Such feeble excuse written upon this dark board of sanguine font. You think there will be forgiveness? You prostrate yourself with this apology in front of your peers? For what? Do not feed the beast of doubt but instead aggravate your confidence. Sip upon the taste of which is yours, erect yourself at the visage which gave you pause. That is the road of those who bleed of the azure.
Apology both accepted and refused at the same time your soul has been consigned to an opaque box with a flask of poison and a photon detector. Your punishment will be misunderstood by divulgators and this comment will be wrongfully cited by hollywood scientists for years to come.
> “Where is your honesty now, Sharer, the frankness you are so proud of? You fear me far more than I fear you.”
< "I fear for you. Some kinds of truth are too dangerous for children. Answer this first: Whose eyes do you see in mine, and whose in the mirror?"
She would also heavily deny the trans part at this point in time. Though also, even though she’s too over the top for me to take seriously, she spoke in a way that said she took herself seriously. For some reason the ‘Freak’ shattered that respect I had for her.
I love Juggernaut Star but I gotta agree, ‘Freak’ is not a very biblically-accurate-angelic thing to say. ‘Abomination’ might have worked better for her.
Primâs comb is meant to represent gentleness. Specifically how the gentleness required not to break the comb, is at odds with the unthinking violence of angels seeking to impose order.
Juggernaut Star is fighting for a sort of order â âan empty heavenâ, in White Chainâs eyes, is considered âcleanâ by the Thorns. And to that end, she rejects gentleness.
But itâs not Juggernaut Star carrying it in the first place. Maybe it shattering means that gentleness isnât an option for White Chain here, that she has no other option but to fight back. Or at least that sheâs going to?
Then again, is violence itself against Primâs idea of gentleness? She was a martial artist, after all. And survived, and then thrived, in a world where âviolence is inescapableâ.
It could be that a certain thoughtfulness allows for violence and gentleness to coexist, as paradoxical as that is. Meti wrote that, if you have complete awareness of every living being in your environment (and their love, hope, and aspirations), âOnly then are you qualified to be their annihilatorâ, so thereâs precedent for the idea that awareness can justify violence.
(Or maybe not. Prim did say âThe most powerful man has the capability to be violent, charismatic, or sovereign, all, but he chooses to be none of them, because if he does, he has become cruel, and a cruel man has lost all claim to powerâ. How much nuance does she allow for? Can someone do violent things without being a violent person? Taking Vigilant Gaze as an example, I think so)
When Prim told an angel to protect her comb, the conclusion to that story wasnât that the angel entirely stopped being violent. Only that thatâs when he first began to think for himself. Something that Juggernaut Star, given the authoritarian nature of the Thorns, likely hasnât realised she can do.
Maybe shattering the comb symbolises how indoctrinated she is.
This is so interesting. In that third panel it almost looks like White Chain is looking at the empty space where the comb was right before the gets stabbed in both arms.
Maybe she was contemplating all this between the moment of dodging the first strike her eye’s rolling back into her head from agony. She could also have her eyes on Michael, which is why Juggernaut Star is so toxic yuri angry in the fifth panel.
The comb represents angels breaking free from the four orders that Micheal uses to control the angels and keep them fighting each other, instead of his regime. Michael strives to keep Juggernaught Star enslaved to self-destructive beleifs, so destroying the comb reminds us that he has entrapped Juggs in his web of lies and coercive threats.
The comb of Prim was given to an angel who was violently punishing a man for a minor infraction, with the instruction to care for it with his life. Because the violent punishment would risk destroying the comb, the angel is unable to blindly follow their previous directive without disrespecting Prim’s divine command. This requires them to think for themselves for the first time, and thus hold their own opinion on how to best follow the law.
The comb represents kindness and love for the world they’re protecting, yes, but also individual morality: a deep and personal respect to the Law. Today, in the Concordance, it’s only worn by the Root Knights, the rare few who still uphold the full burden of their task. The Thorns embrace the law but reject creation, thus upholding the letter of the law, but not it’s spirit. The Petals embrace creation but reject the law, enjoying the world but not protecting it for other to share in their joy.
Since the very beginning of the comic, White Chains held Michael as a mentor and leader to the whole of the Concordance. They might’ve disagreed on many instances, but they were still at the same side. The destruction of the comb betrays not only Michael’s lack of respect for the angel’s ultimate task as The Preservers, and thus the deep meaning of the Old Law, but his hypocrisy: it demonstrates Prim’s lesson about acritical unexamined morality through the lens of his symbolic pulverization of White Chain’s individuality/comb; not realizing that his position stems from his own individuality, founded on his own interpretation of the Law and personal rejection of change. This is further emphasized by the words of Juggernaut Star in the last panel, whose individuality is being actively crushed by her loyalty to Michael. We know how similar her’s and WC’s angelic forms are, we know she’d be judged by Michael just as much a “freak” as WC.
When the comb last broke (KoS 9-121), it was because of White Chain’s unmeasured violence, and called her to find balance through kindness. Now it’s broken from violence suffered, not inflicted. It calls for balance through another path. Prim talked to the angel dispensing punishment and instilled in him kindness and moderation.
I wonder what would Prim, say to the punished man. We should not forget of the tale of the Mendicant Knight (KSBD 2-17), where YS-Prim wielded the very same Pattram Sword Hand as Juggernaut Star to inflict Universal Division upon her aggressor.
Are we about to find out just how much of a freak the heir of salami Dave really is?
What’s the prayer to prim for blasting your helpless opponent wit ki-rata?
You can identify into trans and cis too, independent of sex and gender. While it’s most common that cis and trans co-ordinate with the sex/gender combination I know some fabulous, fierce male sex, female gendered people who more closely identify with cisfemme than transfemme. It’s their choice and, as an ally, I support it.
That is not at all how that works. In any case Juggernaut Star is absolutely a self-repressing trans woman and her character makes no sense if sheâs actually secretly cis-identifying (what does that even mean?)
I prefer to defer to the lived experience of individuals and support however they identify, rather than forcing them to conform to my preconceived framework. It was eye opening and inspirational to learn new facts about how someone can be what the less open minded might impositionally label as ‘trans’ would self identify as cis as well as a gender that’s different from their sex.
I’ve also had people confidently tell me that trans individuals don’t exist and that only sex matters, which is clearly wrong too.
Thatâs literally what being trans means. Am I missing something? Is this a semantic argument? Being cis means your AGAB is the same as your identity. Being trans is when those things are different. This feels like a weird attempt at misguided reclamation or appropriation. I also donât think it serves trans people to compare trans erasure to⌠what, erasure of cis people? Because by your definition thatâs what this is (as you accept these people to be cis). Would really appreciate if you would not imply that cis erasure exists and is comparable in form or function to trans erasure. Thanks.
The idea that identity is essentially a synonym for lived experience is just absurd. The former is up to you. The latter isnât. This is just brainworms and I have no interest in erasing transness in this way.
Someone identifying as cis independent of their sex/gender combination doesn’t erase another person identifying as trans, that’s reminiscent of TERF language. I’m not making erasure comparisons in any direction, I don’t know where you came up with that.
And you have a wonderful day too. However you choose to identify and label is entirely up to you and I respect that but trans women can still be allies across the LGBTQQIP2SAA+ BIPOC spectrum. If you do not wish to be an ally to others, that’s entirely up to you and I respect that too.
15 Centuries Of Ponderous Consideration Makes Good Sandwich
Also, to counter a prior point; if we do not have some form of common classification system, the meaning of the labels degrades and they become pointless. If anyone can call themselves anything, calling yourself anything is nothing but pointless distinction.
He said theyâre cis but said I should be an ally to them and compared me saying thatâs bullshit to transphobes claiming I donât exist. Essentially told a trans woman she should be an ally to cis people. And they wonder why trans people are wary of cis âalliesâ sometimes.
I fear it is our unfortunate condition that we must conduct our metaphysics with respect to factors other than personal affect. Before we conduct the task of naming the world around us it is best to ask why these names exist. We must employ an instrumental ontology that must discard the feelings of some in the interests of other things such as clear communication. I do not feel anymore than you these categories have some manner of transcendental truth just because they have descriptive power but this doesn’t mean we can abandon all taxonomy as we need it to exist. One day we may abandon some of this language but as it stands it would be folly.
âŚI suppose where someone transfemme is AFAB (or thereabouts, perhaps due to being intersex or the result of unusual upbringing), they can end up with a lived experience so close to cis they feel the need to distinguish it from their gender identity. Or be in the same boat as bi-people, where one group says “AFAB means she’s cis” and another group says “sexâ gender means she’s trans”.
Still would make a lot more sense to explain why she identifies as âcisfemmeâ as a trans women, rather then to describe her as that and insist its an identity on top of gender and sex without further context.
Feels like Dan’s trolling a bit since they don’t explain jack.
Or doesnât understand the words they use. (Which is perhaps a bit rude to suggest but uncouth statements made towards strangers on the internet technically counts as prayer to pree Asema and so is allowed to angels.)
(This is why many of my more pedantic siblings can be found posting on Reddit.)
The two women I do know who identify this way haven’t explained it any further than them feeling like their gender identity sits more towards the cisfemme experience. I didn’t ask for more explanation because it seemed rude (akin to asking them to justify their existence).
Maybe we need more words. Just as male/female can refer to either sex or gender, cis/trans can be used with additional pre/suffixes to specify when it’s being used biologically or as a self-identifier.
I do understand how some people find this invalidating and I wish them all the best in finding peace but I think it’s better to move forwards with an open mind than to allow any one group to colonise a particular wordspace to the exclusion of others (e.g. TERFs claiming sole dominion over womanhood).
I haven’t contradicted anyone’s lived experience about themselves, I’m only broadening definitions by communicating other lived experiences. To give an example: I say, as a gay man that I love my partner and that us getting married is as meaningful as any hetero couple. That doesn’t contradict hetero marriage but people stuck in the past might feel like it does.
You can’t communicate lived experiences to broaden definitions if you don’t know the definitions or the experiences you’re communicating.
And, that doesn’t really sound quite as absolute as your firm claim was, which makes me think you’re doing a bit of freelance gender innovation.
Also! Every response you’ve made here ends with a rhetorical association between the prior poster and bigotry. Effective tool for making someone *feel* they might be in the wrong, regardless of your actual post’s contents. I don’t like that.
Honestly I can get too fascinated trying to piece together the reasons for friction in arguments like these, but I should probably drop it like the others. Are you ernest? Are you a bad actor? Did you get AI to write these? Only the birds can know.
Accepting people’s word about what goes on inside their own heads is reasonable. Letting people insist that we describe objective physical reality inaccurately, back to them, is mutually harmful.
Parroting a person’s delusions just to get along and avoid confrontation is actively bad for their mental health, especially if they are struggling with some kind of body dysmorphia. It is better to be hated than to do harm.
They don’t have sexes but they do have sex am I right? But if angles have gender they have sex as sex is gender. To elaborate our conception of sex was seemingly not produced from nature but rather gender applied to nature (where did our conception of nature come from?). Sex doesn’t exist in the sense that is an implicit feature of matter but rather is the metaphysical/political/social absorbing matter into itself. The features we use sexed terms to describe exist but the binary ontology we apply to them isn’t true because of this. Therefore (concordant and thorn) angles could in some sense be said to posses sex in the sense that they view their genderless gender as prediscursive and a function of the matter of their bodies (as they are of the pale flame of UN (the primordial masculine). However in the sense of biology as they are all completely sterile and lack genitals and as such lack sex.
Youâre correct, I admit I use separation between sex and gender more as a shorthand for people who Iâm not sure would otherwise get the concept. Probably a bad idea in the grand scope of things, I gain nothing by pretending sex is anything but gender applied to biology.
mmmmfffg.,,.
sorry
Apology not accepted and your soul has been consigned to Tartarus for three eternities, deviant.
Apology not accepted and become banished from this world to seek penance in the next, sinner.
apology accepted youre absolved of all crimes and youre doing great sweetie
Apology pending and your soul has been consigned to purgatory for 3-5 business days.
Apology not accepted, there is no need to apologize for honest truth
Is anyone else reminded of Maximillian from The Black Hole?
Too late for apologies, son. But don’t worry, you won’t live long enough to pay the cost in full.
Apology in processing queue, please wait for your assigned number #2,148,5E7,906 to be called.
Now serving: #37
apology not necessary
Such feeble excuse written upon this dark board of sanguine font. You think there will be forgiveness? You prostrate yourself with this apology in front of your peers? For what? Do not feed the beast of doubt but instead aggravate your confidence. Sip upon the taste of which is yours, erect yourself at the visage which gave you pause. That is the road of those who bleed of the azure.
Apology not expected. Please hold while I compose myself after this surprise.
Apology both accepted and refused at the same time your soul has been consigned to an opaque box with a flask of poison and a photon detector. Your punishment will be misunderstood by divulgators and this comment will be wrongfully cited by hollywood scientists for years to come.
đ
The abomination looked the monstrosity in the eye, and saw only its reflection in a different light.
> “Where is your honesty now, Sharer, the frankness you are so proud of? You fear me far more than I fear you.”
< "I fear for you. Some kinds of truth are too dangerous for children. Answer this first: Whose eyes do you see in mine, and whose in the mirror?"
repper 6jug
Takes one to know one
I BEEN WAITING FOR THE JUGGERNAUT STAR TO PAY OFF MY WHOLE LIFE
For real
The inner accusation and hatred, voiced and directed outward.
yes…ha ha ha…YES!
Yeah, she freaky. Now kiss. Or better yet, FU-
What’s the appeal of this?
big claws sexy angel demeaning top awoooga
Normally I wouldn’t question things like this, but Juggernaut Star is too silly and pathetic for me to see what some others are seeing.
Only in K6BD could the skeleton-motorcycle-riding flaming trans thorn angel who killed God be called “silly and pathetic”
Zoss was just some tough old man. Yisun is/was God. Juggernaut’s sinner bike, tea thing, funny outfit and aimless bloodlust were absolutely hilarious.
She would also heavily deny the trans part at this point in time. Though also, even though she’s too over the top for me to take seriously, she spoke in a way that said she took herself seriously. For some reason the ‘Freak’ shattered that respect I had for her.
I love Juggernaut Star but I gotta agree, ‘Freak’ is not a very biblically-accurate-angelic thing to say. ‘Abomination’ might have worked better for her.
To become Royalty is on some level to become God, or at least as close to it as mortals can reach.
Everyone is already God.
pathetic self-hatred is an important component of evil yuri
Pondering is wise.
Since when does Juggernaut’s armor have boobs? did they get someone to add boobs to it?
I think it’s just the angle, I don’t think it’s boob plate.
I think it’s meant to accentuate Juggernaut Star’s self hatred. You can also see a signs of a very feminine face beneath her helmet in the next panel.
with her bangs peeking thru the armor, girl yr not fooling anyone lmao
Matrix dodge!
Followed by spiky pain đ
That’s an… Interesting… Pose.
in jiu jitsu we call that top mount, it’s worth 3 points
fuck, I meant 4 points
I think the actual points don’t matter so much as it’s worth points at all. đ
They destroyed prims comb! Symbolism fans, analysis
Primâs comb is meant to represent gentleness. Specifically how the gentleness required not to break the comb, is at odds with the unthinking violence of angels seeking to impose order.
Juggernaut Star is fighting for a sort of order â âan empty heavenâ, in White Chainâs eyes, is considered âcleanâ by the Thorns. And to that end, she rejects gentleness.
But itâs not Juggernaut Star carrying it in the first place. Maybe it shattering means that gentleness isnât an option for White Chain here, that she has no other option but to fight back. Or at least that sheâs going to?
Then again, is violence itself against Primâs idea of gentleness? She was a martial artist, after all. And survived, and then thrived, in a world where âviolence is inescapableâ.
It could be that a certain thoughtfulness allows for violence and gentleness to coexist, as paradoxical as that is. Meti wrote that, if you have complete awareness of every living being in your environment (and their love, hope, and aspirations), âOnly then are you qualified to be their annihilatorâ, so thereâs precedent for the idea that awareness can justify violence.
(Or maybe not. Prim did say âThe most powerful man has the capability to be violent, charismatic, or sovereign, all, but he chooses to be none of them, because if he does, he has become cruel, and a cruel man has lost all claim to powerâ. How much nuance does she allow for? Can someone do violent things without being a violent person? Taking Vigilant Gaze as an example, I think so)
When Prim told an angel to protect her comb, the conclusion to that story wasnât that the angel entirely stopped being violent. Only that thatâs when he first began to think for himself. Something that Juggernaut Star, given the authoritarian nature of the Thorns, likely hasnât realised she can do.
Maybe shattering the comb symbolises how indoctrinated she is.
Mostly unrelated to all of that, I briefly misspelled Vigilant Gaze as Vigilante Gaze. Thatâs a funny mental image.
Juggernaut Star didn’t destroy the comb, Michael did.
Not sure how I got mixed up on that.
Well, similar reasoning probably still applies anyway.
So the lie is revealed. 2 Michael claimed to be fighting for Eternal Truth, but eternal truth does not require backstabbing to assert itself.
This is so interesting. In that third panel it almost looks like White Chain is looking at the empty space where the comb was right before the gets stabbed in both arms.
Maybe she was contemplating all this between the moment of dodging the first strike her eye’s rolling back into her head from agony. She could also have her eyes on Michael, which is why Juggernaut Star is so toxic yuri angry in the fifth panel.
this symbolizes that giant lasers are quite dangerous
I think you’re on to somthing, you should elaborate.
The comb represents angels breaking free from the four orders that Micheal uses to control the angels and keep them fighting each other, instead of his regime. Michael strives to keep Juggernaught Star enslaved to self-destructive beleifs, so destroying the comb reminds us that he has entrapped Juggs in his web of lies and coercive threats.
The comb of Prim was given to an angel who was violently punishing a man for a minor infraction, with the instruction to care for it with his life. Because the violent punishment would risk destroying the comb, the angel is unable to blindly follow their previous directive without disrespecting Prim’s divine command. This requires them to think for themselves for the first time, and thus hold their own opinion on how to best follow the law.
The comb represents kindness and love for the world they’re protecting, yes, but also individual morality: a deep and personal respect to the Law. Today, in the Concordance, it’s only worn by the Root Knights, the rare few who still uphold the full burden of their task. The Thorns embrace the law but reject creation, thus upholding the letter of the law, but not it’s spirit. The Petals embrace creation but reject the law, enjoying the world but not protecting it for other to share in their joy.
Since the very beginning of the comic, White Chains held Michael as a mentor and leader to the whole of the Concordance. They might’ve disagreed on many instances, but they were still at the same side. The destruction of the comb betrays not only Michael’s lack of respect for the angel’s ultimate task as The Preservers, and thus the deep meaning of the Old Law, but his hypocrisy: it demonstrates Prim’s lesson about acritical unexamined morality through the lens of his symbolic pulverization of White Chain’s individuality/comb; not realizing that his position stems from his own individuality, founded on his own interpretation of the Law and personal rejection of change. This is further emphasized by the words of Juggernaut Star in the last panel, whose individuality is being actively crushed by her loyalty to Michael. We know how similar her’s and WC’s angelic forms are, we know she’d be judged by Michael just as much a “freak” as WC.
When the comb last broke (KoS 9-121), it was because of White Chain’s unmeasured violence, and called her to find balance through kindness. Now it’s broken from violence suffered, not inflicted. It calls for balance through another path. Prim talked to the angel dispensing punishment and instilled in him kindness and moderation.
I wonder what would Prim, say to the punished man. We should not forget of the tale of the Mendicant Knight (KSBD 2-17), where YS-Prim wielded the very same Pattram Sword Hand as Juggernaut Star to inflict Universal Division upon her aggressor.
don’t do this to my girl đ
Juggernaut seems to have become an even bigger baby.
Now the question is, is she a coughing baby?
Where I come from that’s a compliment, 6-jug
KISS
Are we about to find out just how much of a freak the heir of salami Dave really is?
What’s the prayer to prim for blasting your helpless opponent wit ki-rata?
I hope it’s a short prayer, cuz time’s a-wastin!
Freak? Look who’s talking, you celestial barbecue tool! >:=p>
sez the “””cisgender man”””” with the boob plates đĽ´
You can identify into trans and cis too, independent of sex and gender. While it’s most common that cis and trans co-ordinate with the sex/gender combination I know some fabulous, fierce male sex, female gendered people who more closely identify with cisfemme than transfemme. It’s their choice and, as an ally, I support it.
That is not at all how that works. In any case Juggernaut Star is absolutely a self-repressing trans woman and her character makes no sense if sheâs actually secretly cis-identifying (what does that even mean?)
Also, angels donât have sexes.
I prefer to defer to the lived experience of individuals and support however they identify, rather than forcing them to conform to my preconceived framework. It was eye opening and inspirational to learn new facts about how someone can be what the less open minded might impositionally label as ‘trans’ would self identify as cis as well as a gender that’s different from their sex.
I’ve also had people confidently tell me that trans individuals don’t exist and that only sex matters, which is clearly wrong too.
Thatâs literally what being trans means. Am I missing something? Is this a semantic argument? Being cis means your AGAB is the same as your identity. Being trans is when those things are different. This feels like a weird attempt at misguided reclamation or appropriation. I also donât think it serves trans people to compare trans erasure to⌠what, erasure of cis people? Because by your definition thatâs what this is (as you accept these people to be cis). Would really appreciate if you would not imply that cis erasure exists and is comparable in form or function to trans erasure. Thanks.
The idea that identity is essentially a synonym for lived experience is just absurd. The former is up to you. The latter isnât. This is just brainworms and I have no interest in erasing transness in this way.
Someone identifying as cis independent of their sex/gender combination doesn’t erase another person identifying as trans, that’s reminiscent of TERF language. I’m not making erasure comparisons in any direction, I don’t know where you came up with that.
Let’s all be inclusive allies.
Iâm not an ally. Iâm a trans woman and youâre either an idiot or a troll. Have a nice day.
And you have a wonderful day too. However you choose to identify and label is entirely up to you and I respect that but trans women can still be allies across the LGBTQQIP2SAA+ BIPOC spectrum. If you do not wish to be an ally to others, that’s entirely up to you and I respect that too.
Yis-Un, I didn’t know it had gotten that long.
Also, to counter a prior point; if we do not have some form of common classification system, the meaning of the labels degrades and they become pointless. If anyone can call themselves anything, calling yourself anything is nothing but pointless distinction.
He said theyâre cis but said I should be an ally to them and compared me saying thatâs bullshit to transphobes claiming I donât exist. Essentially told a trans woman she should be an ally to cis people. And they wonder why trans people are wary of cis âalliesâ sometimes.
Weak bait mate.
I fear it is our unfortunate condition that we must conduct our metaphysics with respect to factors other than personal affect. Before we conduct the task of naming the world around us it is best to ask why these names exist. We must employ an instrumental ontology that must discard the feelings of some in the interests of other things such as clear communication. I do not feel anymore than you these categories have some manner of transcendental truth just because they have descriptive power but this doesn’t mean we can abandon all taxonomy as we need it to exist. One day we may abandon some of this language but as it stands it would be folly.
âŚI suppose where someone transfemme is AFAB (or thereabouts, perhaps due to being intersex or the result of unusual upbringing), they can end up with a lived experience so close to cis they feel the need to distinguish it from their gender identity. Or be in the same boat as bi-people, where one group says “AFAB means she’s cis” and another group says “sexâ gender means she’s trans”.
Still would make a lot more sense to explain why she identifies as âcisfemmeâ as a trans women, rather then to describe her as that and insist its an identity on top of gender and sex without further context.
Feels like Dan’s trolling a bit since they don’t explain jack.
Or doesnât understand the words they use. (Which is perhaps a bit rude to suggest but uncouth statements made towards strangers on the internet technically counts as prayer to pree Asema and so is allowed to angels.)
(This is why many of my more pedantic siblings can be found posting on Reddit.)
The two women I do know who identify this way haven’t explained it any further than them feeling like their gender identity sits more towards the cisfemme experience. I didn’t ask for more explanation because it seemed rude (akin to asking them to justify their existence).
Maybe we need more words. Just as male/female can refer to either sex or gender, cis/trans can be used with additional pre/suffixes to specify when it’s being used biologically or as a self-identifier.
I do understand how some people find this invalidating and I wish them all the best in finding peace but I think it’s better to move forwards with an open mind than to allow any one group to colonise a particular wordspace to the exclusion of others (e.g. TERFs claiming sole dominion over womanhood).
You’re using these friends as an example to contradict trans people’s lived experiences, and it is not your place to do so as a cis person.
I haven’t contradicted anyone’s lived experience about themselves, I’m only broadening definitions by communicating other lived experiences. To give an example: I say, as a gay man that I love my partner and that us getting married is as meaningful as any hetero couple. That doesn’t contradict hetero marriage but people stuck in the past might feel like it does.
You can’t communicate lived experiences to broaden definitions if you don’t know the definitions or the experiences you’re communicating.
And, that doesn’t really sound quite as absolute as your firm claim was, which makes me think you’re doing a bit of freelance gender innovation.
Also! Every response you’ve made here ends with a rhetorical association between the prior poster and bigotry. Effective tool for making someone *feel* they might be in the wrong, regardless of your actual post’s contents. I don’t like that.
Honestly I can get too fascinated trying to piece together the reasons for friction in arguments like these, but I should probably drop it like the others. Are you ernest? Are you a bad actor? Did you get AI to write these? Only the birds can know.
Accepting people’s word about what goes on inside their own heads is reasonable. Letting people insist that we describe objective physical reality inaccurately, back to them, is mutually harmful.
Parroting a person’s delusions just to get along and avoid confrontation is actively bad for their mental health, especially if they are struggling with some kind of body dysmorphia. It is better to be hated than to do harm.
They don’t have sexes but they do have sex am I right? But if angles have gender they have sex as sex is gender. To elaborate our conception of sex was seemingly not produced from nature but rather gender applied to nature (where did our conception of nature come from?). Sex doesn’t exist in the sense that is an implicit feature of matter but rather is the metaphysical/political/social absorbing matter into itself. The features we use sexed terms to describe exist but the binary ontology we apply to them isn’t true because of this. Therefore (concordant and thorn) angles could in some sense be said to posses sex in the sense that they view their genderless gender as prediscursive and a function of the matter of their bodies (as they are of the pale flame of UN (the primordial masculine). However in the sense of biology as they are all completely sterile and lack genitals and as such lack sex.
Youâre correct, I admit I use separation between sex and gender more as a shorthand for people who Iâm not sure would otherwise get the concept. Probably a bad idea in the grand scope of things, I gain nothing by pretending sex is anything but gender applied to biology.
Juggernaut Star seems to hold an intense envy of White Chain’s courage to seize a future she was too cowardly to reach out for herself.
oh dear. ive started a Discussion. this was a throwaway joke but im glad yall are having fun(?)
I do believe this is a highly unideal scenario.
Counterpoint: It’s a great scenario for the Ki-Rata Headbutt of Face Annihilation.
I disagree, I would call being pinned down and pierced by Juggernaut Star a scenario most ideal
Freak: n. ËfrÄk pl. freaks
One who does not conform to the bullshit that binds the speaker. A compliment proclaiming awe.
woah calm down Evil Samus
biiig oof. Yeah, things aren’t looking too good here. Things are always darkest before the morn, but how that morn should come to pass in this case…
I fear in terms of violence out heroins are outmatched. At least Gog is having fun.
So far, “that morn” is passing like last night’s food poisoning: painfully, violently, explosively, and messily.
I wonder what we’ll get for a bidet?
The item being auctioned is sold to the highest bidet…
There’s been TOO MUCH necklace violence