“They used the proper verbiage in their legal filings, so this is allowed.” - SCOTUS after granting 9-0 decision in favor of Make America Starve Again

I grew up just down the road from Finger, TN so yeah

Toward the end he had a teenage girlfriend, who still worked at the county jail when I was a kid, and she never got over the lovebombing

She was 15 or 16 when they got together, I don't remember exactly but I do remember thinking how young that was

The whole "let's worship Buford Fuckin' Pusser" thing in Adamsville only happened *after* the movies, because the town was just about bankrupt and needed the tourism to survive; many who knew him while he was in office were very much against it

I see that most of these replies totally get the joke

This is all friendly fire from how you can't deselect people to reply to on here

Because y'all were in my replies yelling about it after I responded to the Brazilian dude who seemed to have no clue or care about the situation on the ground in the US or UK and was equating OTC hair cream with controlled substances?

Very much against people telling me *I* shouldn't ID as transsexual, or telling me I shouldn't see a distinct meaning to that word as something other than "transgender but either elderly or a gatekeeper or both" which is what I've gotten recently, but only very recently

A lot has changed since '84 and I'm trying my best

Seriously though, I feel like I mistakenly thought some replies that weren't supposed to be aimed at me were responses to my own replies (since that's how they showed up in my mentions)

I'm all for self-ID and self-determination in general

I don't personally like synonimizing "transgender" with "transsexual" for linguistic reasons but I'm not Boss of the English Language or the Label Police so if someone tells me they're a particular label then they're the authority on that and I mind my own business

Not my place to gatekeep

Oh yeah that's horrible, it was unclear to me because you said that *in my replies* when I had said no such thing

Oh, yeah, I haven't been able to keep up with every reply, just those that are replies to mine, which is why I thought my position was the target

The OP and the Brazilian guy both being wrong are why I'm yelling my perfectly reasonable position! We can have different needs and still be in community with each other without devaluing the humanity of any subset, while acknowledging that we're not all exactly the same

I've been around a long time, Long enough to remember when the transmedicalist position was that you had to be HSTS with $50k+ in surgeries or you should go die, and it hurts my heart to see "some of us need specific medical care" being called truscum

I'm very much in the "every trans person is just as important to the broader community regardless of needs" camp, to be clear

I just feel like we can do better at focusing on who's in the most danger, and right now that's people (especially kids) who need medicine in places trying to criminalize it

I had to go DIY with no warning because of an executive order and PP closures, and live under the unbenevolent reign of Sarah Sanders, if a spiteful neighbor decides to report me it's prison just for sharps

My non-medicalized genderfluid spouse is just as trans!

Still useful to draw distinctions

My thing is, look at where there's the highest potential loss of life and focus community efforts there

When hrt was in decent shape legal recognition (especially nonbinary) was it for a while, now it's kids getting blockers, next year maybe it's avoiding getting arrested for existing, who knows

Hormones are the main thing in danger of being outlawed in the US and UK right now, which doesn't make the *need* for them greater than a need for hair removal or to be socially affirmed or whatever anyone needs, it makes *protecting access to that needed thing* more urgent in those places