More moronic BS. Reminds me when all the social "experts" were calling for color blindness back in the '70s. It was great until blacks started feeling ignored. Speaking only for my Christian self, I am not so much offended as I am astounded at the absolute schizophrenic lunacy of this whole construct. Really? You guys throw an epic hissy fit when you're "misgendered"! But I thought the whole idea was to BE
INvisible gender wise. I could probably walk down the streets of almost any blue shithole and encounter at least 3 or 4 guys dressed like girls, and recognize them as such. I'll bet I could also walk by 3 or 4 trannys who really stepped up their game and spent some major bucks on renovations, and simply recognize them as women.
"There is also Paul’s comment in
1 Corinthians 11:14, “Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair it is a disgrace for him?” The length of Jesus’ hair would have been whatever was culturally appropriate for a man. Jesus’ hair would have looked masculine. Now, what that precisely means is subject to debate. Could His hair have been shoulder length? Possibly. Would Jesus have had a buzz cut or otherwise very short hair? Probably not. The key is that it would have been masculine-looking. And that seems to be Paul’s point in 1 Corinthians 11:3–15. A man’s hair should look masculine. A woman’s hair should look feminine. What this means can differ from culture to culture, but the principle remains, regardless of culture."
As for wearing a "dress":
https://theconversation.com/what-did-jesus-wear-90783
What could that
POSSIBLY have to do with tranny visibility day?
Voting for Trump, because he may be an asshole, but you jackasses are nuttier than a squirrel turd.