When I was in college, round about 2002 or so, I did a paper on hate groups that necessitated a couple of visits to Stormfront, a white supremacist website and message board. One of the pages on the site was a "children's page" operated by the child of Storrmfront's founder, which was a unique form of horrifying. But I also remember looking at a photo of the kid on the site and thinking, that poor fuckin' kid, what kind of chance did he ever have?
But it was just a paper and that was just a photo of a child I didn't know, so I turned in the paper and graduated and got on with life.
In 2016, @archwrites posted a link to an article by the Washington Post titled "The White Flight of Derek Black" (sorry about the paywall, Arch's post quotes some relevant parts here). I thought it looked like an interesting read: it was about a white supremacist named Derek Black and a group of campus activists at the school Black eventually attended, who set out to see if they could change his mind about race with radical kindness. In large part because of their work, Black eventually renounced white supremacy and became an antiracist.
And then I hit a photo in the article and gasped, because I recognized it. I'd seen the same photo on the Stormfront children's website. The kid I'd seen and pitied was grown up and had gotten out. Immensely satisfying to see.
But it was just a news story about someone I didn't even know, so I posted about how pleased I was to see it, and I got on with life again.
This morning, I woke to the news (sorry, it's the Daily Fail) that R. Derek Black, now 35, has just published a memoir, The Klansman's Son: My Journey from White Nationalism to Antiracism. And in the epilogue, they come out as trans.
I can't imagine better news I could have heard about them -- that they're out, they're thriving, and they're embracing themself.
Congratulations, kid. It's a great new photo.
[ID: A recent photograph of R. Derek Black, with long curly red hair, wearing a floral collared shirt and a red cardigan, smiling for the camera.]
Discover insights into Identity Formation with psychFORM. Explore how LGBTQ umbrellas affect gay identities.
Abstract
This study examined developmental outcomes among gay male undergraduates within contemporary LGBTQ coalition structures on university campuses. A mixed-methods design was used to assess identity formation, perceived belonging, and psychological safety among N = 49 students (38 gay-identifying males; 11 transgender-identifying female-to-male students) at the University of Michigan across Winter and Spring 2024. Structured interviews and survey measures evaluated agency, authenticity, and relational security within coalition-based campus environments. Although LGBTQ discourse groups sexual and gender minorities under a unified sociopolitical umbrella, developmental theory suggests that sexual orientation and gender identity emerge from distinct psychological pathways with different mechanisms of consolidation (Erikson, 1968; McWilliams, 2011)
Findings indicate that gay male students experience conditional belonging when situated within a trans-centered LGBTQ identity hierarchy. 86% reported feeling pressured to align with trans political or ideological frameworks to maintain social acceptance, while 0% of transgender participants perceived such alignment as optional for coalition cohesion. Gay students additionally reported reduced perceived freedom to differentiate (84%) and anticipated social exclusion if they did not maintain visible alignment (78%). By contrast, transgender respondents reported no perceived threat of displacement and identified their identity category as central to coalition legitimacy.
The data show that this conditional structure results in agency erosion and premature foreclosure of identity development among gay students. Belonging is experienced as contingent on alignment, producing chronic self-monitoring and limiting conditions for autonomous selfauthorship. These results suggest that the current model of LGBTQ inclusion functions as a system of conditional belonging that impedes independent identity consolidation among gay men in university settings.
...
Balanced question pair:
1A: “Do you believe trans students have a shared right to define the meaning of ‘LGBTQ identity’ for the community as a whole?”
1B: “Do you believe individual subgroups (e.g., gay men) should independently define their own identity without trans mediation?”
...
Conclusion
The findings of this study establish that the current structure of LGBTQ coalition identity on university campuses produces a measurable developmental cost for gay male students. The pressure to align with a trans-centered identity framework functions not as affirmation but as a mechanism of conditional belonging, resulting in agency erosion, chronic vigilance, and identity foreclosure.
The climate of enforced ideological alignment does not promote safety; it substitutes compliance for autonomy. Gay students are not permitted to form identity through self-authorship, but instead adopt externally scripted identity roles in order to retain access to community. This foreclosure is relationally enforced and persists because the institution misinterprets the absence of dissent as evidence of support.
The harm is internal rather than discursive: developmental conditions required for individuation are suspended, and identity consolidation is replaced with role adherence. Belonging is contingent on ideological conformity, and the resulting silence is structurally rewarded as proof of inclusion. Gay identity, as a distinct developmental category, is displaced within a coalition architecture that centers trans identity as the sole source of legitimacy.
Therefore, the study demonstrates that the current model of LGBTQ inclusion on campus operates as a system of conditional belonging that is incompatible with autonomous identity development. Integrity fatigue is the clinical consequence of this structure: a state in which authenticity is chronically suppressed because the only available pathway to belonging requires its forfeiture.
==
The crux of this is that:
Gay male identity is not contingent upon external validation. Homosexuality is real. While "trans" identity is contingent upon external validation. That's why they're so militant about force-teaming: without the legitimacy of gay and bisexual men and women, "trans" identity evaporates.
Gay men feel socially pressured to endorse "trans" support that they don't believe in, and the result for them is a forfeiture of identity, especially as "trans" narcissism always takes centre stage. When was the last time you saw anything from the "LGBTQWERTY community" that was LGB oriented and didn't degenerate into into "trans" gobbledygook?
This is why LGB✂️QT+. You cannot destroy yourself or your identity for someone else. Especially when they openly hate you.
––
EDIT: How the fuck are people this retarded?
This took me less than 60 seconds to find with the help of Grok.
The performative self-victimization just seems to be a fetish at this point.
"Trace isn't real because theres no research on it!" Hmm.. I wonder why.
"I feel like I should be a [x] race." and it's always "You should love the race you were born as!", "You can't change your race.." "Your race is what the race you were born as!" "You can't change your race because it's in a different construct than gender." "*death threats.*"
TRAs: It's the way my brain is neurologically arranged that makes me my gender. It's how I just naturally gravitate toward these gendered things that makes me my gender. It's the metaphysical vibrations of my gendered soul, my immutable and innate, indescribable Gender Essence that makes me my gender.
Radfems: That's sexist. Gender is a system of social control based on sex. You can dress, act, and think however you want regardless of sex. Gender roles are not innate. Escaping the system that tells you your life must align with either gender role is good.
TRAs: OMG shut up you're literally such a Gender Essentialist!
