoritarian with your beauty standards in this case.

(Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)


[info]nancygold
2024-08-20 15:34 (ссылка)
Their standards stand in the way of my transitioning.
Doctors now tell me that I don't need HRT and should accept my body.
The medical insurers claim these are just plastic surgeries,
since transsexualism is not a diagnosis anymore.

All thanks to the transgender niggers removing transsexualism from the list mental disorders and making it a norm.

(Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)


(Анонимно)
2024-08-20 15:58 (ссылка)
So their standards stand in the way of your financial parasitism. These pieces of shit removed the financial tranny burden from the normies!

But seriously what you say is literally isn't the case, and only a greater push toward forcing insurers to pay for medical transitioning can be observed. They call it "gender-affirming care" and in the US, the literal homeland of the LGBT and woke ideology. In the liberal states there are literally mandates for it. If the situation is different in the Netherlands then it has more to do with the Netherlands, rather than with the American led lgbt movement. Also you don't know Dutch, so you can't even knowingly tell what's the actual situation in the country. There is also the Sadkov factor, how you magically able to antagonize people around you so they aren't willing to help you.

https://www.npr.org/2021/10/14/1046140320/colorado-now-requires-gender-affirming-care-to-be-covered-by-private-health-insu

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/state-healthcare-plans-must-cover-transgender-related-care-federal-court-rules

(Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)


[info]nancygold
2024-08-20 16:13 (ссылка)
No idea about America. But I got denied HRT in Netherlands, because the female hormones are "not mandatory to be a women," and local LGBT faggots told me multiple times that dicks can be "feminine"

(Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)


(Анонимно)
2024-08-20 16:32 (ссылка)
>I got denied HRT in Netherlands

It requires more investigation before assigning the entirety or even part of the blame to the transgender movement, which is international. You don't know Dutch, so you don't even know what the laws are, the precedents etc etc. Such rejection could simply be illegal, a result of collusion between insurers and doctors, could be discrimination of immigrants(who came to drain resources here on their surgeries, let's be real), could be discrimination of you personally, which is highly likely, considering how abrasive you are.

There is a moral hazard -- if you pay for surgeries for LGBT asylum immigrants, do it more than someone else, than there will be financially burdensome influx of such immigrants. It isn't a simple issue.

>local LGBT faggots told me multiple times that dicks can be "feminine"

This doesn't necessarily have anything to do with denial of care for those who want this care. I see no contradiction with "dicks can be feminine" and "some want vaginas anyway".

(Ответить) (Уровень выше)


(Читать комментарии) -