Calling someone a "cunt" is still misogynist though.
this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2025
796 points (99.0% liked)
People Twitter
8364 readers
2129 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Yeah, she did a lot for shinning a light on the struggles of trans people. She did fucking nothing for the stereotype of women drivers...
Spotted Ricky Gervais
This is like saying you can't make fun of Kristi Noem because she's a woman. If you mock her for being a woman you're a piece of shit, if you mock her for all of the horrible things she does and says you're fine. Her sex and gender have nothing to do with her being an awful stain on humanity (and dogkind).
and yet when that southpark episode of her aired people were celebrating it very openly and calling me a fascist enabler for telling people that being a woman is not one of her faults, there are plenty of actual faults to choose from.
It's like saying you can't make fun of JD Vance for being a couch fucker. Oh wait, you can.
Sorry
(I stole this gif)
I have stolen this gif now too.
No, you see. What youre doing here is making light of the sexual assault of that finely crafted Italian couch. Sexual assault against seating happens every day, and its no laughing matter.
For anyone reading this, is you or anyone you know has a couch or chair that has suffered a sexual assault by a parent or other family member, please know that you are not alone. Please call 555-26824, and speak to one of our SAS(Seating assault specialists) volunteers today.
my poor chesterfield will never sit the same.
They literally dont see the difference. Making fun of Catelyn's shitty behavior and crimes and making fun of trans women in general is one and the same to them. They think that actions necessarily stem, fundamentally, from the "kinds" of people they are. Everyone is a characticture, a stereotype.
"You're gay? Well you're a leftie, socialist, gun-hating, pedophile who speaks effeminately, dresses flamboyantly, and does drag" They wouldnt even know how to handle a gay man that wears carhartt and camo, has a big bushy beard, votes Republican and owns a gun store, becuase such a thing is self-contradictory to them. How can this masculine beast of a guy be attracted to other men and want to have sex with them? It doesn't compute.
It's why gay men, black men, women and others that join Republican groups, people that don't fit the mold, find themselves often targetted with hatred and derision by their own "allies". It's not just that they are hateful bigots (and they are), but that they genuinely do not actually believe that they can be sincere in their shared beliefs because they aren't the right kind of people.
They are literally deciding Charlie Kirk's assassin must have been a leftie based entirely on the possibility that he might have had a sexual relationship with a trans roommate. Yes, a big part of that conclusion is grasping at anything to escape culpability and scape goat the left as usual, but they do also fully beleive that that is damning evidence. Becuase right wingers never have anything but herero-normative sex lives. Dont tell Grindr.
I learned to stop working off that strict either-or dichotomy when I met my first girlfriend. She was the crunchy blissed out (read: permanently stoned) type who was all about PLUR, good vibes, and hemp jewlery. At least until you brought up abortion, immigration, or any other conservative boogeyman. Then she was Pat Buchanan with a redheaded wig and a copy of Billy Breathes.
I think that's a result of the US two-party system. It's spilling over to Europe too, via the media, but I think it originates with the US political system.
It's so tribal and "bi-partisan".
In my country, there's 6 major parties, which are all a different mix on what they are for and what they are against. That means, there's a much larger set of "buckets" a person can fit in. Due to the fact that there are often multiple parties that one person would be OK with voting for them, there's a lot more voter mobility, and thus it's much more common that someone doesn't actually fully agree with a single party at all, but switches which party to vote for depending on what's going on.
If stereotypes aren't enforced that much, people tend to be quite much more complex and self-contradictory than what appears at first glance if you just look for stereotypes.
Are we allowed a measure of schadenfreude at the trans person that joined the anti trans party being mocked by the transphobes they tried to court with hate for a different "other"?
Because that's the part I like.
Reminds me of the "Jew for Hitler" folk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_German_National_Jews
Ffs turns out there were two similar groups https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Vanguard
Honest question from an ally. She was Bruce and going by masculine verbage then. Is it still misgendering them by referring to them as such when talking about the murder?
never mind.
If Bob Smith invented a new device and then became a doctor, would you say Dr. Bob Smith invented the device or just Bob Smith invented it? It is correct to use current terms to refer to what a person did. People don't care what a person used to be called. They just want to know who invented the device.
This makes it make sense. Thanks homie.
Now kiss. All the homies give forehead kisses
Forehead‽ Na give the homies legit smooches! (Iffy's skit on smarty-pants)
ooo, i'm gonna have to binge that. it feels QI-ish.
Yes, her name-change applies retroactively, so when you talk about something that she has done, you may say that she did that
that they always use "can not do it" is kind of telling that they dont understand anything at all. or often they say "are not allowed to"
It is like they are saying i cant hit because of the law, instead of not wanting to hurt someone
The thing is that I tend to believe you can in fact joke about anything, including being transgender.
What they usually fail to get is that being a raging transphobic asshole and covering it up saying "it's a joke" is a very different thing.
The basic problem they run into is that jokes are supposed to be funny, and conservatives aren't funny
Okay, I grew up in Oklahoma, so I think I can explain what's happening here.
To start with, there has been a conservative faction that's outlined seven key areas of control they need to capture to turn America into a theocracy. They came up with the plan before I was born, and it's cut from the same cloth as Project 2025.
One of those areas is education, and they've done a fantastic job of butchering the education system in large swathes of America, leading to what you've described. Where I grew up, education wasn't about thinking, it was about memorizing facts so you could pass tests. Everything got boiled down to a yes/no, and questions were met with "because I said so" at best. At worst, you can get sent to the principal's office for asking too many questions because it's "disruptive".
As an example, in elementary school, I asked what happened if I tried to subtract a big number from a small number. The teacher scoffed and told me that you can't have less than zero, which caused the class to make fun of me for asking a stupid question.
So yeah, they probably don't actually understand why they're not supposed to hit people, they just know they can't because the authority figure says no.
Buckle up, buckaroo!
It shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that shitty people are distributed through the population. There are shitty people in every single subgroup.
And an annoyingly high number of them are far more famous that I like.
She could be an office chair, I'll still make fun of her shitty ass.
I wonder how making fun of how she looks is considered. It's in bad taste to make fun of someone's appearance of course but I think there's probably some line where it crosses into transphobia.
Making fun of how someone looks invariably targets other people. Like why do it all?
I wasn't advocating for it. I just wonder where it crosses over to transphobia if the target is trans.
My point is it doesn't really matter, there is already sufficient reason to not do it at all. But I think it's safe to say joking about anything in her appearance is transphobic since her transness is inextricably tied to it, and more often than not transness is reduced to how someone presents themselves.
I'm just wondering how it would work here. One perspective I was thinking about was what you mentioned, how there's no way to joke about her appearance without it being transphobic
Thought you were talking about Kristi Noem for a minute and making fun of maga face.
There's always an exception to the rule and Caitlyn " I killed a family in a car crash and got away with it absofukinglutely Scott free" Jenner is one of them.
and also trying to jump on the anti-trans bandwagon of the gop for grifting jenner. its the same as THIEL supporting anti-lgbtq+ agendas of the gop and conservatives while being gay himself, of whom he allegedly defenestrated his boy toy last year for voicing that concern.
Well which rule you talking about here? Because the post is more saying you can mock her to high heaven for the things she's done and the horrible piece of shit that she is but mocking her for being trans is what's a no no. At that point you're firing stray bullets at people who are just existing. Probably won't make her feel bad because she's insulated to high hell but will make the trans people who see that behavior feel fucking horrible.
Can mock her for being a cunt all you want, just can't mock her for being trans because she did nothing wrong by coming out to herself and the world. She did do a whole lot wrong by constantly supporting republicans, saying she was against gay marriage to Ellen's face (A cunt in her own right but that's a whole other story), and turning someone into roadkill without seemingly a second thought.
Only way I'm using the word trans against her in an insulting tone is the fact that despite her being trans her support of the community is utterly transparent. Fuck her and the horse she rode in on that I assume trampled someone in the process.
Pretty much any of them, I mean that in the general sense of it all, not specifically out of the points you made, she's a vile human being who says and does shit that is so abhorently hypocritical it's almost perverse. So I have no respect for them as a human being, their gender identity plays no role in her being a cunt.
That I can get behind
Completely off topic, but my favorite blasphemy is currently "Get behind me, Satan! Pull my hair, Satan!"
Well, Donald Trump is a piece of shit. And people routinely say things like "White men ruin the world!". So, if its OK to say that, why wouldnt it be ok to say something about Jenner in the same vein? Why is it ok to make general statements about some, but not others? Perception, maybe? After all, "men" are supposedly in control of everything, right? So saying "fucking men!!!" is fine. Its "punching up". Yet, inside the ranks of men are a lot of people who have never done anything wrong. Worse, a lot of them are victims. We often talk about "Men" being violent, but we almost never talk about them being the victims of violence at a rate of over 80% globally according to the UNODC. Yet still, its ok to make jokes about male rape, especially in a prison setting.
So for me, its ok to generalise about men, then its ok to generalise about everyone.