Ehh…The implication can be interpreted a bit weird if you want to (depending on the world view and upbringing)
Just a “good for them” and “I applaude them protesting by overcoming gender norms” are IMO better than the ones we are discussing right now.
I am neutral about it but see both sides as valid points.
Liberals love to talk about child sexuality just gotta let them be creeps by themselves. You won’t convince a creep/pedo to not have creepy thoughts and wishes for children
I was wondering how many of those kids have started their journey in self actualization; figuring out things about themselves; their needs and desires. It makes me happy thinking of people learning to accept themselves for who they are; and that’s it. Ironically, the only creeps are you two weirdos who immediately jump to to condescending, indirect accusations of paedophilia, obviously so discomforted with their own sexualities they feel the need to lash out at the mere mention of childhood sexual development.
FYI paedophilia only affects less than a percent of the global population; although this number seems a lot larger depending on the media you consume or the people you talk to. Rather, how distorted your world view has become due to a few extremely wealthy people controlling all of the media companies that create that media.
Male children wearing girls clothes is not “childhood sexual development” and you know it same as the rest of the world knows it. To suggest so is to betray your own inner degeneracy and yes, to us normal people degenerates are gross and disgusting and abhorrent
Gender is the norms society associates with sex. A lot of modern things associated with gender are just the product of marketing campaigns: pink as a “girl color” was a marketing push in the early 20th century. Pants are a more recent popular product than people like to admit with kilts, tunics, togas, robes, etc having been male attire until like 1500 AD.
Sexualizing clothing, colors, and now boutique cosmetic surgery (specifically mar a lago face, for instance) etc is some freak shit that ‘conservatives’ do to virtue signal about what good little boys they are because they follow the inane gender codes created by marketing and fads.
IAMgROOT@lemmy.wtf 2 weeks ago
no, the “wonder how many of them were into that” comment bothers me. A lot.
alongside an “egg” which implies they were trans and masking
congrats on calling a bunch of kids trans for wearing skirts
snoons@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
I see so you’re just a bigot.
Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
Ehh…The implication can be interpreted a bit weird if you want to (depending on the world view and upbringing)
Just a “good for them” and “I applaude them protesting by overcoming gender norms” are IMO better than the ones we are discussing right now.
I am neutral about it but see both sides as valid points.
snoons@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
So you tolerate intolerance, and are therefore just as intolerant.
musicjunkie@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Liberals love to talk about child sexuality just gotta let them be creeps by themselves. You won’t convince a creep/pedo to not have creepy thoughts and wishes for children
snoons@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
Let me clarify:
I was wondering how many of those kids have started their journey in self actualization; figuring out things about themselves; their needs and desires. It makes me happy thinking of people learning to accept themselves for who they are; and that’s it. Ironically, the only creeps are you two weirdos who immediately jump to to condescending, indirect accusations of paedophilia, obviously so discomforted with their own sexualities they feel the need to lash out at the mere mention of childhood sexual development.
FYI paedophilia only affects less than a percent of the global population; although this number seems a lot larger depending on the media you consume or the people you talk to. Rather, how distorted your world view has become due to a few extremely wealthy people controlling all of the media companies that create that media.
musicjunkie@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Male children wearing girls clothes is not “childhood sexual development” and you know it same as the rest of the world knows it. To suggest so is to betray your own inner degeneracy and yes, to us normal people degenerates are gross and disgusting and abhorrent
IAMgROOT@lemmy.wtf 2 weeks ago
they are 11 have you met an 11 year old before?
Fedizen@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Gender is the norms society associates with sex. A lot of modern things associated with gender are just the product of marketing campaigns: pink as a “girl color” was a marketing push in the early 20th century. Pants are a more recent popular product than people like to admit with kilts, tunics, togas, robes, etc having been male attire until like 1500 AD.
Sexualizing clothing, colors, and now boutique cosmetic surgery (specifically mar a lago face, for instance) etc is some freak shit that ‘conservatives’ do to virtue signal about what good little boys they are because they follow the inane gender codes created by marketing and fads.