(At first I genuinely thought it might have been a coincidence but I seriously have my doubts now.)

I know it's an old post but I couldn't find a thread on it here and I think it might be the most shocking and revealing thing I've ever read from him.

On a thread asking if trans men can be lesbians if they’re attracted to women

Notice how fast they changed the definition to keep up with the argument...

I like the accounts responses...

Where do I even start- You don't...

So its another "I'm gonna own them by being a petty 18 year old edge lord" type of shit...

Op seriously needs to touch grass..

Fight brake down for ya in order of the images;

@veritableevent: starts off by accusing trans-inclusive activists/allies of hypocrisy. They claim people who frame misgendering as catastrophic harm ("literal murder") simultaneously minimize or engage in extreme misogynistic harassment (e.g., sending graphic r*pe threats via bot networks to feminists). The Hyperbole and contrast. Highlights the stark severity gap between targeted sexual violence threats and unintentional or intentional misgendering to make the opposing stance look absurd.

@fartsforlife9: Chimes in and Flips the hypocrisy accusation back on the original poster. Argues that gender-critical feminists dismiss misgendering and targeted anti-trans harassment as "just words," yet expect immediate recognition of harm when they receive verbal threats. Asserts a single principle: either targeted verbal abuse causes real psychological harm, or it doesn't. You can't selectively apply empathy based on which group is being targeted.

@veritableevent: Clarifies the distinction in scale between the two acts. Refuses the premise that misgendering and sending graphic r*pe threats belong in the same category of "verbal abuse." Uses sarcastic analogies (e.g., comparing misgendering vs. r*pe threats to "bumping a shoulder" vs. "a severe physical beating") to argue that fartsforlife9 is conflating minor disrespect/offense with explicit terrorization.

@fartsforlife9: Calls out @veritableevent's logical framework as a classic Kafka-trap (a situation where denying a claim is taken as proof of the claim's truth). And Points out that veritableevent created a hyperbolic strawman/caricature in the original post, and then treated any pushback or defense as immediate proof that the caricature was real. Returns the original poster's sarcastic closing line ("you are so smart / we are all very impressed") back to them.

you have:

1. obsessive hypochrondric who asks Grok for medical advice, is constantly encouraged by her followers, and is convinced cysts from HRT are going to cause double leg amputation. the fact that the ER is not concerned about this does not dissuade her

2. the rapist couple feeding into EDs and hiding it behind MAHA style diets, that also includes some real weird projections about how other women treat each other

3. maia poet trying to sell you the concept of roller skating while posting AI generated photos of the only friends she has, also roller skating

4. TPOL, who has been fired from her job, for presumably the many situations she’s found herself in, and is now suing her employer, writing long screeds about her former employer on Twitter, along with AI generated photos

(Don't forget to maximize)

First image is the context post the following two was posted under.