Re: BIDEN: "Trump Won't Denounce Political Violence!"

In article <v0btdb$2hs0l$1@dont-email.me>,
  moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
 

On 4/24/2024 2:59 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

In article <v0bjfr$2fjhq$1@dont-email.me>,
   moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>

On 4/24/2024 1:47 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

In article <v09tc9$23ll3$1@dont-email.me>,
    moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>

On 4/23/2024 9:36 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

On 4/23/2024 3:50 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

On Apr 23, 2024 at 12:14:14 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
>

On 4/23/2024 1:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

On Apr 23, 2024 at 9:55:17 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
>

On 4/22/2024 11:09 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

On Apr 20, 2024 at 1:49:53 PM PDT, "moviePig" <never@nothere.com>
wrote:

 

People hired *because* they're trans aren't "replacing women"...

>
When a troon is the 'brand ambassador' for Nike's women's
sportswear line, yes he has taken a job that would normally go
to a woman.
>
Then there's all the beauty pageants who have recently been
selecting troons as the winners. Again, an accolade (and
subsequent endorsement opportunity) that rightly belongs to a
woman if the title is "Miss" Anything.

>
The appeal of novelty is always marketable, and always brief.

>
Says the guy who just two levels up was claiming that "trans people
are indeed 'marginalized' by the public as too unsavory for
commercialization" and aren't "within shouting distance of the
mainstream".
>
What's more mainstream than Nike, Victoria's Secret, Sports
Illustrated, and Miss America?

>
And none of those mainstream businesses is above virtue-signaling and
sensationalism.

>
So even when I give you the cite(s) you asked for, you immediately
dismiss them as 'doesn't count' because of virtue signaling. It's
always a rigged game with you people, isn't it?

>
Afaics, you cited "new" exposures, which don't replace "established"
ones, because they're more of sideshow than a product pitch.

>
Which was always going to be the case because society has only lost its
collective mind over this nonsense relatively recently. There was never
going to be a cite from the 1950s of a major corporation hiring a troon
to rep them.
>
As I said, rigged game.

>
Only if you're playing one. Apart from whatever satisfaction your
indignance may afford you, there's no reason to think that the male and
female demographics are going to be supplanted (or, if you will,
*trans*planted) any time soon. And they're what drives hiring, here.

>
Meanwhile, real women should just shut up and take one for the team
while this 'progressive' lunacy runs its course?

>
Until real men start switching teams, real women don't give a shit.

 All evidence to contrary. Enough real women

the troons have had to come up with a denigrating slur to smear them and
have lobbied to have laws passed to criminalize them.