None of the lesbians incognito, none of the women in disguise to get an education or practice law or medicine were trans.
There are lots of women across many cultures that disguised themselves as men to gain freedom that was only available to men. That doesn't make them trans! Urgh!
The 'trans' troons have tried to rewrite and appropriate LGB history and that they misrepresent or fabricate is not surprising. They have parasitized the LGB movement itself b/c they have nothing materially or historically to cite and no credibility as a material reality. They have also used DSDs to prop up their 'trans' nonsensical narrative and have invented the 'trans child' as well b/c they have no legitimacy, only their attempts to legalize and normalize their fetishes as 'gender identity' and claim it is a civl right--it is not.
I don't know if 'androphilia' is a thing but it seems that some women/girls are drawn to trying to be male b/c they think it has advantages and/or they want to escape womanhood b/c of its disadvantages and how women are depicted in porn and the general misogyny and treatment of women in our culture. But they will find the misogyny and homophobia inherent in 'transgenderism' is just as virulent--if not more so.
Mulan might not have even existed. She’s likely fictional, and in the story, only pretended to be a dude so that she could stop her old dad from being conscripted and dying on the battlefield. After the war, she reverted to her female identity and married a dude. She was no kind of trans. Same thing for many other historical examples of women “dressing up as men to fight a war”. For one, what do they expect the women to do when their homelands were invaded? Cry? Wait for the enemy to come slaughter their families and then rape them? Of course they’d fight when they have no choice, right? For two, how do you “dress as a woman” to fight? Is there feminine armour? Female soldiers in real life don’t dress in flimsy skirts and high heels. Dressing in sensible armour in order to fight to protect their homes is very different from getting gender surgeries because they want to pretend to be the opposite sex. Also, saying the brave women who fought to protect their homelands were some kind of men instead is just female erasure. It strengthens my belief that this whole movement is highly misogynistic.
Mary Read & Ann Bonny pirates in the 1700s! Not trans but fiesty women outlaws! Trans doesnt exist, there are only men and women! How incredibly thick they all are! 😂🤣😂🇬🇧
The main reason there were people living as the opposite sex historically is because of the trans proclivity to trans the dead. In other words, in regards to history, they do what they usually do in regards to a number of things, lie.
Agreed with transing the dead. They've stolen our spaces and they even steal our history. As a Catholic of Norman descent, I especially hate the theft of St. Jeanne D'Arc. The *Maid* of Orleans was NOT trans.
A woman as religious as Joan would never have believed for an instant that god made a mistake, that she was born in the wrong body. But trans respects no one, no reality and no other religion.
At the bare minimum they are being phenomenally disingenuous, as we know that women were historically forbidden from living full public lives. How else were they supposed to earn money for themselves and possibly a same-sex partner?
There still weren't "thousands" of women desperately copying the opposite sex. You hear far more often of "unmarried Aunties" having lived together in my experience anyway.
this! in my own family "spinsters" who supported themselves & a friend & recent: the Butch i knew in Bronx lived their lives as men. people called them "sir" even with big tits.
I don't believe there were 'historical' trans people because PORN wasn't invented and/or readily available in past eras. There were INDIVIDUAL female people who crossed dressed to access education, employment, privilege etc...The men who dressed as women were pervs back then too.
Historically, women who dressed and "passed" as men did it for freedom, safety, comfort and financial opportunity. Men who dressed as women had a sex fetish. And yeah, there is very little evidence this was happening constantly and in the numbers the trans cult seems to believe it did. They're kidding, right?
Joan of Arc never denied being female. She, in fact, used the fact that she was a virgin to elevate her status in the Church's belief that virgins sometimes see and hear divine visions. Then she used the divine voices and visions, stemming from her divine virginity, to turn the tides of French and English conflicts.
No lesbian I have ever known dressed in pants or slacks for any erotic thrill. The way of dressing was for very practical reasons--mainly comfort, freedom of movement, and b/c it was healthier (high-heels and girdles/corsets are physically damaging), and not wanting to attract attention from males b/c that is not who they were attracted to.
These so-called historical trans people were most often homosexuals assumed into the opposite sex role due to their sexual orientation, or women living with other women in the safer role as a male. The whole trans revisionist history is unsupported and speculative at best: they even claim Jesus was trans (although the Church of England may agree these days, lol)! Mental illness and fetishy men have existed forever, but apparently it's a fashion statement these days disguised as social justice.
You're on to something with other people who fall for this accepting information without citation to seem smart. Plus, current main stream liberalism is very hostile to people making mistakes, especially in regards to trans stuff. Something as simple as not condemning J.K. Rowling (for fairly mild takes and some snarky tweets) is enough to make anyone (especially women) persona non grata in liberal circles.
Mulan was not trans.
Deborah Sampson was not trans.
Dr. Mary Walker was not trans.
None of the lesbians incognito, none of the women in disguise to get an education or practice law or medicine were trans.
There are lots of women across many cultures that disguised themselves as men to gain freedom that was only available to men. That doesn't make them trans! Urgh!
The 'trans' troons have tried to rewrite and appropriate LGB history and that they misrepresent or fabricate is not surprising. They have parasitized the LGB movement itself b/c they have nothing materially or historically to cite and no credibility as a material reality. They have also used DSDs to prop up their 'trans' nonsensical narrative and have invented the 'trans child' as well b/c they have no legitimacy, only their attempts to legalize and normalize their fetishes as 'gender identity' and claim it is a civl right--it is not.
I don't know if 'androphilia' is a thing but it seems that some women/girls are drawn to trying to be male b/c they think it has advantages and/or they want to escape womanhood b/c of its disadvantages and how women are depicted in porn and the general misogyny and treatment of women in our culture. But they will find the misogyny and homophobia inherent in 'transgenderism' is just as virulent--if not more so.
Mulan might not have even existed. She’s likely fictional, and in the story, only pretended to be a dude so that she could stop her old dad from being conscripted and dying on the battlefield. After the war, she reverted to her female identity and married a dude. She was no kind of trans. Same thing for many other historical examples of women “dressing up as men to fight a war”. For one, what do they expect the women to do when their homelands were invaded? Cry? Wait for the enemy to come slaughter their families and then rape them? Of course they’d fight when they have no choice, right? For two, how do you “dress as a woman” to fight? Is there feminine armour? Female soldiers in real life don’t dress in flimsy skirts and high heels. Dressing in sensible armour in order to fight to protect their homes is very different from getting gender surgeries because they want to pretend to be the opposite sex. Also, saying the brave women who fought to protect their homelands were some kind of men instead is just female erasure. It strengthens my belief that this whole movement is highly misogynistic.
Exactly! They didn’t thing they were male!
Mary Read & Ann Bonny pirates in the 1700s! Not trans but fiesty women outlaws! Trans doesnt exist, there are only men and women! How incredibly thick they all are! 😂🤣😂🇬🇧
Exactly - women in disguise. Besides, there is no such thing as 'trans gender' because humans cannot change sex. Not then and not now.
Succinct and shareable! Thank you!!
The main reason there were people living as the opposite sex historically is because of the trans proclivity to trans the dead. In other words, in regards to history, they do what they usually do in regards to a number of things, lie.
Agreed with transing the dead. They've stolen our spaces and they even steal our history. As a Catholic of Norman descent, I especially hate the theft of St. Jeanne D'Arc. The *Maid* of Orleans was NOT trans.
They will maniacally attempt to appropriate the identity of any woman who dared to once have a haircut which sat above the ears, it seems.
St. D'Arc was only too well aware of how female she was.
A woman as religious as Joan would never have believed for an instant that god made a mistake, that she was born in the wrong body. But trans respects no one, no reality and no other religion.
At the bare minimum they are being phenomenally disingenuous, as we know that women were historically forbidden from living full public lives. How else were they supposed to earn money for themselves and possibly a same-sex partner?
There still weren't "thousands" of women desperately copying the opposite sex. You hear far more often of "unmarried Aunties" having lived together in my experience anyway.
They only consider homophobia and/or misogyny when it fits their agenda. Otherwise, it is just something an evil terf made up.
this! in my own family "spinsters" who supported themselves & a friend & recent: the Butch i knew in Bronx lived their lives as men. people called them "sir" even with big tits.
they're NOT trance.
I don't believe there were 'historical' trans people because PORN wasn't invented and/or readily available in past eras. There were INDIVIDUAL female people who crossed dressed to access education, employment, privilege etc...The men who dressed as women were pervs back then too.
Historically, women who dressed and "passed" as men did it for freedom, safety, comfort and financial opportunity. Men who dressed as women had a sex fetish. And yeah, there is very little evidence this was happening constantly and in the numbers the trans cult seems to believe it did. They're kidding, right?
Honestly, these people are like a hive mind. They always tell the same goofy lies.
And no one calls them out. Ever. It's so frustrating.
Joan of Arc never denied being female. She, in fact, used the fact that she was a virgin to elevate her status in the Church's belief that virgins sometimes see and hear divine visions. Then she used the divine voices and visions, stemming from her divine virginity, to turn the tides of French and English conflicts.
No lesbian I have ever known dressed in pants or slacks for any erotic thrill. The way of dressing was for very practical reasons--mainly comfort, freedom of movement, and b/c it was healthier (high-heels and girdles/corsets are physically damaging), and not wanting to attract attention from males b/c that is not who they were attracted to.
5:22-They don’t even mention a name
Karen
You did another excellent video conversation.
Brava
These so-called historical trans people were most often homosexuals assumed into the opposite sex role due to their sexual orientation, or women living with other women in the safer role as a male. The whole trans revisionist history is unsupported and speculative at best: they even claim Jesus was trans (although the Church of England may agree these days, lol)! Mental illness and fetishy men have existed forever, but apparently it's a fashion statement these days disguised as social justice.
You're on to something with other people who fall for this accepting information without citation to seem smart. Plus, current main stream liberalism is very hostile to people making mistakes, especially in regards to trans stuff. Something as simple as not condemning J.K. Rowling (for fairly mild takes and some snarky tweets) is enough to make anyone (especially women) persona non grata in liberal circles.
BRAVA 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
You're thinking about Cathay Williams in the American Civil War. These women weren't trans, and they know it.