#btfo

[superchat]

[kidzbopdeathgrips]

best thing to happen on this website involving alison bechdel was when Homestuck beat Dykes To Watch Out For in that "best queer media" poll. people were so fucking mad lmao it was awesome

[nietr]

as an eagles fan im flyin tonight boi

[technofeudalism]

she/theys reading this get absolutely kissed on the cheek

[kidzbopdeathgrips]

>REBLOGS DISABLED

[potato-dragons]

C-C-C-C-Combo Breaker!

[alines7777]

i btfo'd a terf on twitter who decided to chime in on a discussion i participated in on trans issues, namely the topic of arkansas banning gender-affirming therapies for trans youth.

i finished my part of the discussion, or so i thought, by linking an editorial with a list of fatal assaults against trans people that were reported on by the media in the year 2020, in reference to a fear i expressed that the recent legislation in arkansas might embolden hospitals to refuse life-saving care to people with a medical history related to being trans.

and that's when the terf chimed in, changing the subject, with a scholastic paper on crime statistics measuring fatal assaults against women, with the implied but still obvious intent to belittle trans issues, saying that that the 44 named by the media in the editorial i cited didn't compare to her 2000 victims who were unnamed as statistics in a scholastic paper.

i realized all of this immediately the moment i saw it and called it out, starting with the obvious, that a few reports on tragic events made by the media can't be appropriately compared in scope or method to statistics, involving cases not known or reported on by the media, and made a piss-poor sugue into the plight of cis women, and given the context, it was also made in poor taste. i was also quick to point out that there aren't even close to half as many trans women alive or dead as there are cis women. as soon as i finished pointing out these facts, i moved on to berating her conduct, by letting her know that i don't change the subject to the plight of trans people when the subject is on the plight of cis women, and certainly not with the intent of belittling their interests, and that i don't tell anyone to take the back seat, and then i added the remark that i thought she saw me as an abomination like so many other transphobes.

i'll admit, her chiming in and changing the subject like that to belittle my interests as a trans person did annoy me. i was going, to quote a certain someone who shall remain unnamed, "both guns and a hand grenade".

but i wasn't done yet.

i also noticed something amiss in the paper she linked -- it made no clear indication that it was intended to measure fatal assaults solely against cis women -- and i went to the trouble of explaining that to her, and asking her how she could know that it did, multiple times. she never gave a satisfactory answer regarding the author's intent and method. i also pointed out that the paper didn't even indicate any kind of method, which probably meant that it cited other works by other statisticians, whose intent i called into question in turn.

to be clear, i wasn't denying any murders against cis women, nor was i denying that it's as bad as people say it is, i know that it's as bad as people say it is, i was merely expressing doubt that the work she cited was actually faithful to the argument she made, particularly in terms of cis women having it worse than trans women, when i know that neither she nor i were qualified to make any claims attesting to that or the converse.

i kept asking, "how can you be so sure that the research was to measure crimes committed just against cis women when they never said that was what they were doing?"

she only replied and repeated that "women means biological females," you know, attributing her own intent to the author she cited.

i was getting more annoyed by that the more times she said it, and i finally said, "the paper never specified that, and since you said that it's about biological females, that would lead me to wonder if that would include trans men," and having just about had it, i told her that she should contact the author of the paper before continuing the discussion.

then the replies stopped, and then i noticed an older reply that i hadn't before.

"i don't think you're an abomination, you are jumping to conclusions."

still annoyed, but less so, i responded, "yea, just like how you jumped to the conclusion that all the crimes against trans people that are reported on by the media are simply all the crimes against trans people."

and then, before i knew it, she deleted all her replies to me, including where she chimed in, probably realizing that she looked like the combative fool she was being. if she wasn't embarrassed, then i presume she would have blocked me instead, like countless others.

and i won't lie. it felt good knowing that.

but seriously, terfs, i am a specially trained and battle-hardened antifa supersoldier, DON'T FUCK WITH ME.

i'm certainly not the brightest, but don't take me or my intellect lightly.

but in all honesty, and to her credit, the debates i have with others on twitter usually become a lot more heated than that, and they usually aren't nearly as brief

[chillockscans]

Blown the fuck out