I'm not a native english speaker

I'm not a native english speaker.

Can you please explain this to me ?

Explain what?
>I'm not a native english speaker.
>Can you please explain this to me ?

Quieres una traducción literal ?

>I'm not a native english speaker.
I am!
>Can you please explain this to me ?
No, because I have no idea wtf is going on. It seems to be two crazy people are talking about a third person that also probably isn't all there.

Some feminist bullshit you really don't need to know about.

White women are not high enough in the opression olympics to give advice to transbominations.

They talking about how fragile are the trans-people arguments

It's actually telling a feminist to check her priviledge, THIS is how deep into the hole we are!

Women ruining the humor of the internet, just like they ruin the humor in every fucking thing.

A kind woman attempts to ask a question about liberal garbage to appeal to an sjw, but is met with a backhand and an excuse for why trans people deserve more than anyone because of reverse racism.

Basically, it means that a trans that wear women clothes doesn't wear them because he's trans, because he's nothing but a drag queen

The author is insane, nothing to explain.

*Men

Ignorant transporpoisephobe

>cis feminist bullshit

fighting female/male stereotypes is transphobic
If a penis does not makes you a man or a vagina a woman, it means stereotypes of man/woman does it.
No stereotypes, no transpeople ergo there is no gender.

Thous people are insane.

The first girl is stating to the second girl an idea that conflicts with the second girl's ideology, and she can't figure out what to do with herself, so she selfdestructs.

Clothes shouldn't have gender forced on them, unless you're transgender then it's just being who you are. I should be able to castrate any meat sack who disagrees, unless you've already been castrated, then I'm sorry for triggering you mam.

its just tumblard shit

Imagine if a trans person instead of being a sarcastic piece of shit actually took the time to explain these things to people who never had any interaction with a trans person before.

that would require them to be able to relate and communicate with the evil oppressive cis scum on a meaningful level, instead of the constant derision and condescension that define their personalities

okay so this comic has been made by someone who, around here, we'd call an SJW or a tumblrina
SJWs / tumblrinas have a kind of extreme way of looking at the world
if you think of liberals and conservatives as being opposites, SJWs are what happens when someone becomes so liberal that they're basically conservative again

anyway
the character in purple (stephie) is a transgirl. this means that she was born male but is transitioning to become female
the character in pink (milena) is a normal girl

in the first panel milena points out that marvin is wearing a dress and asks stephie if she thinks marvin might be trans
this is a perfectly reasonable question because a boy might wear a dress for a range of reasons and being trans is one possibility
to an SJW, though, milena has made an assumption so presumptive and ignorant that it borders on being offensive

stephie points out that boys can wear dresses too
her intended meaning here is that just because a boy is wearing a dress doesn't mean he's necessarily trans
but, of course, everybody already knows this except, apparently, milena
if you haven't noticed, milena is playing the role of "ignorant normie"
what this tells us is that the person writing this comic thinks that non-sjws are morons

>cont...

>being trans means someone of one sex changes their sex so he can feel ok doing things that are associated with that sex

>It is ok for someone to do things associated with another sex

Then why do you need to be trans to do things associated with another sex

This is confusing to English speakers as well and that's largely the joke.

Basically:
>Biology and sociology got tired of dealing with confusing terminology. To fix it they decided to separate sex, gender, and sexuality into separate terms and concepts.
>Sex deals with physiology and it is what biology uses.
>Gender deals with sociocultural shit. Stuff like the way someone dresses, the mannerisms they have, the sorts of hobbies they're into, etc... Western culture traditionally has two main genders but other societies sometimes have more. Moreover genders differ between societies and there are groups that argue that the situation isn't that simple or that there isn't really any justification for our current gender system.
>Sexuality, this one should be self explanatory.

Consider gaydar. It only works on men who act gay (i.e. identify with a different gender) but not on homosexual men who act straight. Even though they both have the same sex and sexuality it is the gender here that is different.

With regards to the OP picture, they're essentially pitting two of these controversial views against each other.
>Genders don't really exist and there isn't any real justification for boys and girls dressing a certain way.
vs
>Genders do exist and people can be born into the wrong ones.

The joke is that to normal people these views all sound like they come from the same crowd so they must self destruct when faced with this contradiction (well reasoned thought is jokingly referred to as "CIS feminist logic").

3 waves of feminism.
Worst one is neoliberal feminism. Google it you will get cancer

Your description of SJW's is beautiful

in the second panel, milena asks a question that shows a contradiction between some of the things these SJWs believe

on one hand, they believe that transpeople should be treated as though they're no different from the gender/sex they've chosen to be/become
they think a person should be able to declare that they're trans and instantly be accepted as a member of their new gender
they think that to react any other way than completely accepting to transpeople is offensive and harmful (and so on) regardless of things like circumstance, genetics, paperwork, sincerity, appearance, progress, etc

on the other hand, they believe that expression of gender is basically made up
they think gender is entirely a social construct - that people just made it up and that gender is not in any way based on biology
they think that boys are boyish and girls are girlish because of things like socialisation, indoctrination and tradition
they think it's morally wrong to indulge gender stereotypes and think that children should be raised without any gendered influence
they think that gender can be whatever they want it to be and that if someone wants to pick "bus" or "yellow" as a gender then that's totally okay

Milena is pointing out that if gender isn't a thing then transgender isn't a thing.

>cont...

in the last panel, stephie is ceasing to exist because her existence has been disproven by milena's question
she says "cis feminist logic" and "second wave" because the contradiction arises either between cis feminists and trans feminists or between second wave feminism and third wave feminism
I should note here that 'cis' is basically the opposite of 'trans'. if someone wants to change their sex/gender then they're trans but people who don't are cis or 'cisgender'.
the point the author is trying to make here is that since she is trans (stephie represents the author herself), transpeople must exist and since transpeople must exist then it's the other side of the argument that must be wrong - gender must be a thing
or, to take the most charitable view, transpeople intend to change sex regardless of whether gender is a thing
to make a long story short, the author thinks that everyone who doesn't agree with her is silly

That analysis is fucking great, I would not expect such understanding of the subject here.

It reminds me of the thread form last month about Poe law and its consequences

thank you
the appreciation makes it worthwhile :)