jirbling rake wrote: Wed Apr 01, 2026 10:43 pm

"Transvestite"

“Transvestite” is an old term that often misrepresents trans people. Historically, it most commonly refers to cisgender men who dress in feminine clothing. Today, that community prefers the term “cross-dresser” and finds “transvestite” to be insulting.

Defamatory terms, including “tranny” and “she-male” are highly inappropriate slurs, used to discriminate against and dehumanize trans people.

From https://www.prismfl.org/post/outdated-trans-terms

Yep. That checks out. Thank you for doing the leg work.

I am not prepared to walk through coals over this and would never refer to a transgender person as a transvestite or crossdresser, but I thought that was something else entirely. Aren’t there people who might, purely for the purpose of kink or sexual gratification, present as a different gender? And isn’t there a word for them?

I have seen assholes describe all trans people that way. That isn’t what I’m talking about.

llllllllllllllllllll wrote: I am not prepared to walk through coals over this and would never refer to a transgender person as a transvestite or crossdresser, but I thought that was something else entirely. Aren’t there people who might, purely for the purpose of kink or sexual gratification, present as a different gender? And isn’t there a word for them?

I have seen assholes describe all trans people that way. That isn’t what I’m talking about.

jirbling rake wrote:

"Transvestite"

“Transvestite” is an old term that often misrepresents trans people. Historically, it most commonly refers to cisgender men who dress in feminine clothing. Today, that community prefers the term “cross-dresser” and finds “transvestite” to be insulting.

Defamatory terms, including “tranny” and “she-male” are highly inappropriate slurs, used to discriminate against and dehumanize trans people.

From https://www.prismfl.org/post/outdated-trans-terms

emphasis for clarity. not attacking anyone, but sharing what that community has to say about its preferences. It's an ever-shifting landscape of terminology. I find it helpful when the correct terminology is checked, shared, clarified, for any culture, from sources within that culture. I wasn't sure either, but here it seems Noem's husband would be a cross-dresser, if the story is true

The best thing we can do is not give a fuck about any of that shit (the kink and how people express themselves sexually). I always think if I wouldn't want to justify why I'm making fun of it to my kid, it is probably a super clear sign that it's the wrong thing to do. We want a culture free of sexual shame and we are heading in the other direction again.

Calling out hypocrisy has never for a second worked in any appreciable way. "Republican sexcapades" sort of stuff a la Cliff Schechter et al is very cringey in retrospect.

Exceptions (always) for actual violation of consent and abuse, and support of abusers, tacit or otherwise.

It also distracts from the Noem/Lewandowski graft investigation.

Is the K. Noem/B. Noem/C. Lewandowski drama newsworthy as a kink? Nope. In fact, it seems kinda tame by those standards.

Is it newsworthy (and amusing) b/c it looks hypocritical while Noem has been all about the old-school family values (and xeonphobic "othering") of her party? Sorta. I'm also guessing she was not exactly a champion of queer culture back in South Dakota (raunchy ranches?), but I could be wrong.

Meanwhile, NYC still does not have a balanced budget past its deadline (exactly like during the Eric Adams years, hooray!) and the City Council has basically told Mamdani to go fuck himself w/his not-so-progressive proposals to increase taxes on all NYC homeowners and/or lower the 50% ceiling on estate taxes for anything valued at over 750K (which equals almost anyone passing any property to their kids paying a rate of 50% tax—b/c fair or not, most NYC real estate is now worth over $750 in 2026, even if you paid $75K on it decades ago, my totally cheap, shitty, rapidly decaying 1950s one-bedroom apartment included).

City Council of NYC wrote: NEW YORK, NY – Today, the New York City Council published its response to Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s Preliminary Budget proposal, offering an alternative budgeting path for Fiscal Years (FY) 2026 and 2027. The response provides the necessary resources to fund spending priorities without increasing taxes on property owners and renters, reducing funding for critical services, or drawing down the City’s reserves.

Suffice, to say, our snow-shoveling mayor seems pretty unhappy about this and is acting like he's had a rude awakening. So it looks like he's now proposing... austerity and service cuts! To be continued...

jimmy spako wrote: Thu Apr 02, 2026 6:25 am The best thing we can do is not give a fuck about any of that shit (the kink and how people express themselves sexually). I always think if I wouldn't want to justify why I'm making fun of it to my kid, it is probably a super clear sign that it's the wrong thing to do. We want a culture free of sexual shame and we are heading in the other direction again.

Calling out hypocrisy has never for a second worked in any appreciable way. "Republican sexcapades" sort of stuff a la Cliff Schechter et al is very cringey in retrospect.

Exceptions (always) for actual violation of consent and abuse, and support of abusers, tacit or otherwise.

I don't think it's a silver bullet that defeats them or anything. It's more for us. These fucks preach so hard about this sanctimonious Christian model for who gets to fuck, how and why, and it's all about this godly family model. We all know that it's unrealistic and unhealthy. When we stumble on something like this it's just nice to check reality for a sec.

Those weirdos in that reality TV, puritan family, the Duggars filled hours of television talking about purity (my wife became fascinated with their cult). Now two of their sons have been prosecuted for sex crimes.

Not comparing the two cause Mr. Noem should feel free to enjoy life with consenting adults (although he and his wife need to come to some agreements) which is not at all like those Duggar boys who have directly and indirectly contributed to harming children. It just feels nice to get a sociological check on their culture war. "Don't shame us motherfucker, we know about you".

One thing that's missing from the conversation is misogyny and how cis men who were raised and/or find solace in the digital-era see women as ridiculous, sexually-aggressive, cartoonish creatures. It's almost like blackface where black men were portrayed by white guys as brutishly ignorant, libidinous, hulking versions of a black man. I'm beginning to think that we might run the risk of normalizing psychologically damaging behaviors as fun aberrant kinky ones. This isn't your old-school crossdressing.

Maybe he just really likes boobs that he's willing to fake wear them. He's a boob man.

losthighway wrote: Thu Apr 02, 2026 7:50 am It just feels nice to get a sociological check on their culture war. "Don't shame us motherfucker, we know about you".

That's it! Right on the money. Language and semantics has always been the tool of division, not inclusion. But the issue is not to open the tent for both sides, it's to dismiss it from the start.