all 13 comments

[–]MarkTwainiac 12 insightful - 6 fun12 insightful - 5 fun13 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

Why own a vagina when you can lease? Vagina vacation rentals and time shares - they're the ticket!

[–]SpatOuttheKoolaid 11 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Two. This is totally not a Munchausen mommy!

[–]JulienMayfair 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Odds of randomly happening to have two TIF daughters vs. odds that this is a result of psychological/sexual abuse.

[–]bopomofodojo 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Third option: the mother's obsession with TQ++ pushing her probably-tomboyish daughters towards T coupled with the social contagion when the first one did it and got all the love and attention. It's abuse, but not necessarily those two, though I guess this does count as psychological abuse in some ways.

[–]Rage-Xion 10 insightful - 4 fun10 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

TeRfS aRe ReDuCiNg WoMeN tO GeNiTaLiA

[–]xandit 7 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

She could have gotten a better deal leasing the vaginas with a family plan.

[–]Aloudmeow 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

And if she’d bundled them with her home and car insurance. But seriously, how horrible is it these two kids are being exploited?

[–]FlippyKing 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"Owners".

Sorry, but there has been a point of view that saw liberalism as being invested in the commodification of desires that reclassifies them as rights or freedoms. The end goal then is to use money as a means to escape all bounds of nature or morality. One might not want to make a big deal out of morality, but when the bill society is running up entertaining this nonsense comes due, they will blame the victims just like they do in absolutely everything else. Such suspicions of it seems spot on.

People who say things like "vagina owners" place a value on ownership, and not on a human dignity we are all born with. There are at least three conversational ways of saying a similar idea: owners , born with, or just "have". The choice of using "owners" says so much about their world view, and I'd argue their morality. They also see "sex work" as something legitimate to pay someone for, and scoff if you dare ask if they'd be OK with their kids doing "sex work". This is always the kind of result we get when the "left" pretend they can be on the same side as the middle class, or when the middle class pretend they are part of any "left" in politics.

[–]JoeyJoeJoe 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Anyone playing word police and trying to pass themselves off as virtuous and "gentle" is a fascist.

I cannot stomach this Orwellian nonsense and will not participate in Newspeak or doublethink.

[–]kwallio 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Imani is such a fucking tool.

[–]filbs111 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Why do people assume her progeney are girls? Could be mum of some masterful lads not ready for commitment.

[–]ralph 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I mean, she says right there that they're "not female" so I think you must be right.

[–]sisterinsomnia 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Love those gentle reminders! The statement is only true IF and ONLY IF 'woman' has nothing to do with belonging to the female sex. So someone, somewhere changed the definition without any democratic consultation. So all women out there who regard themselves as women BECAUSE their sex is female have now their identities invalidated in order to validate the identities of a tiny group of transgender individuals with female bodies.