On 09 May 2026, Carney <x@y.com> posted some news:10tn2gf$1ancb$1@paganini.bofh.team:
On 5/3/2026 11:55 AM, Bradley K. Sherman wrote:
"I want to tell you what I really think
The United States’ federal prison system no longer offers
gender-affirming care to incarcerated trans people under a new Bureau
of Prisons policy.
Signed into effect by Bureau of Prisons (BOP) director Billy Marshall
on February 19, the policy prohibits the bureau from providing
gender-affirming surgeries or hormone replacement therapy to federal
inmates diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Inmates who were previously
receiving hormone medications will be forcibly tapered off of them and
given a new individualized treatment plan that “may include
psychotherapy, group counseling, psychiatric services, and
psychotropic medications.â€
Prisons will also no longer support gender-affirming social
accommodations for trans inmates, including breast padding, binders,
makeup, wigs, butt padding, and undergarments, per the policy.
https://www.them.us/story/federal-prisons-are-beginning-to-force-trans-
inmates-off-hormone-therapy
Taxpayers should not be paying for that kind of silly shit.
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or breast
padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with cocks
and balls.
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with cocks
and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with cocks
and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
On 09 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> posted some news:69ffbe7c$0$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
There's a difference between natural oddities that occur because
of inbreeding and the self-induced due to poor decisions and lack of familial support.
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote <46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
There's a difference between natural oddities that occur because
of inbreeding and the self-induced due to poor decisions and lack of familial support.
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered the
reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is because they
are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, which normally
converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in this
part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one that
has inspired "treatment'.
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:Yet we do...
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism
of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered
the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is
because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase,
which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in
this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare
elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one
that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don’t fit the more common binary are about as rare as
redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who
they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they’re somehow
broken.
Seems common sense to me, and I don’t even have red hair!And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift if
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
On 10 May 2026 18:04:58 GMT
Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism
of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered
the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is
because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase,
which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in
this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare
elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one
that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don’t fit the more common binary are about as rare as
redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who
they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they’re somehow
broken.
Yet we do...
Seems common sense to me, and I don’t even have red hair!
And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift if
one is a pitcher.
Bill Oaks <memphis@hillbillies.org> wrote:
On 09 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> posted some news:69ffbe7c$0$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40⤯PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
There's a difference between natural oddities that occur because
of inbreeding and the self-induced due to poor decisions and lack of familial support.
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
On May 10, 2026 at 9:57:33AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote <20260510105733.0cded532@z-z>:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
Redheads are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
I do not have red hair. I think redheads should not be belittled for having red hair.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
Keep in mind that nature is not restricted to a simple binary just to make some people more comfortable.
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in this
part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one that
has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as redheads.
We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who they are. We
should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow broken.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
On May 10, 2026 at 9:57:33 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote <20260510105733.0cded532@z-z>:
Of course they are:On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
Redheads are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
I do not have red hair. I think redheads shouldAnd yet the English are famous for doing that.
not be belittled for having red hair.
Nature isn't brewing these trans cocktails.2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
Keep in mind that nature is not restricted to a simple binary just to
make some people more comfortable.
On May 10, 2026 at 11:07:18AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote <20260510120718.28052f2c@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:04:58 GMT
Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism
of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered
the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is
because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase,
which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in
this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare
elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one
that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as
redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who
they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow
broken.
Yet we do...
No. You might... "we" do not.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift if
one is a pitcher.
Sure... another uncommon trait that does not mean one is any less "valid" as a
person.
Does mean using common (right handed) scissors is a pain!
On May 10, 2026 at 11:07:18 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote <20260510120718.28052f2c@z-z>:Societal we - prevalent in the UK:
On 10 May 2026 18:04:58 GMT
Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100%
natural trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight
women with cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated
hermaphrodism of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered
the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is
because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase,
which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in
this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare
elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one
that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don’t fit the more common binary are about as rare as
redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who
they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they’re somehow
broken.
Yet we do...
No. You might... "we" do not.
True.Seems common sense to me, and I don’t even have red hair!
And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift
if one is a pitcher.
Sure... another uncommon trait that does not mean one is any less
"valid" as a person.
Does mean using common (right handed) scissors is a pain!Indeed!
Keep in mind that nature is not restricted to a simple binary just
to make some people more comfortable.
Dick = Male
Pussy = Female.
Trans women are really men.
In article <6a0031b7$0$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Bill Oaks <memphis@hillbillies.org> wrote:
On 09 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> posted some
news:69ffbe7c$0$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
There's a difference between natural oddities that occur because
of inbreeding and the self-induced due to poor decisions and lack of
familial support.
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
You idiots have a name for anyone that doesn't agree with
you.
In article <6a00c98c$0$77130$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 9:57:33 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510105733.0cded532@z-z>:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
Redheads are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
I do not have red hair. I think redheads should not be belittled for having >> red hair.
Sounds like you're the only person doing that.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
Keep in mind that nature is not restricted to a simple binary just to make >> some people more comfortable.
Dick = Male
Pussy = Female.
Trans women are really men.
In article <6a00c8ca$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism of a >>> sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered the
reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is because they >>> are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, which normally
converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in this
part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one that
has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as redheads. >> We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who they are. We
should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow broken.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
You have no argument. A redheaded trans woman is really
just a man.
On 10 May 2026 18:08:12 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 10, 2026 at 9:57:33 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510105733.0cded532@z-z>:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
Redheads are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
Of course they are:
AI Overview
Naturally red hair is rare, occurring in only
1–2% of the global population. It is most common in individuals with Northern or Northwestern European ancestry, where the prevalence
increases to 2–6%.
I do not have red hair. I think redheads should
not be belittled for having red hair.
And yet the English are famous for doing that.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
Keep in mind that nature is not restricted to a simple binary just to
make some people more comfortable.
Nature isn't brewing these trans cocktails.
But...if we're heading for a global crisis and population collapse--
having less breeders may be part of the larger plan.
In article <6a00d17d$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 11:07:18 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510120718.28052f2c@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:04:58 GMT
Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism
of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered
the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is
because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase,
which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in
this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare
elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one
that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as
redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who
they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow
broken.
Yet we do...
No. You might... "we" do not.
There is no "we" in your sour bubble.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift if
one is a pitcher.
Sure... another uncommon trait that does not mean one is any less "valid" as a
person.
Does mean using common (right handed) scissors is a pain!
Maybe they aren't acting like something there really
aren't.
On 10 May 2026 18:42:05 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 10, 2026 at 11:07:18 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510120718.28052f2c@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:04:58 GMT
Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100%
natural trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight
women with cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated
hermaphrodism of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered
the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is
because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase,
which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in
this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare
elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one
that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don’t fit the more common binary are about as rare as
redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who
they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they’re somehow
broken.
Yet we do...
No. You might... "we" do not.
Societal we - prevalent in the UK:
AI Overview
"Gingerism" is a documented form of prejudice
and bullying in the UK, where people with red hair are teased or
harassed, sometimes dismissed as harmless "banter" but often considered
a form of social bullying. It is a long-standing stereotype, with
redheads often facing derogatory nicknames like "carrot tops" or jokes
about having "no soul".Key details regarding this phenomenon:Cultural Context: While and Ireland have the highest concentrations of red hair,
they also have a history of stigmatizing it.Impact: A 2014 study
indicated that over 90% of men with red hair in the UK reported being targeted by bullying.Nature of Bullying: Jokes often stem from
stereotypes, with some observers arguing it is the "last socially
acceptable form of bullying".Discrimination Debate: Some advocacy
groups, like the Anti-Bullying Alliance, have discussed whether this,
at its worst, should be categorized as a hate crime, though this is debated.Changing Views: Although still prevalent, some feel that
attitudes are gradually changing.This type of discrimination is often
seen as a form of "othering," as red hair is a distinct, uncommon
minority trait.
Seems common sense to me, and I don’t even have red hair!
And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift
if one is a pitcher.
Sure... another uncommon trait that does not mean one is any less
"valid" as a person.
True.
Does mean using common (right handed) scissors is a pain!
Indeed!
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
On May 10, 2026 at 2:04:38PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446aa0ce55a063ef98b68e@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00c98c$0$77130$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 9:57:33 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510105733.0cded532@z-z>:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
Redheads are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
I do not have red hair. I think redheads should not be belittled for having
red hair.
Sounds like you're the only person doing that.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
Keep in mind that nature is not restricted to a simple binary just to make >> some people more comfortable.
Dick = Male
Pussy = Female.
Trans women are really men.
Why don't you go with the science instead of a second grade understanding?
On May 10, 2026 at 2:05:58PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446aa1258a6dae2298b690@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00c8ca$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism of a >>> sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered the >>> reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is because they >>> are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, which normally
converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in this
part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one that
has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as redheads. >> We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who they are. We
should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow broken.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
You have no argument. A redheaded trans woman is really
just a man.
Are they blonde or brunette? Fit them into a binary so you are comfortable.
Bet that point went over your head.
On May 10, 2026 at 2:06:23PM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote <20260510150623.2c65133b@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:08:12 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 10, 2026 at 9:57:33AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510105733.0cded532@z-z>:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
Redheads are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
Of course they are:
AI Overview
Naturally red hair is rare, occurring in only
1?2% of the global population. It is most common in individuals with Northern or Northwestern European ancestry, where the prevalence
increases to 2?6%.
They are uncommon. Sure. Just like folks in the LGBTQ+ community.
I do not have red hair. I think redheads should
not be belittled for having red hair.
And yet the English are famous for doing that.
I do not back that.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
Keep in mind that nature is not restricted to a simple binary just to
make some people more comfortable.
Nature isn't brewing these trans cocktails.
Nature is not limited to the binary you can handle. Are brunettes blonde or brunette in your world?
But...if we're heading for a global crisis and population collapse
having less breeders may be part of the larger plan.
On May 10, 2026 at 2:07:29PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446aa17f1b531f4898b691@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00d17d$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 11:07:18 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510120718.28052f2c@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:04:58 GMT
Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism >>>>> of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered >>>>> the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is
because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase,
which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in
this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare
elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one
that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as
redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who
they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow
broken.
Yet we do...
No. You might... "we" do not.
There is no "we" in your sour bubble.
I do not join you in ignorance. Not sour about it, just a fact. I go with evidence.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift if
one is a pitcher.
Sure... another uncommon trait that does not mean one is any less "valid" as a
person.
Does mean using common (right handed) scissors is a pain!
Maybe they aren't acting like something there really
aren't.
Maybe you are acting like the bigot you are.
On May 10, 2026 at 2:08:39PM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote <20260510150839.54ea3ddb@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:42:05 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 10, 2026 at 11:07:18AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510120718.28052f2c@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:04:58 GMT
Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100%
natural trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight >>>>>>>>> women with cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated
hermaphrodism of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered >>>>> the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is
because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase,
which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in
this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare
elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one
that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as
redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who
they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow
broken.
Yet we do...
No. You might... "we" do not.
Societal we - prevalent in the UK:
AI Overview
"Gingerism" is a documented form of prejudice
and bullying in the UK, where people with red hair are teased or
harassed, sometimes dismissed as harmless "banter" but often considered
a form of social bullying. It is a long-standing stereotype, with
redheads often facing derogatory nicknames like "carrot tops" or jokes about having "no soul".Key details regarding this phenomenon:Cultural Context: While and Ireland have the highest concentrations of red hair, they also have a history of stigmatizing it.Impact: A 2014 study
indicated that over 90% of men with red hair in the UK reported being targeted by bullying.Nature of Bullying: Jokes often stem from
stereotypes, with some observers arguing it is the "last socially acceptable form of bullying".Discrimination Debate: Some advocacy
groups, like the Anti-Bullying Alliance, have discussed whether this,
at its worst, should be categorized as a hate crime, though this is debated.Changing Views: Although still prevalent, some feel that
attitudes are gradually changing.This type of discrimination is often
seen as a form of "othering," as red hair is a distinct, uncommon
minority trait.
There are bigots against any group with a small percentage of the population. Good point.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift
if one is a pitcher.
Sure... another uncommon trait that does not mean one is any less
"valid" as a person.
True.
Does mean using common (right handed) scissors is a pain!
Indeed!
Amazing how many do not know this.
On May 10, 2026 at 2:01:07PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446aa001cf13e36098b68c@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0031b7$0$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Bill Oaks <memphis@hillbillies.org> wrote:
On 09 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> posted some >>> news:69ffbe7c$0$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40⤯PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
There's a difference between natural oddities that occur because
of inbreeding and the self-induced due to poor decisions and lack of
familial support.
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
You idiots have a name for anyone that doesn't agree with
you.
It is a standard English word. Bigot. And it is the correct one.
On 2026-05-10 12:57 p.m., Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
In article <6a00f81a$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:04:38 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa0ce55a063ef98b68e@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00c98c$0$77130$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 9:57:33 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510105733.0cded532@z-z>:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
Redheads are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
I do not have red hair. I think redheads should not be belittled for having
red hair.
Sounds like you're the only person doing that.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
Keep in mind that nature is not restricted to a simple binary just to make >>>> some people more comfortable.
Dick = Male
Pussy = Female.
Trans women are really men.
Why don't you go with the science instead of a second grade understanding?
Any idiot knows this. You get fucked in the ass by a man
in a dress.
In article <6a00f7f9$0$44102$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:01:07 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa001cf13e36098b68c@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0031b7$0$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Bill Oaks <memphis@hillbillies.org> wrote:
On 09 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> posted some >>>>> news:69ffbe7c$0$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
There's a difference between natural oddities that occur because
of inbreeding and the self-induced due to poor decisions and lack of >>>>> familial support.
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
You idiots have a name for anyone that doesn't agree with
you.
It is a standard English word. Bigot. And it is the correct one.
No, it's what you use when we don't agree with you
"tolerant" liberals.
In article <6a00fcc5$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
crude@sausa.ge says...
On 2026-05-10 12:57 p.m., Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
Well it might be the only love he can get.
On 2026-05-10 12:57 p.m., Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
In article <6a00f81a$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:04:38 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa0ce55a063ef98b68e@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00c98c$0$77130$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 9:57:33 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510105733.0cded532@z-z>:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
Redheads are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
I do not have red hair. I think redheads should not be belittled for having
red hair.
Sounds like you're the only person doing that.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
Keep in mind that nature is not restricted to a simple binary just to make >>>> some people more comfortable.
Dick = Male
Pussy = Female.
Trans women are really men.
Why don't you go with the science instead of a second grade understanding?
Any idiot knows this. You get fucked in the ass by a man
in a dress.
In article <6a00f845$0$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:05:58 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa1258a6dae2298b690@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00c8ca$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism of a >>>>> sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered the >>>>> reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is because they >>>>> are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, which normally
converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in this >>>>> part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one that >>>>> has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as redheads. >>>> We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who they are. We
should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow broken.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
You have no argument. A redheaded trans woman is really
just a man.
Are they blonde or brunette? Fit them into a binary so you are comfortable. >>
Bet that point went over your head.
The only point needed is the fact that trans women are
really men.
In article <6a00f890$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:06:23 PM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510150623.2c65133b@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:08:12 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 10, 2026 at 9:57:33 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510105733.0cded532@z-z>:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
Redheads are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
Of course they are:
AI Overview
Naturally red hair is rare, occurring in only
1?2% of the global population. It is most common in individuals with
Northern or Northwestern European ancestry, where the prevalence
increases to 2?6%.
They are uncommon. Sure. Just like folks in the LGBTQ+ community.
"uncommon" is being nice.
I do not have red hair. I think redheads should
not be belittled for having red hair.
And yet the English are famous for doing that.
I do not back that.
They don't care and they outnumber you.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
Keep in mind that nature is not restricted to a simple binary just to
make some people more comfortable.
Nature isn't brewing these trans cocktails.
Nature is not limited to the binary you can handle. Are brunettes blonde or >> brunette in your world?
Women or men ones?
--
But...if we're heading for a global crisis and population collapse
having less breeders may be part of the larger plan.
In article <6a00f8e4$0$21$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:08:39 PM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510150839.54ea3ddb@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:42:05 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 10, 2026 at 11:07:18 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510120718.28052f2c@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:04:58 GMT
Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% >>>>>>>>>>> natural trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight >>>>>>>>>>> women with cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated
hermaphrodism of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered >>>>>>> the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is
because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, >>>>>>> which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in >>>>>>> this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare
elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one >>>>>>> that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as
redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who >>>>>> they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow
broken.
Yet we do...
No. You might... "we" do not.
Societal we - prevalent in the UK:
AI Overview
"Gingerism" is a documented form of prejudice
and bullying in the UK, where people with red hair are teased or
harassed, sometimes dismissed as harmless "banter" but often considered
a form of social bullying. It is a long-standing stereotype, with
redheads often facing derogatory nicknames like "carrot tops" or jokes
about having "no soul".Key details regarding this phenomenon:Cultural
Context: While and Ireland have the highest concentrations of red hair,
they also have a history of stigmatizing it.Impact: A 2014 study
indicated that over 90% of men with red hair in the UK reported being
targeted by bullying.Nature of Bullying: Jokes often stem from
stereotypes, with some observers arguing it is the "last socially
acceptable form of bullying".Discrimination Debate: Some advocacy
groups, like the Anti-Bullying Alliance, have discussed whether this,
at its worst, should be categorized as a hate crime, though this is
debated.Changing Views: Although still prevalent, some feel that
attitudes are gradually changing.This type of discrimination is often
seen as a form of "othering," as red hair is a distinct, uncommon
minority trait.
There are bigots against any group with a small percentage of the population.
Good point.
Butt fucker learned a new word.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift
if one is a pitcher.
Sure... another uncommon trait that does not mean one is any less
"valid" as a person.
True.
Does mean using common (right handed) scissors is a pain!
Indeed!
Amazing how many do not know this.
Most don't really care as long as you don't run with them.
In article <6a00f8b5$0$23$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:07:29 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa17f1b531f4898b691@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00d17d$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 11:07:18 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510120718.28052f2c@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:04:58 GMT
Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism >>>>>>> of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered >>>>>>> the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is
because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, >>>>>>> which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in >>>>>>> this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare
elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one >>>>>>> that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as
redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who >>>>>> they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow
broken.
Yet we do...
No. You might... "we" do not.
There is no "we" in your sour bubble.
I do not join you in ignorance. Not sour about it, just a fact. I go with
evidence.
That trans women are really men?
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift if >>>>> one is a pitcher.
Sure... another uncommon trait that does not mean one is any less "valid" as a
person.
Does mean using common (right handed) scissors is a pain!
Maybe they aren't acting like something there really
aren't.
Maybe you are acting like the bigot you are.
You idiots always have a name for someone if they don't
agree with you. The fact is no matter how pretty you are
if you were born with a dick you are a male.
On May 10, 2026 at 2:06:23 PM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote <20260510150623.2c65133b@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:08:12 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 10, 2026 at 9:57:33 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510105733.0cded532@z-z>:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100%
natural trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight
women with cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by
design.
Redheads are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
Of course they are:
Yes.AI Overview
Naturally red hair is rare, occurring in only
1–2% of the global population. It is most common in individuals with Northern or Northwestern European ancestry, where the prevalence
increases to 2–6%.
They are uncommon. Sure. Just like folks in the LGBTQ+ community.
Me neither, but it's their thing.
I do not have red hair. I think redheads should
not be belittled for having red hair.
And yet the English are famous for doing that.
I do not back that.
Chemical alteration of genitals is a recent medical process, not a
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
Keep in mind that nature is not restricted to a simple binary just
to make some people more comfortable.
Nature isn't brewing these trans cocktails.
Nature is not limited to the binary you can handle. Are brunettes
blonde or brunette in your world?
But...if we're heading for a global crisis and population collapse
having less breeders may be part of the larger plan.
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
You idiots have a name for anyone that doesn't agree with
you.
It is a standard English word. Bigot. And it is the correct one.
No, it's what you use when we don't agree with you
"tolerant" liberals.
On May 10, 2026 at 2:08:39 PM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote <20260510150839.54ea3ddb@z-z>:It's somewhat in the vein of their intense provincialism where
On 10 May 2026 18:42:05 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 10, 2026 at 11:07:18 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510120718.28052f2c@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:04:58 GMT
Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs >>>>>>>>>> or breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100%
natural trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight >>>>>>>>> women with cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated
hermaphrodism of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she
discovered the reason they don't have male genitalia when they
are born is because they are deficient in an enzyme called
5-alpha-reductase, which normally converts testosterone into
dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in
this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare
elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one
that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don’t fit the more common binary are about as rare as
redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide
who they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they’re
somehow broken.
Yet we do...
No. You might... "we" do not.
Societal we - prevalent in the UK:
AI Overview
"Gingerism" is a documented form of prejudice
and bullying in the UK, where people with red hair are teased or
harassed, sometimes dismissed as harmless "banter" but often
considered a form of social bullying. It is a long-standing
stereotype, with redheads often facing derogatory nicknames like
"carrot tops" or jokes about having "no soul".Key details regarding
this phenomenon:Cultural Context: While and Ireland have the
highest concentrations of red hair, they also have a history of stigmatizing it.Impact: A 2014 study indicated that over 90% of men
with red hair in the UK reported being targeted by bullying.Nature
of Bullying: Jokes often stem from stereotypes, with some observers
arguing it is the "last socially acceptable form of bullying".Discrimination Debate: Some advocacy groups, like the Anti-Bullying Alliance, have discussed whether this, at its worst,
should be categorized as a hate crime, though this is
debated.Changing Views: Although still prevalent, some feel that
attitudes are gradually changing.This type of discrimination is
often seen as a form of "othering," as red hair is a distinct,
uncommon minority trait.
There are bigots against any group with a small percentage of the
population. Good point.
Seems common sense to me, and I don’t even have red hair!
And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift
if one is a pitcher.
Sure... another uncommon trait that does not mean one is any less
"valid" as a person.
True.
Does mean using common (right handed) scissors is a pain!
Indeed!
Amazing how many do not know this.
On 2026-05-10 12:57 p.m., Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
You see hims as a catcher, not a pitcher?
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
I tend to concur.
On 10 May 2026 21:30:12 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote
No. You might... "we" do not.
Societal we - prevalent in the UK:
AI Overview
"Gingerism" is a documented form of prejudice
and bullying in the UK, where people with red hair are teased or
harassed, sometimes dismissed as harmless "banter" but often
considered a form of social bullying. It is a long-standing
stereotype, with redheads often facing derogatory nicknames like
"carrot tops" or jokes about having "no soul".Key details regarding
this phenomenon:Cultural Context: While and Ireland have the
highest concentrations of red hair, they also have a history of
stigmatizing it.Impact: A 2014 study indicated that over 90% of men
with red hair in the UK reported being targeted by bullying.Nature
of Bullying: Jokes often stem from stereotypes, with some observers
arguing it is the "last socially acceptable form of
bullying".Discrimination Debate: Some advocacy groups, like the
Anti-Bullying Alliance, have discussed whether this, at its worst,
should be categorized as a hate crime, though this is
debated.Changing Views: Although still prevalent, some feel that
attitudes are gradually changing.This type of discrimination is
often seen as a form of "othering," as red hair is a distinct,
uncommon minority trait.
There are bigots against any group with a small percentage of the
population. Good point.
It's somewhat in the vein of their intense provincialism where
accents are concerned.
On 2026-05-10 6:16 p.m., Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a00f7f9$0$44102$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:01:07 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa001cf13e36098b68c@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0031b7$0$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Bill Oaks <memphis@hillbillies.org> wrote:
On 09 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> posted some >>>>>> news:69ffbe7c$0$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
There's a difference between natural oddities that occur because
of inbreeding and the self-induced due to poor decisions and lack of >>>>>> familial support.
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
You idiots have a name for anyone that doesn't agree with
you.
It is a standard English word. Bigot. And it is the correct one.
No, it's what you use when we don't agree with you
"tolerant" liberals.
"Believe everything we say or else we will label you! Our labels are
more powerful than anything in the world. They are like kryptonite to Superman... unless you don't mind the label, at which point our ultimate weapon is completely impotent."
Don't let the Prescott faggot and Baked Anus believe that their labels
have any effect. Take pride in being called a bigot, an islamophobe, a racist, a misogynist, a Nazi or whatever else these limp-wristed
leftists throw at you.
On Sun, 10 May 2026 17:46:45 -0400
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-10 12:57 p.m., Eldon Chance wrote:You see hims as a catcher, not a pitcher?
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
I tend to concur.
In article <6a00c8ca$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism of a >>> sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered the
reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is because they >>> are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, which normally
converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in this
part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one that
has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as redheads. >> We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who they are. We
should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow broken.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
You have no argument. A redheaded trans woman is really
my wildest dream.
On May 10, 2026 at 3:10:12PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446ab034279cb7c098b698@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f845$0$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:05:58 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa1258a6dae2298b690@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00c8ca$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism of a
sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered the >>>>> reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is because they
are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, which normally >>>>> converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in this >>>>> part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one that >>>>> has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as redheads.
We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who they are. We >>>> should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow broken.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
You have no argument. A redheaded trans woman is really
just a man.
Are they blonde or brunette? Fit them into a binary so you are comfortable.
Bet that point went over your head.
The only point needed is the fact that trans women are
really men.
A claim that is not backed by evidence / science.
I tend to go with evidence over you who goes with emotion. We will not see eye
to eye.
On May 10, 2026 at 3:11:53PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446ab09274dd34d998b699@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f890$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:06:23 PM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510150623.2c65133b@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:08:12 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 10, 2026 at 9:57:33 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510105733.0cded532@z-z>:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design. >>>>>
Redheads are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
Of course they are:
AI Overview
Naturally red hair is rare, occurring in only
1?2% of the global population. It is most common in individuals with
Northern or Northwestern European ancestry, where the prevalence
increases to 2?6%.
They are uncommon. Sure. Just like folks in the LGBTQ+ community.
"uncommon" is being nice.
It is being accurate. Being in that community, or being red headed, is rare. Nothing wrong with being in a rare group.
I do not have red hair. I think redheads should
not be belittled for having red hair.
And yet the English are famous for doing that.
I do not back that.
They don't care and they outnumber you.
And?
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
Keep in mind that nature is not restricted to a simple binary just to >>>> make some people more comfortable.
Nature isn't brewing these trans cocktails.
Nature is not limited to the binary you can handle. Are brunettes blonde or
brunette in your world?
Women or men ones?
Either... or nonbinary ones. But you will not answer the question.
But...if we're heading for a global crisis and population collapse
having less breeders may be part of the larger plan.
On May 10, 2026 at 3:14:03PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446ab111ae48fa1c98b69a@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f8b5$0$23$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:07:29 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa17f1b531f4898b691@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00d17d$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 11:07:18 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510120718.28052f2c@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:04:58 GMT
Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism >>>>>>> of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered >>>>>>> the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is >>>>>>> because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, >>>>>>> which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone. >>>>>>>
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in >>>>>>> this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare
elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one >>>>>>> that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as >>>>>> redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who >>>>>> they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow >>>>>> broken.
Yet we do...
No. You might... "we" do not.
There is no "we" in your sour bubble.
I do not join you in ignorance. Not sour about it, just a fact. I go with >> evidence.
That trans women are really men?
That trans women are trans women.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift if >>>>> one is a pitcher.
Sure... another uncommon trait that does not mean one is any less "valid" as a
person.
Does mean using common (right handed) scissors is a pain!
Maybe they aren't acting like something there really
aren't.
Maybe you are acting like the bigot you are.
You idiots always have a name for someone if they don't
agree with you. The fact is no matter how pretty you are
if you were born with a dick you are a male.
It is an accurate term. And you are the one using bigoted offenses terms.
Notice you just make claims based on proclamation. You have no scientific evidence to back this.
On May 10, 2026 at 3:15:13PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446ab15ce4a75fab98b69b@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f8e4$0$21$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:08:39 PM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510150839.54ea3ddb@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:42:05 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 10, 2026 at 11:07:18 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510120718.28052f2c@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:04:58 GMT
Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% >>>>>>>>>>> natural trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight >>>>>>>>>>> women with cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated
hermaphrodism of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered >>>>>>> the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is >>>>>>> because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, >>>>>>> which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone. >>>>>>>
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in >>>>>>> this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare
elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one >>>>>>> that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as >>>>>> redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who >>>>>> they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow >>>>>> broken.
Yet we do...
No. You might... "we" do not.
Societal we - prevalent in the UK:
AI Overview
"Gingerism" is a documented form of prejudice
and bullying in the UK, where people with red hair are teased or
harassed, sometimes dismissed as harmless "banter" but often considered >>> a form of social bullying. It is a long-standing stereotype, with
redheads often facing derogatory nicknames like "carrot tops" or jokes >>> about having "no soul".Key details regarding this phenomenon:Cultural
Context: While and Ireland have the highest concentrations of red hair, >>> they also have a history of stigmatizing it.Impact: A 2014 study
indicated that over 90% of men with red hair in the UK reported being
targeted by bullying.Nature of Bullying: Jokes often stem from
stereotypes, with some observers arguing it is the "last socially
acceptable form of bullying".Discrimination Debate: Some advocacy
groups, like the Anti-Bullying Alliance, have discussed whether this,
at its worst, should be categorized as a hate crime, though this is
debated.Changing Views: Although still prevalent, some feel that
attitudes are gradually changing.This type of discrimination is often
seen as a form of "othering," as red hair is a distinct, uncommon
minority trait.
There are bigots against any group with a small percentage of the population.
Good point.
Butt fucker learned a new word.
It is not a new word.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift >>>>> if one is a pitcher.
Sure... another uncommon trait that does not mean one is any less
"valid" as a person.
True.
Does mean using common (right handed) scissors is a pain!
Indeed!
Amazing how many do not know this.
Most don't really care as long as you don't run with them.
:)
On May 10, 2026 at 3:36:10PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote <6a01085a$6$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 6:16 p.m., Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a00f7f9$0$44102$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:01:07 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa001cf13e36098b68c@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0031b7$0$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Bill Oaks <memphis@hillbillies.org> wrote:
On 09 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> posted some
news:69ffbe7c$0$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40⤯PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
There's a difference between natural oddities that occur because >>>>>> of inbreeding and the self-induced due to poor decisions and lack of >>>>>> familial support.
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
You idiots have a name for anyone that doesn't agree with
you.
It is a standard English word. Bigot. And it is the correct one.
No, it's what you use when we don't agree with you
"tolerant" liberals.
"Believe everything we say or else we will label you! Our labels are
more powerful than anything in the world. They are like kryptonite to Superman... unless you don't mind the label, at which point our ultimate weapon is completely impotent."
Don't let the Prescott faggot and Baked Anus believe that their labels
have any effect. Take pride in being called a bigot, an islamophobe, a racist, a misogynist, a Nazi or whatever else these limp-wristed
leftists throw at you.
That is not at all accurate. It is if you act like a bigot it makes sense to honestly note this. It is not labeling you, it is identifying you. And, sure, you can take pride in your bigotry. If you really are proud to be so insecure and irrational that is on you.
But what you are not going to do is make me feel bad for noting your lack of tolerance tied to your insecurities. There is nothing wrong with being honest about your harm.
On May 10, 2026 at 3:16:16PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446ab1945d70566098b69c@usnews.blocknews.net>:
...
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
You idiots have a name for anyone that doesn't agree with
you.
It is a standard English word. Bigot. And it is the correct one.
No, it's what you use when we don't agree with you
"tolerant" liberals.
The Paradox of Tolerance is real.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
-----
The paradox of tolerance is a philosophical concept suggesting
that if a society extends tolerance to those who are intolerant,
it risks enabling the eventual dominance of intolerance, thereby
undermining the very principle of tolerance.
-----
There is nothing to "tolerate" about someone being gay or bi or trans or Jewish or red-headed or left-handed or white or black or Christian or Muslim or tall or short or ... you get the idea (I hope). These are not things that are harming others.
There is no reason to "tolerate" bigotry. That IS harmful. It should be called
out. That helps to mitigate the harm.
When you bigots whine you are not being tolerated where you targets are, you are saying your HARM should be seen as equal to non-harm. It is an irrational view. It is an entitled view. But that really is at the heart of bigotry -- you think you are entitled, but you are also insecure. You feel you have to put others down for no good reason other than to feel better about yourself (and to back your tribalism and scapegoating).
On May 10, 2026 at 2:46:45PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote <6a00fcc5$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 12:57 p.m., Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
Your bigotry is the real issue.
On May 10, 2026 at 3:09:32PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446ab005d2bb8b9b98b697@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f81a$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:04:38 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa0ce55a063ef98b68e@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00c98c$0$77130$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 9:57:33 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510105733.0cded532@z-z>:
Redheads are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design. >>>>
I do not have red hair. I think redheads should not be belittled for having
red hair.
Sounds like you're the only person doing that.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
Keep in mind that nature is not restricted to a simple binary just to make
some people more comfortable.
Dick = Male
Pussy = Female.
Trans women are really men.
Why don't you go with the science instead of a second grade understanding?
Any idiot knows this. You get fucked in the ass by a man
in a dress.
Do not follow. Just making random bigoted attacks?
On May 10, 2026 at 3:46:39PM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote <20260510164639.4a2dcce5@z-z>:
...
You see hims as a catcher, not a pitcher?
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
I tend to concur.
Interesting you spend time picturing men having sex.
In article <6a0108cc$0$27$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:10:12 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446ab034279cb7c098b698@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f845$0$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:05:58 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa1258a6dae2298b690@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00c8ca$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism of a
sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered the >>>>>>> reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is because they
are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, which normally >>>>>>> converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in this >>>>>>> part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare elsewhere." >>>>>>>
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one that >>>>>>> has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as redheads.
We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who they are. We >>>>>> should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow broken.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
You have no argument. A redheaded trans woman is really
just a man.
Are they blonde or brunette? Fit them into a binary so you are comfortable.
Bet that point went over your head.
The only point needed is the fact that trans women are
really men.
A claim that is not backed by evidence / science.
I tend to go with evidence over you who goes with emotion. We will not see eye
to eye.
If that "trans woman" has a dick it's a male.
In article <6a010964$0$13959$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:14:03 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446ab111ae48fa1c98b69a@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f8b5$0$23$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:07:29 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa17f1b531f4898b691@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00d17d$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 11:07:18 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510120718.28052f2c@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:04:58 GMT
Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns. >>>>>>>>>>>
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism >>>>>>>>> of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered >>>>>>>>> the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is >>>>>>>>> because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, >>>>>>>>> which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone. >>>>>>>>>
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in >>>>>>>>> this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare
elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one >>>>>>>>> that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as >>>>>>>> redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who >>>>>>>> they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow >>>>>>>> broken.
Yet we do...
No. You might... "we" do not.
There is no "we" in your sour bubble.
I do not join you in ignorance. Not sour about it, just a fact. I go with >>>> evidence.
That trans women are really men?
That trans women are trans women.
With dicks. That makes them a male.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift if >>>>>>> one is a pitcher.
Sure... another uncommon trait that does not mean one is any less "valid" as a
person.
Does mean using common (right handed) scissors is a pain!
Maybe they aren't acting like something there really
aren't.
Maybe you are acting like the bigot you are.
You idiots always have a name for someone if they don't
agree with you. The fact is no matter how pretty you are
if you were born with a dick you are a male.
It is an accurate term. And you are the one using bigoted offenses terms.
Notice you just make claims based on proclamation. You have no scientific
evidence to back this.
Any idiot knows if you have a dick you are a male.
In article <6a010f50$0$21$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:36:10 PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote
<6a01085a$6$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 6:16 p.m., Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a00f7f9$0$44102$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:01:07 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa001cf13e36098b68c@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0031b7$0$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Bill Oaks <memphis@hillbillies.org> wrote:
On 09 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> posted some
news:69ffbe7c$0$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote >>>>>>>>> <46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
There's a difference between natural oddities that occur because >>>>>>>> of inbreeding and the self-induced due to poor decisions and lack of >>>>>>>> familial support.
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
You idiots have a name for anyone that doesn't agree with
you.
It is a standard English word. Bigot. And it is the correct one.
No, it's what you use when we don't agree with you
"tolerant" liberals.
"Believe everything we say or else we will label you! Our labels are
more powerful than anything in the world. They are like kryptonite to
Superman... unless you don't mind the label, at which point our ultimate >>> weapon is completely impotent."
Don't let the Prescott faggot and Baked Anus believe that their labels
have any effect. Take pride in being called a bigot, an islamophobe, a
racist, a misogynist, a Nazi or whatever else these limp-wristed
leftists throw at you.
That is not at all accurate. It is if you act like a bigot it makes sense to >> honestly note this. It is not labeling you, it is identifying you. And, sure,
you can take pride in your bigotry. If you really are proud to be so insecure
and irrational that is on you.
But what you are not going to do is make me feel bad for noting your lack of >> tolerance tied to your insecurities. There is nothing wrong with being honest
about your harm.
You're gay because you let a trans woman fuck you.
In article <6a010a81$0$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:16:16 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446ab1945d70566098b69c@usnews.blocknews.net>:
...
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
You idiots have a name for anyone that doesn't agree with
you.
It is a standard English word. Bigot. And it is the correct one.
No, it's what you use when we don't agree with you
"tolerant" liberals.
The Paradox of Tolerance is real.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
-----
The paradox of tolerance is a philosophical concept suggesting
that if a society extends tolerance to those who are intolerant,
it risks enabling the eventual dominance of intolerance, thereby
undermining the very principle of tolerance.
-----
There is nothing to "tolerate" about someone being gay or bi or trans or
Jewish or red-headed or left-handed or white or black or Christian or Muslim >> or tall or short or ... you get the idea (I hope). These are not things that >> are harming others.
There is no reason to "tolerate" bigotry. That IS harmful. It should be called
out. That helps to mitigate the harm.
When you bigots whine you are not being tolerated where you targets are, you >> are saying your HARM should be seen as equal to non-harm. It is an irrational
view. It is an entitled view. But that really is at the heart of bigotry -- >> you think you are entitled, but you are also insecure. You feel you have to >> put others down for no good reason other than to feel better about yourself >> (and to back your tribalism and scapegoating).
Trans women are really men.
In article <6a010899$0$19$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:46:45 PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote
<6a00fcc5$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 12:57 p.m., Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
Your bigotry is the real issue.
Us not agreeing with you isn't bigotry.
In article <6a0108af$0$19$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:09:32 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446ab005d2bb8b9b98b697@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f81a$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
Any idiot knows this. You get fucked in the ass by a man
On May 10, 2026 at 2:04:38 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa0ce55a063ef98b68e@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00c98c$0$77130$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 9:57:33 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510105733.0cded532@z-z>:
Redheads are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design. >>>>>>
I do not have red hair. I think redheads should not be belittled for having
red hair.
Sounds like you're the only person doing that.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
Keep in mind that nature is not restricted to a simple binary just to make
some people more comfortable.
Dick = Male
Pussy = Female.
Trans women are really men.
Why don't you go with the science instead of a second grade understanding? >>>
in a dress.
Do not follow. Just making random bigoted attacks?
Just stating facts.
In article <6a010c9d$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:46:39 PM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510164639.4a2dcce5@z-z>:
...
You see hims as a catcher, not a pitcher?
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
I tend to concur.
Interesting you spend time picturing men having sex.
Interesting YOU actually do it.
On May 10, 2026 at 10:07:18PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446b11ef48d7796c98b69f@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0108cc$0$27$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:10:12 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446ab034279cb7c098b698@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f845$0$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:05:58 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa1258a6dae2298b690@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00c8ca$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism of a
sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered the
reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is because they
are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, which normally >>>>>>> converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in this >>>>>>> part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare elsewhere." >>>>>>>
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one that >>>>>>> has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as redheads.
We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who they are. We >>>>>> should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow broken.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
You have no argument. A redheaded trans woman is really
just a man.
Are they blonde or brunette? Fit them into a binary so you are comfortable.
Bet that point went over your head.
The only point needed is the fact that trans women are
really men.
A claim that is not backed by evidence / science.
I tend to go with evidence over you who goes with emotion. We will not see eye
to eye.
If that "trans woman" has a dick it's a male.
So you keep saying -- with no evidence or support.
On May 10, 2026 at 10:09:19PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446b126533964bf998b6a1@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a010964$0$13959$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:14:03 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446ab111ae48fa1c98b69a@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f8b5$0$23$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:07:29 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa17f1b531f4898b691@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00d17d$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 11:07:18 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510120718.28052f2c@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:04:58 GMT
Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote >>>>>>>>>> <46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns. >>>>>>>>>>>
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women. >>>>>>>>>>
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism >>>>>>>>> of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered >>>>>>>>> the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is >>>>>>>>> because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, >>>>>>>>> which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone. >>>>>>>>>
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in >>>>>>>>> this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare
elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one >>>>>>>>> that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as >>>>>>>> redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who >>>>>>>> they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow >>>>>>>> broken.
Yet we do...
No. You might... "we" do not.
There is no "we" in your sour bubble.
I do not join you in ignorance. Not sour about it, just a fact. I go with
evidence.
That trans women are really men?
That trans women are trans women.
With dicks. That makes them a male.
So you say with no evidence.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift if >>>>>>> one is a pitcher.
Sure... another uncommon trait that does not mean one is any less "valid" as a
person.
Does mean using common (right handed) scissors is a pain!
Maybe they aren't acting like something there really
aren't.
Maybe you are acting like the bigot you are.
You idiots always have a name for someone if they don't
agree with you. The fact is no matter how pretty you are
if you were born with a dick you are a male.
It is an accurate term. And you are the one using bigoted offenses terms. >>
Notice you just make claims based on proclamation. You have no scientific >> evidence to back this.
Any idiot knows if you have a dick you are a male.
Claims by proclamation are not the same as claims by evidence.
On May 10, 2026 at 10:11:29PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446b12f092404eb98b6a3@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a010f50$0$21$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:36:10 PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote
<6a01085a$6$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 6:16 p.m., Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a00f7f9$0$44102$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:01:07 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa001cf13e36098b68c@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0031b7$0$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Bill Oaks <memphis@hillbillies.org> wrote:
On 09 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> posted some
news:69ffbe7c$0$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40⤯PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote >>>>>>>>> <46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns. >>>>>>>>>>
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
There's a difference between natural oddities that occur because >>>>>>>> of inbreeding and the self-induced due to poor decisions and lack of >>>>>>>> familial support.
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
You idiots have a name for anyone that doesn't agree with
you.
It is a standard English word. Bigot. And it is the correct one.
No, it's what you use when we don't agree with you
"tolerant" liberals.
"Believe everything we say or else we will label you! Our labels are
more powerful than anything in the world. They are like kryptonite to
Superman... unless you don't mind the label, at which point our ultimate >>> weapon is completely impotent."
Don't let the Prescott faggot and Baked Anus believe that their labels >>> have any effect. Take pride in being called a bigot, an islamophobe, a >>> racist, a misogynist, a Nazi or whatever else these limp-wristed
leftists throw at you.
That is not at all accurate. It is if you act like a bigot it makes sense to
honestly note this. It is not labeling you, it is identifying you. And, sure,
you can take pride in your bigotry. If you really are proud to be so insecure
and irrational that is on you.
But what you are not going to do is make me feel bad for noting your lack of
tolerance tied to your insecurities. There is nothing wrong with being honest
about your harm.
You're gay because you let a trans woman fuck you.
Incorrect.
In article <6a016c91$0$27$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 10:07:18PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446b11ef48d7796c98b69f@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0108cc$0$27$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:10:12 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446ab034279cb7c098b698@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f845$0$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:05:58 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa1258a6dae2298b690@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00c8ca$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns. >>>>>>>>>>>
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism of a
sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered the
reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is because they
are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, which normally >>>>>>>>> converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in this >>>>>>>>> part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare elsewhere." >>>>>>>>>
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one that >>>>>>>>> has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as redheads.
We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who they are. We >>>>>>>> should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow broken.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
You have no argument. A redheaded trans woman is really
just a man.
Are they blonde or brunette? Fit them into a binary so you are comfortable.
Bet that point went over your head.
The only point needed is the fact that trans women are
really men.
A claim that is not backed by evidence / science.
I tend to go with evidence over you who goes with emotion. We will not see eye
to eye.
If that "trans woman" has a dick it's a male.
So you keep saying -- with no evidence or support.
None needed. Any idiot knows a person with a dick is male.
Except for the one you keep up your ass.
On May 10, 2026 at 10:12:30PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446b132bde5b8b1498b6a4@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a010a81$0$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:16:16 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446ab1945d70566098b69c@usnews.blocknews.net>:
...
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
You idiots have a name for anyone that doesn't agree with
you.
It is a standard English word. Bigot. And it is the correct one.
No, it's what you use when we don't agree with you
"tolerant" liberals.
The Paradox of Tolerance is real.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
-----
The paradox of tolerance is a philosophical concept suggesting
that if a society extends tolerance to those who are intolerant,
it risks enabling the eventual dominance of intolerance, thereby
undermining the very principle of tolerance.
-----
There is nothing to "tolerate" about someone being gay or bi or trans or >> Jewish or red-headed or left-handed or white or black or Christian or Muslim
or tall or short or ... you get the idea (I hope). These are not things that
are harming others.
There is no reason to "tolerate" bigotry. That IS harmful. It should be called
out. That helps to mitigate the harm.
When you bigots whine you are not being tolerated where you targets are, you
are saying your HARM should be seen as equal to non-harm. It is an irrational
view. It is an entitled view. But that really is at the heart of bigotry --
you think you are entitled, but you are also insecure. You feel you have to
put others down for no good reason other than to feel better about yourself
(and to back your tribalism and scapegoating).
Trans women are really men.
You keep saying that as if repetition gives it power.
On May 10, 2026 at 10:13:30PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446b1365dc5420c798b6a5@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a010899$0$19$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:46:45 PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote
<6a00fcc5$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 12:57 p.m., Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
Your bigotry is the real issue.
Us not agreeing with you isn't bigotry.
Agreed. Your bigotry, though, is bigotry.
On May 10, 2026 at 10:14:10PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446b138b4b75018a98b6a6@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0108af$0$19$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:09:32 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446ab005d2bb8b9b98b697@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f81a$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:04:38 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa0ce55a063ef98b68e@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00c98c$0$77130$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 9:57:33 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510105733.0cded532@z-z>:
Redheads are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design. >>>>>>
I do not have red hair. I think redheads should not be belittled for having
red hair.
Sounds like you're the only person doing that.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
Keep in mind that nature is not restricted to a simple binary just to make
some people more comfortable.
Dick = Male
Pussy = Female.
Trans women are really men.
Why don't you go with the science instead of a second grade understanding?
Any idiot knows this. You get fucked in the ass by a man
in a dress.
Do not follow. Just making random bigoted attacks?
Just stating facts.
Then support these "facts". But you never will.
On May 10, 2026 at 10:16:11PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote <MPG.446b14054d92423498b6a7@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a010c9d$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:46:39 PM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510164639.4a2dcce5@z-z>:
...
You see hims as a catcher, not a pitcher?
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
I tend to concur.
Interesting you spend time picturing men having sex.
Interesting YOU actually do it.
In your mind... perhaps. That is a YOU issue.
In article <6a010f50$0$21$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:36:10 PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote
<6a01085a$6$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 6:16 p.m., Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a00f7f9$0$44102$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:01:07 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa001cf13e36098b68c@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0031b7$0$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Bill Oaks <memphis@hillbillies.org> wrote:
On 09 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> posted some
news:69ffbe7c$0$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote >>>>>>>>> <46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
There's a difference between natural oddities that occur because >>>>>>>> of inbreeding and the self-induced due to poor decisions and lack of >>>>>>>> familial support.
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
You idiots have a name for anyone that doesn't agree with
you.
It is a standard English word. Bigot. And it is the correct one.
No, it's what you use when we don't agree with you
"tolerant" liberals.
"Believe everything we say or else we will label you! Our labels are
more powerful than anything in the world. They are like kryptonite to
Superman... unless you don't mind the label, at which point our ultimate >>> weapon is completely impotent."
Don't let the Prescott faggot and Baked Anus believe that their labels
have any effect. Take pride in being called a bigot, an islamophobe, a
racist, a misogynist, a Nazi or whatever else these limp-wristed
leftists throw at you.
That is not at all accurate. It is if you act like a bigot it makes sense to >> honestly note this. It is not labeling you, it is identifying you. And, sure,
you can take pride in your bigotry. If you really are proud to be so insecure
and irrational that is on you.
But what you are not going to do is make me feel bad for noting your lack of >> tolerance tied to your insecurities. There is nothing wrong with being honest
about your harm.
You're gay because you let a trans woman fuck you.
In article <6a010899$0$19$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:46:45 PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote
<6a00fcc5$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 12:57 p.m., Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
Your bigotry is the real issue.
Us not agreeing with you isn't bigotry.
In article <6a016ccf$0$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 10:11:29 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446b12f092404eb98b6a3@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a010f50$0$21$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:36:10 PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote
<6a01085a$6$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 6:16 p.m., Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a00f7f9$0$44102$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:01:07 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa001cf13e36098b68c@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0031b7$0$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Bill Oaks <memphis@hillbillies.org> wrote:
On 09 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> posted some
news:69ffbe7c$0$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote >>>>>>>>>>> <46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns. >>>>>>>>>>>>
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women. >>>>>>>>>>>
There's a difference between natural oddities that occur because >>>>>>>>>> of inbreeding and the self-induced due to poor decisions and lack of >>>>>>>>>> familial support.
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
You idiots have a name for anyone that doesn't agree with
you.
It is a standard English word. Bigot. And it is the correct one.
No, it's what you use when we don't agree with you
"tolerant" liberals.
"Believe everything we say or else we will label you! Our labels are >>>>> more powerful than anything in the world. They are like kryptonite to >>>>> Superman... unless you don't mind the label, at which point our ultimate >>>>> weapon is completely impotent."
Don't let the Prescott faggot and Baked Anus believe that their labels >>>>> have any effect. Take pride in being called a bigot, an islamophobe, a >>>>> racist, a misogynist, a Nazi or whatever else these limp-wristed
leftists throw at you.
That is not at all accurate. It is if you act like a bigot it makes sense to
honestly note this. It is not labeling you, it is identifying you. And, sure,
you can take pride in your bigotry. If you really are proud to be so insecure
and irrational that is on you.
But what you are not going to do is make me feel bad for noting your lack of
tolerance tied to your insecurities. There is nothing wrong with being honest
about your harm.
You're gay because you let a trans woman fuck you.
Incorrect.
As he slowly tries to slink away. If you take a dick in
the ass you are a fag.
Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a016c91$0$27$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 10:07:18PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446b11ef48d7796c98b69f@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0108cc$0$27$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:10:12 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446ab034279cb7c098b698@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f845$0$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:05:58 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa1258a6dae2298b690@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00c8ca$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote >>>>>>>>>> <46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns. >>>>>>>>>>>
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women. >>>>>>>>>>
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism of a
sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered the
reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is because they
are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, which normally >>>>>>>>> converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in this
part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare elsewhere." >>>>>>>>>
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one that
has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as redheads.
We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who they are. We
should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow broken. >>>>>>>>
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
You have no argument. A redheaded trans woman is really
just a man.
Are they blonde or brunette? Fit them into a binary so you are comfortable.
Bet that point went over your head.
The only point needed is the fact that trans women are
really men.
A claim that is not backed by evidence / science.
I tend to go with evidence over you who goes with emotion. We will not see eye
to eye.
If that "trans woman" has a dick it's a male.
So you keep saying -- with no evidence or support.
None needed. Any idiot knows a person with a dick is male.
Except for the one you keep up your ass.
The only rational voice on this that I've heard is that if it doesn't
have a uterus it is not female. This is what Elon Musk said. You know,
he's a billionaire and takes more than 30 seconds to formulate his statements, Skeeter.
On 2026-05-11 1:13 a.m., Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a010899$0$19$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:46:45 PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote
<6a00fcc5$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 12:57 p.m., Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
Your bigotry is the real issue.
Us not agreeing with you isn't bigotry.
Far-leftists like Snit always see themselves as the only ones capable of judging what is moral and what isn't.
On 2026-05-11 10:13 a.m., Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a016ccf$0$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 10:11:29 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446b12f092404eb98b6a3@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a010f50$0$21$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:36:10 PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote
<6a01085a$6$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 6:16 p.m., Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a00f7f9$0$44102$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
No, it's what you use when we don't agree with you
On May 10, 2026 at 2:01:07 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa001cf13e36098b68c@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0031b7$0$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Bill Oaks <memphis@hillbillies.org> wrote:
On 09 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> posted some
news:69ffbe7c$0$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote >>>>>>>>>>>> <46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women. >>>>>>>>>>>>
There's a difference between natural oddities that occur because >>>>>>>>>>> of inbreeding and the self-induced due to poor decisions and lack of
familial support.
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
You idiots have a name for anyone that doesn't agree with
you.
It is a standard English word. Bigot. And it is the correct one. >>>>>>>
"tolerant" liberals.
"Believe everything we say or else we will label you! Our labels are >>>>>> more powerful than anything in the world. They are like kryptonite to >>>>>> Superman... unless you don't mind the label, at which point our ultimate >>>>>> weapon is completely impotent."
Don't let the Prescott faggot and Baked Anus believe that their labels >>>>>> have any effect. Take pride in being called a bigot, an islamophobe, a >>>>>> racist, a misogynist, a Nazi or whatever else these limp-wristed
leftists throw at you.
That is not at all accurate. It is if you act like a bigot it makes sense to
honestly note this. It is not labeling you, it is identifying you. And, sure,
you can take pride in your bigotry. If you really are proud to be so insecure
and irrational that is on you.
But what you are not going to do is make me feel bad for noting your lack of
tolerance tied to your insecurities. There is nothing wrong with being honest
about your harm.
You're gay because you let a trans woman fuck you.
Incorrect.
As he slowly tries to slink away. If you take a dick in
the ass you are a fag.
If Snit is confused, he can always turn around during the sodomy and ask whether that person believes themselves to be a man or a woman.
Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a016c91$0$27$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,The only rational voice on this that I've heard is that if it doesn't
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 10:07:18 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446b11ef48d7796c98b69f@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0108cc$0$27$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:10:12 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446ab034279cb7c098b698@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f845$0$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:05:58 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa1258a6dae2298b690@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00c8ca$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote >>>>>>>>>>> <46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns. >>>>>>>>>>>>
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women. >>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism of a
sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered the
reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is because they
are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, which normally >>>>>>>>>> converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in this
part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare elsewhere." >>>>>>>>>>
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one that
has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as redheads.
We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who they are. We >>>>>>>>> should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow broken. >>>>>>>>>
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
You have no argument. A redheaded trans woman is really
just a man.
Are they blonde or brunette? Fit them into a binary so you are comfortable.
Bet that point went over your head.
The only point needed is the fact that trans women are
really men.
A claim that is not backed by evidence / science.
I tend to go with evidence over you who goes with emotion. We will not see eye
to eye.
If that "trans woman" has a dick it's a male.
So you keep saying -- with no evidence or support.
None needed. Any idiot knows a person with a dick is male.
Except for the one you keep up your ass.
have a uterus it is not female. This is what Elon Musk said. You know,
he's a billionaire and takes more than 30 seconds to formulate his statements, Skeeter.
In article <6a016ccf$0$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 10:11:29 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446b12f092404eb98b6a3@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a010f50$0$21$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:36:10 PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote
<6a01085a$6$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 6:16 p.m., Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a00f7f9$0$44102$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:01:07 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa001cf13e36098b68c@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0031b7$0$22$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Bill Oaks <memphis@hillbillies.org> wrote:
On 09 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> posted some
news:69ffbe7c$0$20$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote >>>>>>>>>>> <46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns. >>>>>>>>>>>>
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women. >>>>>>>>>>>
There's a difference between natural oddities that occur because >>>>>>>>>> of inbreeding and the self-induced due to poor decisions and lack of >>>>>>>>>> familial support.
What did the lack of support do to create bigots?
You idiots have a name for anyone that doesn't agree with
you.
It is a standard English word. Bigot. And it is the correct one.
No, it's what you use when we don't agree with you
"tolerant" liberals.
"Believe everything we say or else we will label you! Our labels are >>>>> more powerful than anything in the world. They are like kryptonite to >>>>> Superman... unless you don't mind the label, at which point our ultimate >>>>> weapon is completely impotent."
Don't let the Prescott faggot and Baked Anus believe that their labels >>>>> have any effect. Take pride in being called a bigot, an islamophobe, a >>>>> racist, a misogynist, a Nazi or whatever else these limp-wristed
leftists throw at you.
That is not at all accurate. It is if you act like a bigot it makes sense to
honestly note this. It is not labeling you, it is identifying you. And, sure,
you can take pride in your bigotry. If you really are proud to be so insecure
and irrational that is on you.
But what you are not going to do is make me feel bad for noting your lack of
tolerance tied to your insecurities. There is nothing wrong with being honest
about your harm.
You're gay because you let a trans woman fuck you.
Incorrect.
As he slowly tries to slink away. If you take a dick in
the ass you are a fag.
In article <6a016cc0$0$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 10:09:19 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446b126533964bf998b6a1@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a010964$0$13959$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:14:03 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446ab111ae48fa1c98b69a@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f8b5$0$23$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:07:29 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa17f1b531f4898b691@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00d17d$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 11:07:18 AM MST, "Eldon Chance" wrote
<20260510120718.28052f2c@z-z>:
On 10 May 2026 18:04:58 GMT
Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote >>>>>>>>>>>> <46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women. >>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism >>>>>>>>>>> of a sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered >>>>>>>>>>> the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is >>>>>>>>>>> because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, >>>>>>>>>>> which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone. >>>>>>>>>>>
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in >>>>>>>>>>> this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare >>>>>>>>>>> elsewhere."
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one >>>>>>>>>>> that has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as >>>>>>>>>> redheads. We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who >>>>>>>>>> they are. We should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow >>>>>>>>>> broken.
Yet we do...
No. You might... "we" do not.
There is no "we" in your sour bubble.
I do not join you in ignorance. Not sour about it, just a fact. I go with
evidence.
That trans women are really men?
That trans women are trans women.
With dicks. That makes them a male.
So you say with no evidence.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
And lefties, being left-handed is a cursive curse, but also a gift if >>>>>>>>> one is a pitcher.
Sure... another uncommon trait that does not mean one is any less "valid" as a
person.
Does mean using common (right handed) scissors is a pain!
Maybe they aren't acting like something there really
aren't.
Maybe you are acting like the bigot you are.
You idiots always have a name for someone if they don't
agree with you. The fact is no matter how pretty you are
if you were born with a dick you are a male.
It is an accurate term. And you are the one using bigoted offenses terms. >>>>
Notice you just make claims based on proclamation. You have no scientific >>>> evidence to back this.
Any idiot knows if you have a dick you are a male.
Claims by proclamation are not the same as claims by evidence.
Facts is what they are. Males can't have baby s because
they have dicks.
In article <6a016c91$0$27$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 10:07:18 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446b11ef48d7796c98b69f@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a0108cc$0$27$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 3:10:12 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446ab034279cb7c098b698@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00f845$0$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:05:58 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<MPG.446aa1258a6dae2298b690@usnews.blocknews.net>:
In article <6a00c8ca$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com says...
Eldon Chance <nospam@in.valid> wrote:
On 09 May 2026 23:08:45 GMT
Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 2026 at 4:06:40 PM MST, ""Joel W. Crump"" wrote
<46PLR.741370$o0gf.531859@fx03.iad>:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural >>>>>>>>>>>>> trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with >>>>>>>>>>>>> cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns. >>>>>>>>>>>
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
What would he do if he learned of the Guevedoces?
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981
Now that is "normal" but also geographically isolated hermaphrodism of a
sort.
"When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered the
reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is because they
are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, which normally >>>>>>>>> converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.
This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in this >>>>>>>>> part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare elsewhere." >>>>>>>>>
By any common measure however it is a genetic miscue, albeit one that >>>>>>>>> has inspired "treatment'.
Ok.
People who don?t fit the more common binary are about as rare as redheads.
We should not criticize redheads or ask them to hide who they are. We >>>>>>>> should not mock redheads or act like they?re somehow broken.
Seems common sense to me, and I don?t even have red hair!
You have no argument. A redheaded trans woman is really
just a man.
Are they blonde or brunette? Fit them into a binary so you are comfortable.
Bet that point went over your head.
The only point needed is the fact that trans women are
really men.
A claim that is not backed by evidence / science.
I tend to go with evidence over you who goes with emotion. We will not see eye
to eye.
If that "trans woman" has a dick it's a male.
So you keep saying -- with no evidence or support.
None needed. Any idiot knows a person with a dick is male.
Except for the one you keep up your ass.
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
On Sun, 10 May 2026 17:46:45 -0400
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomizedYou see hims as a catcher, not a pitcher?
regularly is equivalent to love.
I tend to concur.
On 5/10/2026 12:57 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or
breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% natural
trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight women with
cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
You are not understanding the basic meaning of what I said. They were
not people with birth defects, they were completely normal XY
individuals with transgender identity.
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-11 1:13 a.m., Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a010899$0$19$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:46:45Â PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote
<6a00fcc5$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 12:57 p.m., Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100%
natural trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight
women with cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by
design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
Your bigotry is the real issue.
Us not agreeing with you isn't bigotry.
Far-leftists like Snit always see themselves as the only ones capable
of judging what is moral and what isn't.
Equal rights is moral. Your demand for special entitlements is not. It’s not hard.
On 11 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> posted some
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-11 1:13 a.m., Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a010899$0$19$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:46:45Â PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote
<6a00fcc5$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 12:57 p.m., Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100%
natural trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight >>>>>>>>>> women with cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by
design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized
regularly is equivalent to love.
Your bigotry is the real issue.
Us not agreeing with you isn't bigotry.
Far-leftists like Snit always see themselves as the only ones capable
of judging what is moral and what isn't.
Equal rights is moral. Your demand for special entitlements is not.
It’s not hard.
Not when it's applied unequally. See BLM, JDL, CHIRLA, LGBTQ, etc.
Jews and blacks are the worst when it comes to that.
On May 11, 2026 at 3:51:49 PM MST, "Rudy Canosa" wrote <20260512.005149.8cd43dbf@msgid.frell.theremailer.net>:
On 11 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> posted some
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-11 1:13 a.m., Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a010899$0$19$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:46:45Â PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote
<6a00fcc5$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 12:57 p.m., Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% >>>>>>>>>>> natural trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight >>>>>>>>>>> women with cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by
design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized >>>>>>> regularly is equivalent to love.
Your bigotry is the real issue.
Us not agreeing with you isn't bigotry.
Far-leftists like Snit always see themselves as the only ones capable
of judging what is moral and what isn't.
Equal rights is moral. Your demand for special entitlements is not.
It’s not hard.
Not when it's applied unequally. See BLM, JDL, CHIRLA, LGBTQ, etc.
Jews and blacks are the worst when it comes to that.
I doubt even you know what you are talking about, but I will give you one chance. What do you mean. Use specific examples, as I did with Skeeter.
Brock McNuggets wrote:
On May 11, 2026 at 3:51:49 PM MST, "Rudy Canosa" wroteThat's one chance too many.
<20260512.005149.8cd43dbf@msgid.frell.theremailer.net>:
On 11 May 2026, Brock McNuggets <Brock.McNuggets@gmail.com> posted some
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-05-11 1:13 a.m., Skeeter wrote:
In article <6a010899$0$19$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
On May 10, 2026 at 2:46:45Â PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote
<6a00fcc5$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
On 2026-05-10 12:57 p.m., Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 19:06:40 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 6:25 PM, Eldon Chance wrote:
On Sat, 9 May 2026 16:04:04 -0400
"Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2026 3:58 PM, phoenix wrote:
Also, those are good looking girls even without their wigs or >>>>>>>>>>>>> breast padding or whatever. Amirite, Joel?
I have been massively aroused seeing porn images of 100% >>>>>>>>>>>> natural trans women. No breasts, no nothing, just straight >>>>>>>>>>>> women with cocks and balls.
Iow - chemical chimeras...nature doesn't make unicorns.
What? They were perfectly normal, healthy trans women.
1. Trans women are *not* normal, either statistically or by
design.
2. You conflate hermaphrodism with chemical alteration.
+1
Joel is just trying to make himself believe that being sodomized >>>>>>>> regularly is equivalent to love.
Your bigotry is the real issue.
Us not agreeing with you isn't bigotry.
Far-leftists like Snit always see themselves as the only ones capable >>>>> of judging what is moral and what isn't.
Equal rights is moral. Your demand for special entitlements is not.
It’s not hard.
Not when it's applied unequally. See BLM, JDL, CHIRLA, LGBTQ, etc.
Jews and blacks are the worst when it comes to that.
I doubt even you know what you are talking about, but I will give you one
chance. What do you mean. Use specific examples, as I did with Skeeter.
Next thing you know Fozzard Rudy will be
calling you a Jew, finding out which newsgroup you frequent and fully populating it with him and people who hate him that follow him like the Protoss follow the Zerg.
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 1,116 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 87:51:01 |
| Calls: | 14,305 |
| Files: | 186,338 |
| D/L today: |
1,221 files (386M bytes) |
| Messages: | 2,525,536 |