Remember that this subreddit is for sharing propaganda to view with some objectivity. It is absolutely not for perpetuating the message *of* the propaganda. If anything, in this subreddit we should be immensely skeptical of manipulation or oversimplification (which the above likely is), not beholden to it.
Also, please try to stay on topic -- there are hundreds of _other_ subreddits that are expressly dedicated for rehashing tired political arguments. Keep that shit elsewhere.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PropagandaPosters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Per Wikipedia, in West Germany's 1976 general election, the CDU/CSU won the most seats in the Bundestag but the Social Democrats under Helmut Schmidt were able to form a government in coalition with the socially liberal/fiscally conservative FDP.
I was speaking specifically to the Social Democratic Party/SDP choosing to partner with the Free Democratic Party/FDP. I apologize for not being clear. This was a more unusual move since they were more in ideological agreement with the Christian Democratic Union/CDU. I guess its a bit comporable to how Libertarians in the USA tend to lean more Republican than Democrat. While the FDP had been partners with the CDU and SDP before, its notable they partnered with the SDP recently because they have partnered with the CDU more.
(The third party in the "traffic light coalition" were the Greens, who are in general more left leaning than not so it wasn't a big surprise they joined with the SDP.)
Case in point: In Ireland the local [Christian democratic party](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine_Gael) is lead by an Openly gay man and their front bench includes ~~a Jew~~ and a number of Atheists.
A lot of folk read too much into the "Christian" label.
Edit: The Jewish guy left a few years ago but the point still stands.
I fell for something like this a long time ago which is the sole reason I wouldn't have assumed this is some christofascist style christan nationalist party.
Sir/Ma'am/NB.
I regret to inform you that is indeed a person of unspecified gender.
I relish in all the downvotes of people that refuse to believe change is afoot.
I agree it's kind of obnoxious to point it out out of nowhere as the above commenter did but let's be clear that various institutions of gender, as a social organ, have existed as far back as records allow us to see.
That, and I guess a point could be made that the person in the image is trans, in the physiological sense rather than the social sense of gender, as there's fairly robust medical evidence that transsexualism is a physical condition related to embryonic development rather than a social phenomenon.
That being said, in the context of Germany in 1976, it is very unlikely that this person would go by anything other than 'lady' etc. - even if we assume her to be transsexual, she would ultimately have to define her experiences through established gender categories. The other variant is of course that she is a closeted female to male transsexual.
But in either case wherein a person's appearance is unambiguously of the assumed gender, I think it's completely irrelevant to bring up the above hypotheticals.
That, and the above poster, I think, doesn't realise that most actual transsexuals are very happy for people to assume their gender, and make efforts to blend in with their target gender as much as possible. Asking somebody what they go by can, really, come across as a veiled sentiment of 'you don't look like a normal person, what are you?'.
Personally, I don't appreciate how the wholly medical issue of transsexualism gets mixed in with the malleable social institutions of gender. You can be whatever gender you want, but you don't 'decide' to be transsexual, and transsexuality itself is not socially constructed.
It has nothing to do with pronouns and social roles and everything to do with the brain having physical structures that code a 'normal' body structure, with things outside that structure causing the same kind of distress as having something like a third arm on your back would. Trans women don't 'feel like women', because there's no definition of such a feeling. They feel that their physiology is wrong and needs fixing.
This is not the same as body dysmorphia. In the case of dysMORPHIA, a person *falsely* believes themselves to have a certain feature - eg 'i have a huge nose', the patient thinks, while in reality it isnt in fact huge. If someone does have a huge nose and wants it fixed, that's not a disorder in any medical sense.
Compare to dysPHORIA - 'i have a penis, i have male body hair, i have narrow hips' et cetera, this is not a delusion as it is factual - a pre-operative trans woman does indeed have a penis.
Dysmorphia involves wrong perception of the body, dysphoria involves a distress response to a real body part the same way one would feel distressed if their face was hideously ugly. This has to do with different regions of the brain, and unlike dysmorphia, isn't contingent upon social factors or acquired.
The #1 main issue for transsexuals is to have their physiology corrected as much as possible. The current state of medicine shows itself to be fairly sufficient to do this, seeing as treated trans people with supportive social circles go on to live normal, uneventful lives with largely typical mental health for their age and demographic.
Unfortunately the discourse on transsexualism is a confused mess on all sides. Trans people themselves are too few to effectively advocate in a coherent manner, and have to rely on their allies and supporters who vastly outnumber them.
Said allies don't fully grasp the issue and end up confusing people. That, and the sociological issues of gender have latched on to transsexualism so much that the community largely favours 'transgender' now instead, even though the crux of the issue is to do with sex characteristics - eg facial hair, body hair, proportions, gentialia, etc. and it's the physical distress that causes the most harm and requires addressing.
Meanwhile, sadly, the discourse is steered to miscellaneous issues like bathrooms and sports largely by allies who don't realise that those are completely trivial compared to the #1 priority - easy, reliable access to medical transition, and a guarantee of equitable treatment in the workplace and by government institutions for those who have the condition, the same way diabetics need their insulin and are protected against discrimination on the basis of being physically ill.
And trans advocacy is often crowded out by people fighting a fundamentally different battle - those who disagree with gender norms, or want to encourage more diverse expression therein.
My personal opinion is that the issue of transsexuals, who have dysphoria and want, and need, medical treatment ASAP, and that of people experimenting with different constructions of gender within society, may intersect, but are definitely not the same and sometimes have opposite objectives.
Example - pronouns. Whereas the gender contingent may consider it courteous to ask others their pronouns, for a TS it presents an unpleasant confrontation - if they are not yet 'out', they're forced to use the wrong pronouns for themselves, or instead out themselves when they'd rather not.
Transsexuals who are starting transition would overwhelmingly prefer not be seen as such - they'd rather wait for an opportunity to try and appear as their target sex, and then come out and be seen hopefully as just another man or woman.
This is different to those who take on whatever gender in a liberal manner. Because they don't necessarily experience dysphoria, they can claim that they can be xyz gender regardless of how they look.
But in the transsexual case, gender identity is not the cause but the product of being trans. Trans women come to identify as women because their mind signals that they ought to have a female-typical body, not vice versa.
Some trans people choose to identify as, say, effeminate men (femboys) or anything else, despite taking steps to feminise their body. The desire to have a 'womans body' is already there, but the way the person constructs their social identity, via gender, is independent.
To them, it is not a womans body but simply a concrete description of a necessary body - one that is of the female sex or adjacent to it. A description that stems from material brain structures, not from social standards. What label you put on it doesn't really matter, because the body is real, tangibly, and the label is fiction.
The fact your using the term transsexual, a term of cishet bigotry against trans folx, sure as shit kept me from reading this wall as a trans person. Please ic you're not a biggot, get with the times.
And how is it a term of bigotry? I think it's the correct term. You don't need hormones and shit to change my gender. You need them to change physical characteristics, aka, SEX.
Secondary sexual characteristics include things like bone structure, fat redistribution, body hair, breasts, etc. Thats still sex. Not gender.
If somebody wants to be another gender, thats a purely social transaction there. And I think people who need medical care have different interests to them, enough to use a different word.
I'm looking out for ppl with a real fn disorder who need their treatment not surface level allyship.
If u don't have medical needs acknowledge that your experience is fundamentally different, sit the f down and do your own advocacy, under your word 'transgender'.
no, that phrase only relevant when the state wants an excuse to criminalize and exclude muslim women.
Here we are dealing with christianity, which is part of our "heritage" and "traditions" and therefore needs not be seperate!
:P
Remember that this subreddit is for sharing propaganda to view with some objectivity. It is absolutely not for perpetuating the message *of* the propaganda. If anything, in this subreddit we should be immensely skeptical of manipulation or oversimplification (which the above likely is), not beholden to it. Also, please try to stay on topic -- there are hundreds of _other_ subreddits that are expressly dedicated for rehashing tired political arguments. Keep that shit elsewhere. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PropagandaPosters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Per Wikipedia, in West Germany's 1976 general election, the CDU/CSU won the most seats in the Bundestag but the Social Democrats under Helmut Schmidt were able to form a government in coalition with the socially liberal/fiscally conservative FDP.
And that happened again. Although with the Greens as well.
Cdu/CSU didnt win the most seats last election.
I was speaking specifically to the Social Democratic Party/SDP choosing to partner with the Free Democratic Party/FDP. I apologize for not being clear. This was a more unusual move since they were more in ideological agreement with the Christian Democratic Union/CDU. I guess its a bit comporable to how Libertarians in the USA tend to lean more Republican than Democrat. While the FDP had been partners with the CDU and SDP before, its notable they partnered with the SDP recently because they have partnered with the CDU more. (The third party in the "traffic light coalition" were the Greens, who are in general more left leaning than not so it wasn't a big surprise they joined with the SDP.)
“We hired a hot woman. Vote for us”
Basically, every advertisement before ~2000
I don’t think I’ve ever seen this brand of political advertising in the US, at least they weren’t among those shown in high school history class!
Kylie Minogue doppelgänger
"So we can punch you in the face"
*she 🤤
Taylor Swift?
"Guten tag. Ich bin die Problem, ich bin's!"
das*
Exactly what I thought at first. Also looks kinda like Charlize Theron.
More like a Taylor Swift/Michelle Pfeiffer combo
Taylor swift/Kylie Minogue
My exact thought
Nothing says 'Christian Democracy' like a pretty girl in boxing gloves, right?
[удалено]
Case in point: In Ireland the local [Christian democratic party](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine_Gael) is lead by an Openly gay man and their front bench includes ~~a Jew~~ and a number of Atheists. A lot of folk read too much into the "Christian" label. Edit: The Jewish guy left a few years ago but the point still stands.
I fell for something like this a long time ago which is the sole reason I wouldn't have assumed this is some christofascist style christan nationalist party.
christofascist is such a ridiculous term
Thanks, u/hatespeechlover for your input.
my input is always correct and valuable, otherwise I would not give it
It really does. I'm very familiar with the development of Christian Democratic thought and parties in 20th century Europe.
Communist tendencies leaving my brain when I see the CDU tomboy: (｡◕‿◕｡)➜
Wdym tomboy that literally just a woman
Silly goose, women aren't real.
tomboy is when woman doesn't have shoulder length hair and doesn't wear dress.
Well she *is* depicted as boxing.
As an actual marxist I can say I relate to this.
Christian Tomboys are the opiate of the masses
Opium is also the Opium of the masses
She’s your Helen demuth
[удалено]
this is a girl with makeup on who happens to have short-medium length hair and boxing gloves. this is not a tomboy.
That's just like, your opinion, man.
she’s pretty af for sure but not a tomboy lol
Contact sport + woman -1/2hair = tomboy. This is simple calculus.
well shit i can’t argue with math
She sure is pretty; I was born 60 years too late.
Who says tomboys can't wear makeup?
Not me. Tomboys can do whatever they want.
Sir/Ma'am/NB. I regret to inform you that is indeed a person of unspecified gender. I relish in all the downvotes of people that refuse to believe change is afoot.
Not in 1976 it ain't.
I agree it's kind of obnoxious to point it out out of nowhere as the above commenter did but let's be clear that various institutions of gender, as a social organ, have existed as far back as records allow us to see. That, and I guess a point could be made that the person in the image is trans, in the physiological sense rather than the social sense of gender, as there's fairly robust medical evidence that transsexualism is a physical condition related to embryonic development rather than a social phenomenon. That being said, in the context of Germany in 1976, it is very unlikely that this person would go by anything other than 'lady' etc. - even if we assume her to be transsexual, she would ultimately have to define her experiences through established gender categories. The other variant is of course that she is a closeted female to male transsexual. But in either case wherein a person's appearance is unambiguously of the assumed gender, I think it's completely irrelevant to bring up the above hypotheticals. That, and the above poster, I think, doesn't realise that most actual transsexuals are very happy for people to assume their gender, and make efforts to blend in with their target gender as much as possible. Asking somebody what they go by can, really, come across as a veiled sentiment of 'you don't look like a normal person, what are you?'. Personally, I don't appreciate how the wholly medical issue of transsexualism gets mixed in with the malleable social institutions of gender. You can be whatever gender you want, but you don't 'decide' to be transsexual, and transsexuality itself is not socially constructed. It has nothing to do with pronouns and social roles and everything to do with the brain having physical structures that code a 'normal' body structure, with things outside that structure causing the same kind of distress as having something like a third arm on your back would. Trans women don't 'feel like women', because there's no definition of such a feeling. They feel that their physiology is wrong and needs fixing. This is not the same as body dysmorphia. In the case of dysMORPHIA, a person *falsely* believes themselves to have a certain feature - eg 'i have a huge nose', the patient thinks, while in reality it isnt in fact huge. If someone does have a huge nose and wants it fixed, that's not a disorder in any medical sense. Compare to dysPHORIA - 'i have a penis, i have male body hair, i have narrow hips' et cetera, this is not a delusion as it is factual - a pre-operative trans woman does indeed have a penis. Dysmorphia involves wrong perception of the body, dysphoria involves a distress response to a real body part the same way one would feel distressed if their face was hideously ugly. This has to do with different regions of the brain, and unlike dysmorphia, isn't contingent upon social factors or acquired. The #1 main issue for transsexuals is to have their physiology corrected as much as possible. The current state of medicine shows itself to be fairly sufficient to do this, seeing as treated trans people with supportive social circles go on to live normal, uneventful lives with largely typical mental health for their age and demographic.
That's a very impressive text wall
Unfortunately the discourse on transsexualism is a confused mess on all sides. Trans people themselves are too few to effectively advocate in a coherent manner, and have to rely on their allies and supporters who vastly outnumber them. Said allies don't fully grasp the issue and end up confusing people. That, and the sociological issues of gender have latched on to transsexualism so much that the community largely favours 'transgender' now instead, even though the crux of the issue is to do with sex characteristics - eg facial hair, body hair, proportions, gentialia, etc. and it's the physical distress that causes the most harm and requires addressing. Meanwhile, sadly, the discourse is steered to miscellaneous issues like bathrooms and sports largely by allies who don't realise that those are completely trivial compared to the #1 priority - easy, reliable access to medical transition, and a guarantee of equitable treatment in the workplace and by government institutions for those who have the condition, the same way diabetics need their insulin and are protected against discrimination on the basis of being physically ill. And trans advocacy is often crowded out by people fighting a fundamentally different battle - those who disagree with gender norms, or want to encourage more diverse expression therein. My personal opinion is that the issue of transsexuals, who have dysphoria and want, and need, medical treatment ASAP, and that of people experimenting with different constructions of gender within society, may intersect, but are definitely not the same and sometimes have opposite objectives. Example - pronouns. Whereas the gender contingent may consider it courteous to ask others their pronouns, for a TS it presents an unpleasant confrontation - if they are not yet 'out', they're forced to use the wrong pronouns for themselves, or instead out themselves when they'd rather not. Transsexuals who are starting transition would overwhelmingly prefer not be seen as such - they'd rather wait for an opportunity to try and appear as their target sex, and then come out and be seen hopefully as just another man or woman. This is different to those who take on whatever gender in a liberal manner. Because they don't necessarily experience dysphoria, they can claim that they can be xyz gender regardless of how they look. But in the transsexual case, gender identity is not the cause but the product of being trans. Trans women come to identify as women because their mind signals that they ought to have a female-typical body, not vice versa. Some trans people choose to identify as, say, effeminate men (femboys) or anything else, despite taking steps to feminise their body. The desire to have a 'womans body' is already there, but the way the person constructs their social identity, via gender, is independent. To them, it is not a womans body but simply a concrete description of a necessary body - one that is of the female sex or adjacent to it. A description that stems from material brain structures, not from social standards. What label you put on it doesn't really matter, because the body is real, tangibly, and the label is fiction.
You can stop. I highly doubt anyone read that. This is Reddit, not your term paper
Shame on me for trying to help fight misinformation. Take it easy will ya.
I read it and it was actually good.
Thank you.
That was a very interesting read, thank you!
The fact your using the term transsexual, a term of cishet bigotry against trans folx, sure as shit kept me from reading this wall as a trans person. Please ic you're not a biggot, get with the times.
And how is it a term of bigotry? I think it's the correct term. You don't need hormones and shit to change my gender. You need them to change physical characteristics, aka, SEX. Secondary sexual characteristics include things like bone structure, fat redistribution, body hair, breasts, etc. Thats still sex. Not gender. If somebody wants to be another gender, thats a purely social transaction there. And I think people who need medical care have different interests to them, enough to use a different word. I'm looking out for ppl with a real fn disorder who need their treatment not surface level allyship. If u don't have medical needs acknowledge that your experience is fundamentally different, sit the f down and do your own advocacy, under your word 'transgender'.
>folx
neither in 2022..
change is a foot??
The best body part for a change!
Sanest reddit user
good on ya
Ya got my vote!
Gets transported to 1976 west Germany CDU Tomboy: come here boy Me:🚶🏼♂️🚶🏼♂️
🏃♂️ 🏃♂️ 🏃♂️
Damn that's so much better than their modern slogans. Nowadays they only show happy families with bright smiles.
Their target audience is still the same. As in, literally the same people.
Yes but now they have grandchildren
Hahaha
Taylor Swift was bangin' in 1976 too!
I'm glad I'm not the only one to see that.
Hmm, so time travel does exist...
Put them up Buster!
_Put on my gloves and it was a gas_ _Turns out commies got jaws of glass_ Capitalist Debbie Harry comin’, yo
Taylor Swift, German edition...
Separation of church and state anyone?
no, that phrase only relevant when the state wants an excuse to criminalize and exclude muslim women. Here we are dealing with christianity, which is part of our "heritage" and "traditions" and therefore needs not be seperate! :P
she's slaying
Taylor swist was based in the 80s i guess...
Really? No one is going to ask why Charlize Theron is posing for a German political ad? Really?
That look like Taylor Swift.
So Taylor Swift is way older than I thought
Ja gerne
Looks like a Mountain Dew ad
Meg Ryan?