Insane Parents of "Transgender" Kids - Parents who push a transgender identity on their children

SITHRAK!

ESL teenager spouting gibberish and angry words.
kiwifarms.net
I hate that 'but women murder babies so don't bitch about men raping' shit.

No understanding of the insane toll pregnancy takes on the body and mental health. If you really wanted to save the babies from the evil wahmens then start talking about post pregnancy mental illness more.

Ask your mother's if any sane woman could kill their own child.

But that's only if you think the number of child murders in anyway resembles the number of rapes. One of these is substantially more common than the other, I wonder which.
So when a woman murders a newborn infant, she’s actually the victim?
You genuinely believe no woman could just be an evil, selfish cunt?
It’s society’s fault. It’s the baby’s fault. It’s everyone’s fault but the killer’s.
You nail those colors to the mast. I’ll be over here continuing to point out hypocrisy and shitty rationalizations.
 

Scolopendra Dramatica

kiwifarms.net
So when a woman murders a newborn infant, she’s actually the victim?
You genuinely believe no woman could just be an evil, selfish cunt?
It’s society’s fault. It’s the baby’s fault. It’s everyone’s fault but the killer’s.
You nail those colors to the mast. I’ll be over here continuing to point out hypocrisy and shitty rationalizations.
Calm your tits Joe, I'm not defending it nor saying there aren't nuts women out there, I've dated a psycho bitch, but post pregnancy crazy is crazy powerful and a reasonable explanation for it.

If it was evil bitches being evil then surely they wouldn't stop at their own kids having gotten a taste for it?

Or, y'know, come with a history of killing small animals etc which is rarely the case.

More likely these are women that are desperately unhinged because their body has been through so much trauma they snapped. Not to mention the sudden and collosal changes in hormones that take place in the body during pregnancy.

Did you know hormones affect behaviour? Cool fact, huh friend!
 

Cousin It

kiwifarms.net
Yes, I am claiming that, because it actually does happen. Going "but wait, I know families who have daughters!" neither disproves the existence of son preference, the fact that some parents stop at one child if they have a son because they don't want to "risk" having an unwanted daughter, or the existence of sexism in general (which seems to be your goal? maybe? idk what the point is of your examples tbh). Shit, I know lots of families who have daughters - every single one of them treated their daughter(s) like garbage and worshipped their sons. But that's anecdotal; it just so happens that the actual statistical data backs me up.

I would imagine the "issue in India" would be the systemic misogyny. The dowry system is an example of that misogyny. However, it is no excuse... I would hope that would be obvious.
But you going "I know families who do have biases towards their sons!" is automatically evidence of widespread boy preference for western families? Maybe you have made some friends with shit families. Are you even friends with these families? How do you know so much about how well they treat their daughters?

The links you provided were about boy selection in China and India. Two very patriarchal societies. I don't think anyone is arguing with you about extreme male sex selection happening over there. It's just that all your arguments about boy-favoring in western societies to the extent you have described has been anecdotal. What is the statistical data that backs up your arguments for western societies?
 

SITHRAK!

ESL teenager spouting gibberish and angry words.
kiwifarms.net
Or, y'know, come with a history of killing small animals etc which is rarely the case.

More likely these are women that are desperately unhinged because their body has been through so much trauma they snapped. Not to mention the sudden and collosal changes in hormones that take place in the body during pregnancy.

Did you know hormones affect behaviour? Cool fact, huh friend!
You may benefit from looking up the ‘M’Naghten Rules’ if you’re going to try the insanity defense as a blanket response to women killing babies.
 

Sourceress

chaotic neutral
kiwifarms.net
But you going "I know families who do have biases towards their sons!" is automatically evidence of widespread boy preference for western families? Maybe you have made some friends with shit families. Are you even friends with these families? How do you know so much about how well they treat their daughters?

The links you provided were about boy selection in China and India. Two very patriarchal societies. I don't think anyone is arguing with you about extreme male sex selection happening over there. It's just that all your arguments about boy-favoring in western societies to the extent you have described has been anecdotal. What is the statistical data that backs up your arguments for western societies?
I was friends with their daughters. I know how they treated their daughters because we compared notes. But more importantly maybe, I read a lot, especially about systemic sexism and the way it effects women and girls. I look at studies and statistics. I simply don't regurgitate them all in casual forum posts all the time. Maybe I didn't think that in a thread that regularly discusses the way systemic misogyny pushes young women to "transition" and the ways in which males transitioning is itself misogynistic I would have to elaborate more on the fact that sexism exists.

Son preference exists in the US, especially among minority groups but also overall. (source) Americans (and especially American men) still prefer to have male children than female by a sizable margin. (source) American men are 50% more likely to take paternity leave to bond with their new baby if it is a son. (source) American men are more likely to marry the mother of their child if that child is a boy. (source) American men are less likely to remain married to the mother of their child if their first child is a girl, and mothers of boys are more likely to remarry after divorce. (same as last source) American fathers are also more likely to have custody of their children if said children are all boys than if they are all girls. (same as last source) There are numerous studies showing that male children spend significantly less time than female children on chores, housework and errands, while being both more likely to be paid an allowance for doing them and earning as much as twice what their female peers do, showing that the time and work of male children is considered more valuable than the time and work of female children. (source)

I could go on for hours or even days demonstrating all the ways in which our society shows its preference for male children and the privileged treatment they receive. After all, male privilege is a fundamental part of systemic sexism, right there with the oppression of women and girls. I'll have to hope this is enough for now - I have biscuits cooling.
 

AnOminous

each malted milk ball might be their last
True & Honest Fan
Retired Staff
kiwifarms.net
You may benefit from looking up the ‘M’Naghten Rules’ if you’re going to try the insanity defense as a blanket response to women killing babies.
Look up postpartum psychosis and, specifically, the case of Andrea Yates. If that wasn't a case worthy of an insanity defense I've never seen one. She didn't get it at trial but did on appeal. Incidentally, Texas does apply a version of the M'Naghten Rule. If even Texas found actual insanity in a case like this (Yates is in a mental hospital), I'm going to take their conclusions seriously.

In some cases women go quite literally completely psychotic after a birth.

This isn't like the teenager dumping a kid in the dumpster out of embarrassment or because it's inconvenient to have a baby.
 

SITHRAK!

ESL teenager spouting gibberish and angry words.
kiwifarms.net
This isn't like the teenager dumping a kid in the dumpster out of embarrassment or because it's inconvenient to have a baby.
And one specific case doesn't override the sad fact that women are very capable of harming their children for reasons other than clinical insanity of a degree so severe that they no longer know right from wrong (which must be successfully argued for an insanity defense to apply). That's kind of the thread theme IMHO.
It's overwhelmingly mothers (especially single mothers) that raise rapists, serial killers and mass murderers; it's overwhelmingly mothers that subject their children to Munchhausen's by proxy; it's overwhelmingly women that revel in the freedom from responsibility that 'personality disorders' confer; anecdotally, it's overwhelmingly women that facilitate, encourage and even force transgender status on the children that they have a natural and moral obligation to protect and nurture.
I fucking hate hypocrisy and I see so much of it when it comes to hand-waving away the harm done by the tiny minority of women that choose to harm their kids.
And now we live in a world where women are socially rewarded with asspats and attention for subjecting their children to puberty blockers, hormonal fuckery (that science is still a fucking long way from fully understanding) and even irreversible mutilating surgery that dooms the kids to a lifetime as a freak.
I believe that kids being encouraged or railroaded by parents into choosing the trans lifestyle as stemming from the same psychopathology that gives rise to MBP- the mother vales attention and asspats over the health and happiness of their child.
Transgenderism is real. I absolutely believe that. But I also believe it should be treated as a mental illness, not a lifestyle, until the individual reaches the age of majority and can decide for themselves. Even more so when it's incentivized by SocJus cultists and social media.
 

AnOminous

each malted milk ball might be their last
True & Honest Fan
Retired Staff
kiwifarms.net
It's overwhelmingly mothers (especially single mothers) that raise rapists, serial killers and mass murderers; it's overwhelmingly mothers that subject their children to Munchhausen's by proxy; it's overwhelmingly women that revel in the freedom from responsibility that 'personality disorders' confer; anecdotally, it's overwhelmingly women that facilitate, encourage and even force transgender status on the children that they have a natural and moral obligation to protect and nurture.
That's largely because it's overwhelmingly mothers who do the bulk of the parenting, so naturally they'd do the bulk of the shitty parenting too, including MBP nutcases, parents who troon out their kids, etc. This is usually accompanied by a weak or absent father. Male children quite simply have far more adverse outcomes without a father to model masculinity and are at an increased risk for fucked up mothers. And of course, the kind of mothers who fuck up their kids are by and large the kind of mothers who picked shitty fathers in the first place because of their universally terrible judgment.

However, you can't really ignore the negative "contribution" of the man who wasn't there to the ability of the mother to fuck up the kid even worse. Yes, there are good single mothers and fathers so bad that the kid is better off without them, but even in those cases, the lack of a positive male role model has worse results than the presence of one.
 

SITHRAK!

ESL teenager spouting gibberish and angry words.
kiwifarms.net
That's largely because it's overwhelmingly mothers who do the bulk of the parenting, so naturally they'd do the bulk of the shitty parenting too, including MBP nutcases, parents who troon out their kids, etc. This is usually accompanied by a weak or absent father. Male children quite simply have far more adverse outcomes without a father to model masculinity and are at an increased risk for fucked up mothers. And of course, the kind of mothers who fuck up their kids are by and large the kind of mothers who picked shitty fathers in the first place because of their universally terrible judgment.

However, you can't really ignore the negative "contribution" of the man who wasn't there to the ability of the mother to fuck up the kid even worse. Yes, there are good single mothers and fathers so bad that the kid is better off without them, but even in those cases, the lack of a positive male role model has worse results than the presence of one.
Absolutely. The overwhelming impact of post-WW2 social engineering and the postmodernist directive to destroy the Western nuclear family has done immense damage to the social fabric of first-world nations. It's no coincidence that nonwestern cultures with a strong sense of family and heritage (such as India, China and Pakistan) are progressing as we decline.

The assertion about 'bulk of parenting/bulk of shitty parenting' is hardly an excuse for shitty parenting, though. It's like saying 'men have the most access to drunk chicks in nightclubs, so naturally they do most of the raping'.
If we lived in a science-based society we'd at least be able to study clean data on things like rates of troonery amongst single-father, single-mother and dual-parent households of all kinds, cross-referenced with ethnic and cultural backgrounds, with longitudinal studies on things like economic outcomes and self-harm rates.
But we won't. Ever. Because now that troonery is Stunning And Brave And Totally Scientific, feels take precedence over the search for facts.
 

Scolopendra Dramatica

kiwifarms.net
Absolutely. The overwhelming impact of post-WW2 social engineering and the postmodernist directive to destroy the Western nuclear family has done immense damage to the social fabric of first-world nations. It's no coincidence that nonwestern cultures with a strong sense of family and heritage (such as India, China and Pakistan) are progressing as we decline.

The assertion about 'bulk of parenting/bulk of shitty parenting' is hardly an excuse for shitty parenting, though. It's like saying 'men have the most access to drunk chicks in nightclubs, so naturally they do most of the raping'.
If we lived in a science-based society we'd at least be able to study clean data on things like rates of troonery amongst single-father, single-mother and dual-parent households of all kinds, cross-referenced with ethnic and cultural backgrounds, with longitudinal studies on things like economic outcomes and self-harm rates.
But we won't. Ever. Because now that troonery is Stunning And Brave And Totally Scientific, feels take precedence over the search for facts.
I agree with you here.
Not on the baby killing, I honestly think that's a different story for the most part, but coddle culture and over mothering (which I'd happily call toxic femininity, because extremes on either end exist and they're both damaging as all hell) is, frankly, murdering kids by proxy.

Once upon a time the doctors and nurses could make a fair judgement call and lock up these women for their abusive insanity, these days they get asspats for it. It's devastatingly wrong and these narcissistic cows should be brought into line by others because, IF they actually register the damage they're causing, the evil sods are only leaning deeper into it.

Same as the troon dad's that want their sons to join them (see GameStop 'it's ma'am' troon and how he's grooming his son), if you aren't putting the kids first you've no right parenting.

Channeling your ego through your offspring and denying them the chance to grow up is sheer evil and the product of rampant narcissism and, I agree, women get away with that shit more on the whole because we're seen as the sex less capable of damage.

Which on one hand is true, fuck, we're smaller and generally are seen to have less influence, we're less prone to violence and snap rages due to lesser testosterone, but how many serial killers have women raised by indulging toxic femininity? Is that not a huge part of it?

You only need to watch the mothers of Jazz and Desmond to know this is a real fucking problem that SHOULD be sorted for the sake of the child.

Kids CAN'T consent. The Kiera Bell case should well prove that.
 

GenitalFetishist

Send duck pics plz
kiwifarms.net
Much as I love autistic internet slapfights over which sex has more devilcooties, I'd like to try and get this train back on the rails.

Keir Starmer making nobody happy

Long story short: Mom (of a TIF) links resistance to "trans rights" (forcing people to agree with you and putting 13 year olds on a lifelong medication path) with anti-Irish bigotry, Section 28, and basically everything else she can think of.

"But there are some matters of principle on which the Labour Party must not compromise – and the rights of transgender people to live peaceful lives, to be safe at school and at work, to have the healthcare they need, and not have the truth of their identity ceaselessly debated, fall into that category.***

This is a basic civil rights issue, one which Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were crystal clear about on their campaign trail, and addressed immediately on taking office – their feet hardly under the table when they unapologetically rescinded all the transphobic nonsense implemented by Donald Trump.

Labour should be doing the same. Transgender people are not policy choices to be polled and tested with the red wall before a word of solidarity is sent in their direction – they are people. Silence in the face of the barrage of prejudice they face from within the Labour Party not only does trans people a great disservice, but does Labour’s proud history a disservice too.

Is it truly the case that the party that gave us the Race Relations Act, the Disability Discrimination Act, civil partnerships, and the abolition of Section 28, is the same party that today maintains a disciplined, institutional silence when it comes to discrimination against transgender people from within its own ranks?"


*** notice, here, that granting troons the right to not be assaulted/harrassed is listed in the same breath as their right not to be questioned.
 
Last edited:

Fliddaroonie

I'm a spooky ghost! Whooooo!!! Ectoplasm!!!!
kiwifarms.net
Much as I love autistic internet slapfights over which sex has more devilcooties, I'd like to try and get this train back on the rails.

Keir Starmer making nobody happy

Long story short: Mom (of a TIF) links resistance to "trans rights" (forcing people to agree with you and putting 13 year olds on a lifelong medication path) with anti-Irish bigotry, Section 28, and basically everything else she can think of.

"But there are some matters of principle on which the Labour Party must not compromise – and the rights of transgender people to live peaceful lives, to be safe at school and at work, to have the healthcare they need, and not have the truth of their identity ceaselessly debated, fall into that category.***

This is a basic civil rights issue, one which Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were crystal clear about on their campaign trail, and addressed immediately on taking office – their feet hardly under the table when they unapologetically rescinded all the transphobic nonsense implemented by Donald Trump.

Labour should be doing the same. Transgender people are not policy choices to be polled and tested with the red wall before a word of solidarity is sent in their direction – they are people. Silence in the face of the barrage of prejudice they face from within the Labour Party not only does trans people a great disservice, but does Labour’s proud history a disservice too.

Is it truly the case that the party that gave us the Race Relations Act, the Disability Discrimination Act, civil partnerships, and the abolition of Section 28, is the same party that today maintains a disciplined, institutional silence when it comes to discrimination against transgender people from within its own ranks?"


*** notice, here, that granting troons the right to not be assaulted/harrassed is listed in the same breath as their right not to be questioned.
It's interesting that article mentions section 28, because if it hadn't been repealed,teachers wouldn't be allowed to have sex offender troons in the classroom or be pushing this batdhit insane agenda of encouraging kids to mutilate themselves permanently. It's a pity we got rid of it.
 

UnsufficentBoobage

Atleast things I wanna fuck are 3D
kiwifarms.net
I hope feminists will no longer barf up the thread, but, just in case: we have been through two entire world wars. An entire generations, raised fatherless without any fault to be put on guys themselves. And overly coddling, often toxic or crazy mothers, who are direct cause of a lot of modern ""toxic masculinity"" (ffs, I saw a poem about that shit, dating back to WW2). So, how could responsibility be on men here? The ones abandoning their families/not having any/violent are all just a step in cycle of abuse, started by mothers. I am cringing at that "women are victims" rhetoric every time I encounter it. No, you are not a victim. You are means to end that cycle.
 

Sourceress

chaotic neutral
kiwifarms.net
I hope feminists will no longer barf up the thread, but, just in case: we have been through two entire world wars. An entire generations, raised fatherless without any fault to be put on guys themselves. And overly coddling, often toxic or crazy mothers, who are direct cause of a lot of modern ""toxic masculinity"" (ffs, I saw a poem about that shit, dating back to WW2). So, how could responsibility be on men here? The ones abandoning their families/not having any/violent are all just a step in cycle of abuse, started by mothers. I am cringing at that "women are victims" rhetoric every time I encounter it. No, you are not a victim. You are means to end that cycle.
What a hot take. "Men are never responsible for their actions, women are the root of all evil." Really eye-opening. 🙄 I guess men aren't people, since they don't seem to have free will or the ability to make their own choices in life like women do. Thank you for that insightful analysis, I will wait with bated breath for you to start petitioning to remove men from positions of power on the basis that they can't make decisions or be responsible for themselves let alone anyone else.
 

Pond Scum

Disgusting!
kiwifarms.net
I hope feminists will no longer barf up the thread, but, just in case: we have been through two entire world wars. An entire generations, raised fatherless without any fault to be put on guys themselves. And overly coddling, often toxic or crazy mothers, who are direct cause of a lot of modern ""toxic masculinity"" (ffs, I saw a poem about that shit, dating back to WW2). So, how could responsibility be on men here? The ones abandoning their families/not having any/violent are all just a step in cycle of abuse, started by mothers. I am cringing at that "women are victims" rhetoric every time I encounter it. No, you are not a victim. You are means to end that cycle.
What a hot take. "Men are never responsible for their actions, women are the root of all evil." Really eye-opening. 🙄 I guess men aren't people, since they don't seem to have free will or the ability to make their own choices in life like women do. Thank you for that insightful analysis, I will wait with bated breath for you to start petitioning to remove men from positions of power on the basis that they can't make decisions or be responsible for themselves let alone anyone else.
It has now been 0 days since we had pointless fights about feminism in a thread about crazy trannies.
 

Reepicheep

True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
FE6FB78E-8C93-44CC-8BE6-31A198871FA5.jpeg
 

Similar threads

ft. r/GenderCritical & related reddits, Mancheeze, Cathy Brennan, GCDad, RadFHarva, Jamie Shupe, etc; "Gender Critical Feminism is Homophobic" - Cathy Brennan, 2019.
Replies
3K
Views
601K
Severely paranoid thin-skinned attention whore with hate/real boner for Ralph, Null, Jim, BSV, etc. "Right kind of gay" and "verified female". Legally banned from KF, 13 socks and counting
Replies
8K
Views
1M
Top