this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2026
38 points (91.3% liked)
Leopards Ate My Face
10027 readers
219 users here now
Rules:
- The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a post/comment removed, please appeal.
- Off-topic posts will be removed. If you don't know what "Leopards ate my Face" is, try reading this post.
- If the reason your post meets Rule 1 isn't in the source, you must add a source in the post body (not the comments) to explain this. If the reason is in the source but is tedious to find (e.g. in a lengthy video), you must add an explanation for where it is.
- Posts should use high-quality sources (for a rough idea, check out this list), and posts should retain the title (if one exists) from works like news articles, videos, etc. You may (but need not) edit your post if the source changes the title. (If you're only using an excerpt from an article that's otherwise not about LAMF, you can use the quote in the title.) Other types of posts should have a title which accurately, relatively neutrally describes their contents.
- For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the post body.
- Reposts within 1 year or the Top 100 of all time are subject to removal. Within moderator discretion, this doesn't just include reposts of the exact same media but also includes e.g. a secondary source telling basically the exact same story as another that was already posted.
- This is not exclusively a US politics community. You're encouraged to post stories about anyone from any place in the world at any point in history as long as you meet the other rules.
- All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.
Also feel free to check out:
Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.
_portrait.jpg){kind=link}
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Look I agree with your main argument about people being varied and complicated. But there's a couple things there that I think should be called out:
That's not transitioning - he didn't transition. A cross dressing or sissification or bimbofication fetish is one thing and we could debate about misogyny vs kinkshaming or whatever, but whatever way you slice it its different than transitioning.
Perhaps I'm too caught up on this, but the fact is that people often conflate transitioning with sexual motivations and fetishes inaccurately and in bad faith, and its not accurate
Similar to the above, I don't think there's any suggestion she 'wants to be humiliated' rather than acting in her self interest as a wealthy white woman. And yeah possibly there's internalised transphobia as well or something? But that's different than wanting to be humiliated, which to me implies some kind of sexual thing. Which again, needs to be entirely divorced from transitioning in the discourse
Right...
He is on one extreme.
And as I said, it's not binary.
Some people, dress fulltime, but still have the same motivations as Noem's husband.
It's weird...
I wrote all that about how we should look at people individually, and you definitely read it, but still responded saying the "real solution" is making a shit ton of boxes to put them in along a single axis.
Completely and totally missing the larger point that there's innumerable different axis.
The logical result of your idea, ends in mine where everyone is a unique person.
You're just not thinking all the way thru.
Even two people on exactly the same spot on this axis, have so many different things, that getting them in the same "box" on this a is is pointless.
All boxes are pointless when talking about an individual.
You're thinking of nouns and not adjectives, and that's reductive even if coming from a good place.
Edit:
To clarify, Noem's husband was an example of someone who (infrequently and in private) portrays themselves as a gender other than what they were assigned at birth.
It is a very long axis, and on the other end are people who get full surgery and live entire lives as a different gender.
Along the axis are occasional cross dressers, drag queens, people that just change underwear, and just literally too many different points to list.
Because if you keep looking closer, no two humans are ever exactly the same on any single axis.
Making two boxes is dumb.
Making 3 boxes is dumb, or 4 or 27, or however many different boxes, it will never be enough until every one has their own box, which is where we'd end up treating everyone as individuals on an individual level.
Conflating a cross-dressing kink and trans people is not talking about a variety of spectrums, it's just innacurate
One is sexually motivated, the other isn't. It's a clear line.
I agree that people are too complex to be put into boxes, but we can talk about issues without overlapping them with completely separate ideas because of surface level similarities like wearing clothing designed for a different sex than your biological one.
The spectrum of people with humiliation or cross dressing kicks and trans people are two circles that might overlap like a Venn diagram, but they're fundamentally different and acting like they aren't is reducing trans people to sexually motivated fetishists. Its just not accurate
Again, to be perfectly clear: someone with a bimbofication kink is not on the same 'axis' as a trans person, and I find the suggestion that they are to be problematic at best and bigoted at worst
Edit:
This is it really. This is not an accurate or realistic portrayal of trans people. It's a fun house mirror of trans identities pushed by bigots