/trap/ - Traps

>Is anyone out there actually searching for a passing "traditional" trap waifu?

At least 22% of /pol/ faps to traps, according to this one poll. Of course, that doesn't mean all of them want to be in a long term relationship with a trap, but enough do that you're in a pretty good position.

Most people on /trap/ who want to be in a relationship seem to want something traditional. Maybe not full /pol/, but something a little retro, with a girl who is feminine and closer to what women were like 30-60 years ago compared to women today.

Thinking about it, 8chan is practically defined by being anti-SJW, and to a lesser extent anti-feminist. Even the leftist board hates SJWs, and every SJW board is simply a troll. Almost everyone here is traditionalist to some degree.

So yeah, a lot of guys, myself included.

Yes.

I'm on the map on /cuteboys/. I want someone who will fill a role most traditionally defined as "female" and isn't afraid of being somewhat old-fashioned.

You just need to remember that not all gay people act gay. My boss who is very openly gay even told me once not too long ago "I fucking hate faggots". People are going to judge you based on your self-respect and determination. If you find somebody like-minded that way, awesome. If not, keep trying.

>>10146

That gives me hope, danke. Like, lots of hope actually. My kik is someoneswaifu if you wanted to chat (I totally forgot to mention it, gg me).

>>10157

I so know that feel

>>10153

>320 million American males

Doesn't take into account their race/ethnic composition, desire for family life or political perspectives. I'm not looking for a "partner" but a husband who is interested in raising a specific kind of family. If I just wanted a "partner" (lel) I would have no issues finding one.

>>10158

The point is not that you have 160 million potential partners, your dating pool is going to be far smaller than that, but it's non-zero. Whites still make up more than half of that.

If you're looking for a specifically national socialist, traditionalist, or truly reactionary boyfriend, though, your chances really are basically none unless you're willing to ask around /pol/, which will be probably an unpleasant experience at best for a transwoman. /pol/ is perhaps the only place where you could hope to find a 'natsoc' boyfriend who doesn't believe that your natural place is in a gas chamber or a mental institution, and of course they comprise a tiny minority of the population. I don't really know what to tell you, you have a really difficult and convoluted goal. At least you seem to be honestly considering it and not just wallowing in depression (pointless). I'd start working up the money to pay for moving somewhere if you find a long-distance relationship but otherwise you're going to have to set some realistic goals.

>I'm looking for a husband who is interested in raising a specific kind of family

So you're looking for a guy in a state that will let you adopt a kid, presumably, or help to raise his preexisting kid, but also has a high percentage of national socialists and reactionaries, relatively speaking. You're not in it for the sex, you're in it for the politics and for playing the part of the good housewife, so you'll want to find a husband with a job lucrative enough to support multiple people, or else get used to the idea of working. Many reactionaries are also religious, often very much so. Are you religious as well? Usually that would factor heavily into a marriage (and wedding, of course) so you will want to be religiously compatible with your husband. It would also be smart to specify when you're looking for a partner that you are looking for a specific ethnic group and not merely "whites" because some groups consider themselves white whom you would almost certainly disagree; hispanics, slavs, Mediterraneans, etc. This isn't taking into account other specifics and requirements that you'll have and that he'll have. Before you two get together, you will need to either ensure that you always pass, or that his associates are on board with it because otherwise, you could be putting not just yourself but also your husband in jeopardy. I'm certain you're aware that many of his political companions will hate your guts, so maybe you should look somewhere isolated?

In any case, good luck to you. I don't know what compelling force brought you to where you are and I'm not sure exactly what your plan is but if you make any progress, let us know.

>>10165

Super good advice all around, danke anon. Ja, I'm kinda looking for someone from /pol/ at a distance, and if that doesn't work there are a couple other means I want to try. I'll never fall to depressed nihilism fam.

Surrogacy or adoption for sure. Housewife/mother yes, that's all that is fulfilling to me (I've had to homeschool before and I'm great at it). I'm pretty much Christian and I could become a part of hubb's denomination, but I also have culturally Norse-pagan beliefs.

>not merely whites

I had planned on finding someone also Germanic. American whites are mostly that anyway it seems.

>In any case, good luck to you.

Danke!

>I don't know what compelling force brought you to where you are and I'm not sure exactly what your plan is but if you make any progress, let us know.

Truth brought me here and my plan is to make the best out of an ideologically unfit life. I'll let yall know how it goes for sure.

>>10165

>If you're looking for a specifically national socialist, traditionalist, or truly reactionary boyfriend, though, your chances really are basically none unless you're willing to ask around /pol/, which will be probably an unpleasant experience at best for a transwoman. /pol/ is perhaps the only place where you could hope to find a 'natsoc' boyfriend who doesn't believe that your natural place is in a gas chamber or a mental institution, and of course they comprise a tiny minority of the population.

It's not nearly as dire as that, though I grant the true nature of /pol/, the far right, and sexuality is hard to get a handle on. /pol/ has about as varied a sexuality as the other boards, but many of the people there have trouble making their sexuality relate to their belief systems. Here is a really typical example >>4616 There are numerous posts here from people who are regulars on /pol/, like >>5968 & >>8963 & >>7351 There are at least one or two traps in relationships with NatSoc boyfriends who have posted on here.

It goes beyond just /pol/ though. The entire alt right is filled with people who are into every form of extreme sexuality. Even publicly, there are a number of figures like Jack Donovan and Greg Johnson who are openly gay, and at least one writer, James J. O'Meara, who is openly transgender.

It's a strange world, because they keep so much of it hidden, which is not healthy. Thankfully, the growing alt right movement is changing that.

>>10166

>my plan is to make the best out of an ideologically unfit life

Don't allow yourself to think like that. Men are born at a ratio of 1.06:1 relative to females. Some of that is a buffer in the event of men dying because they expose themselves to danger to protect family and tribe. At the same time, it is normal and expected that some men will find options in things like homosexuality, transgenderism, or attraction to transgenders. Transgenders have been around for thousands of years, and they probably first appeared shortly after human beings evolved complex gender roles.

There has almost always been a small percentage of men who went childless in any society, including ones that placed a lot of emphasis on fecundity. It's hard to come up with a better example than Hitler, actually.

>>10167

>It's not nearly as dire as that, though I grant the true nature of /pol/, the far right, and sexuality is hard to get a handle on.

Sexuality can be hard to get a handle on. The far right, though, is not so nebulous. /pol/ tolerates these elements to the extent that some of its members get off on certain things and have little incentive to come down on themselves as degenerates (of course many still do and struggle with the cognitive dissonance of realizing they are what they hate), but ideologically /pol/ champions a set of ideas which openly and firmly oppose transsexuality in every form. That isn't to say that OP's quest is impossible, clearly it isn't, but OP is appealing to a group of people whose codified belief system believes people like OP should simply not exist, which you are quick enough to point out. That makes /pol/'s behavior fuzzier and out of sync with their stated ideals, but their stated ideals are clearly against any form of sexual or romantic relationship outside of one biological man with one biological woman who can produce racially pure children, we all know this. /pol/ members who are not attracted to traps or other men have little patience for it, and by their own standards, they make the rules long before anyone with a newfound or, God forbid, Jew-supported sexuality does. OP needs to find the exception to that rule that can still be as close as possible to ideological purity while still knowingly subverting that standard which many hold as the fundamental cornerstone of traditional society. A backbone and sense of self-sufficiency even outside of other NatSoc associates is absolutely a requirement, not simply for finding a relationship like the one she describes, but especially for keeping it.

>The entire alt right is filled with people who are into every form of extreme sexuality.

Yes, and this has been historically true as well, but it's also been historically true that they lose to their socially conservative former allies, or else keep their sexualities as secret as possible. A transsexual national socialist had better hope she passes or that her partner is in enough of a position of power that it won't be rejected outright. This was true from the beginning; the NSDAP would never have attained the power it did if it were not for its earliest militant arm, the vehemently gay brownshirts. Rohm was a hop, skip, and a jump away from Hitler's position and in large part, gay men won Germany for the national socialists, who then did their best to purge Germany of the gay men who just fought for it. Since then, there has indeed been a constant subsection of fascism which flouts its own sexual codes, but that doesn't mean fascism in practice is any kinder to its members with alternative sexualities, many of which, as you pointed out, are quick to distance themselves from their sexuality and even to reject it wholesale.

If the alt-right movement is to succeed, its members with differing sexualities–and there are a decent number of them–should take special precautions to defend their own families and ways of life unless their goal is to bring about a NatSoc state and then die as degenerates who at least helped to rid the world of people like them. It was not a mistake that the homosexuality of the SA was used to justify its enfeebling after Rohm's execution; whatever the personal tolerances of those leading Germany and even Hitler himself, they had no real issues purging most or all of their homosexual members once they had served their purpose. If OP wishes to keep her family for the long haul and is genuine in her devotion to her newfound politics, if she is a 'true believer,' she would do well to keep this in mind.

>Thankfully, the growing alt right movement is changing that.

If it does, it does, but there's no guarantee of that. The sexualities of the supporters of an ideology don't necessarily have anything to do with whether that ideology supports them. National socialism is about preserving and advancing the race above all else, certainly above the comfort and lives of its supporters, which is one reason why when it was put into power, it lasted all of twelve years before its leaders were mostly dead or powerless. However, we don't live in a world where national socialists are in power, and for the time being, its less-savory characters only pose a threat to OP if she's being purposefully self-destructive. /pol/ members are kinder on boards like /trap/ and /cuteboys/ and boards which explicitly cater to alternative sexualities, but it's selection bias. I may have misspoke earlier when I said OP should ask /pol/. OP should probably be asking here first and foremost and then let /pol/ users come to her instead, which filters out most of the national socialists there who are very much against it. This is probably the best place to ask about this sort of thing anyways and she'll get the most bang for her buck.

>>10169

Taking in all of what you said here, strategically it's obvious what I need to do. I think honestly the worst thing that could happen would be, as you said, dying as a degenerate on the cusp of founding a new, healthier world. That, to me, wouldn't be so bad beyond having to die of course… What would matter most to me would be that the children not be harmed, and my assumption is they would be placed under the care of a model family. If that were the case I could die a bittersweet death for the sake of something greater than myself.

I definitely pass on all fronts besides legal documents, so if I did end up finding someone who would keep my status a well kept secret this wouldn't be an issue at all. The best possible outcome is founding a healthy society of the sort /pol/ is after but remaining completely silent on the issue of my transsexuality. Keeping it secret is easy since I can't see myself as anything but a woman; I only bring it up here for relationship' sake, so once that is out of the way there will be no need to mention it any longer.

>pic

Oy veyyyyy

>>10169

This is an excellent post, and more a pessimistic take on my position than a real opposing point of view. There are a few things that I would like to add though.

> ideologically /pol/ champions a set of ideas which openly and firmly oppose transsexuality in every form.

/pol/ is not a monolith, and has gone through a few different forms. In 2011, /new/ was mostly libertarian/race aware, in line with Ron Paul's candidacy. After Ron's campaign failed, it became increasingly NatSoc and Christian, the former possibly due in part to the rise of Golden Dawn in Greece. You didn't see the buzz word "degeneracy" much before then.

IMHO, Christianity on /pol/ has peaked, as has NatSoc. Right now, /pol/ is going full bore in favor of Trump, and riding the anti-Muslim/anti-immigration wave. They're projecting a lot of their own views onto Trump, and uncritically accepting some of the dumb things Trump has to say.

Where I'm going with this is that /pol/ is pretty open to change, and are more followers than they probably like to admit, although that can happen easily enough with any news-junkies looking for the next political hero.

>Rohm

First, as you know, Rohm was murdered not because he was gay, but because he was seen as a potential threat. Of course, they used the homosexuality of him and his associates as a partial pretext for some of their actions, and the Third Reich leadership became more militantly social conservative.

Secondly, and this is really the more important point, in the 1930s, homosexuality was illegal everywhere. There were very few truly public homosexuals, even in libertine societies like Weimar Germany, but something closer to the 1960s West Village, where people were openly gay in the safety of particular spaces, but kept up appearances in their jobs or to family.

Not being out in the open makes you much more vulnerable. Today, as I mentioned, we actually have openly gay alt righters, and I expect we will be seeing a lot more of them. They represent in part the whole movement, and not silently. IMHO, the likelihood of a strict National Socialism that was equally puritanical reappearing is pretty slim. That doesn't mean it's not a danger, only that I don't see a return to that or the visions of William Pierce et al.

>>10176

Danke! Ill keep it in mind from here on out. Glad you like the thread c:

>>10178

>is a passing NatSoc trap that wants a family and a strong husband

>doesn't consider herself a man at all and has no regrets, just ideologically knows what the response of others will be

I am so feminine that I've met people irl for political purposes and they suspect nothing, heap praise and flirtation upon me even. I'm absolutely a woman.

My highest goal in life is to, as Catharine Beecher put it, "form and guide the immortal mind" by raising children with love, intelligence and care. I am emotionally and mentally suited for that purpose.

>>10178

>Of course, this leaves other issues brought up so far–namely that it'd have to be a secret, and could be a big problem if it got out.

If you're in a conservative family thing, then I have nothing to add there. That is just the reality that some of us have been handed.

But if it's not something that will upset your livelihood or destroy family relations, then I think it's better to at least mentally toughen yourself to the possibility of it being discovered, even if you don't announce it.

My personal take on it is that I really don't care that much, so long as the girl is passable and attractive, someone I would be proud to be with. Also, not somebody obsessed with being trans on Facebook or anything completely lame like that.

It took me a while to get to the point where I realized I really don't care. It didn't happen overnight.

>>10172

While I am certain other national socialists would commend your commitment, what often goes unsaid is whether or not you would commit something perhaps even harder to do than self-sacrifice. First, I want to ask, what would happen if you raised a son who turned out to be transsexual? Would the world be happier for him? Could he transition in his own country? The very goal of national socialism is to grant its people a full and grounded sense of national unity, to give a country and a future to its people with all the benefits that entails. If you had been born into such a world, would you have been happier? Will your children find it happier if they turn out to be transsexual, or for that matter, any other alternative sexuality? Would you want them to have those options?

The second question I have is perhaps harder, but it must be asked. Revolution is not something that will happen all at once and if indeed it does happen, it will be necessarily violent, especially if the strain of national socialism carries over the social values of the original NSDAP (post-night of the long knives). What will be asked of your husband and sons, and perhaps you too if the circumstances are dire enough, is that they will not die for their people but kill for their people. Would you be willing to raise a son who would be tasked with exterminating transsexuals? Who would be, perhaps, tasked even with exterminating you? Who would be taught to turn you in? These are not so far off and so fanciful as they might seem, given the nature of the project of national socialism, at least if we are to take history as a lesson of what it intends and if we take the actions of 1930s and 1940s Germany as exemplary of national socialism in action.

(continued in a moment, posting white stuff)

As a personal note, I'm going to go ahead and give you a hint that I'm not trying to dissuade you from your goal of finding a husband who will raise a white family with you, and I have no problems at all with your devotion to your people and history. I come from a firmly Scots-Norwegian background and I am in an extremely tightly-knit and supportive family, so for me, familial ties are extremely important; we are an exceptionally clannish group. I am proud not simply of my background but of my family and my close relatives specifically, and it is to them above all others that I owe my allegiance; everyone has the right to that, if they are lucky enough to be born into a family which is truly a family and not simply a collection of genetic relatives who loathe one another, as is so often the case. It would be absolute hypocrisy for me to dissuade you from pursuing that. What I'm trying to do, more than anything, is to prepare you for what actually lies ahead for you if this is your goal. While I believe in cultural nationalism or at the very least cultural self-determination and self-assertion, as well as regionalism and socialism, what passes for "national socialism" today seems neither particularly national in character nor is it socialist in the way originally intended. What I want for you and for other whites (and anyone, really, with the capacity to further their culture and people) is for these movements to be reformed in a way that is itself healthy. If your family is healthy, you are a part of that health, and you are clearly ready and willing to do your part. That is true national socialism, in spirit and in practice.

While I totally disagree with certain points of third position politics, what is true is that you ought to form your family and you ought to fight tooth and nail to support it and to defend it, not merely against other groups but also against people who would claim to do you harm in the name of the very thing you are supporting. Would it really do your family good if you as a mother figure were to die for a cause which is so perverted that it is the very thing demanding your death? Would it do your son or daughter good to become foster children given to a family which sees them as the product of degenerate upbringing? Goddammit, fight for your real flesh-and-blood family before you lay down and die for people who care not at all about you! The most infuriating thing in the world is that what ought to be a movement which results in mankind's flourishing and fulfillment (that is, a fully functioning and productive, self-perpetuating culture which serves its people–I am a cultural nationalist rather than a racial nationalist but certainly we must agree that this is the goal) has become a safe haven for all manner of "look at me I'm an edgy skinhead!" cretins and political LARPers who inexplicably believe that being tough, menacing, and socially unbearable will do any good for their race. What is needed far more than that are families which look out for one another; these things begin at home, not in bars or clubhouses or even on /pol/. One white family doing well does more good for whites and for the positive spirit of national socialism than a thousand queerbashing skinhead cretins ever could. Long before the political posturing, long before national socialism was even needed, there were healthy families, and long before you are a national socialist, I for one would have you be a healthy and wealthy mother.

I guess my point is that if national socialism as a movement isn't in favor of a white person who wants only to raise a healthy, wealthy, and tightly-knit family (I have only my own to compare it to but I believe this is what I have and also intend to continue), then who is it for and in what meaningful sense is it truly national or social? Don't put theoretical politics before the flesh-and-blood reality of your family, that's all I'm saying. As always, good luck. I believe in what you're doing and I want the best for you and your family, as I want the best for mine, regardless of sexuality.

Ok here is the deal. There are shitty people in the world, extremes touch.

Some things from traditionalism are good and Nazis and other far-righters brought that out.

For example the great ancient Greek culture.

Long dead, super good, super "progressive" as modern people would say. Accepts all forms of sexuality, had deities for it.

They had a /trap/ god/goddess.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermaphroditus

etc things like that were good. But Christianity destroyed much of the ancient European Paganism.

Now Nazism had some good shit here and there but most was stupid tbh. If your native lenguage is German you should read "Simplicissimus". Basically the "Mad" magazine of the Germans of that era, it has a lot of political satire and it really reflects how Germans viewed late Nazism. Late Nazism sucked, but early was nice for Germany.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruno_Paul

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplicissimus

The way I see it is that group of races should stick together, ideally. Caucasians (usually and naturally) get along better with Caucasians, Asians with Asians, etc and ideally between each racial group there should be no prejudices. They should respect each other, especially their sexuality just like the Ancient Greeks.

Also I suggest you stop believing in: "Left vs Right" it's total bullshit, politics are more complex and there are several traits that can be mixed or created.

>>10186

That's a complicated question. I don't believe everyone who has transsexual "feelings" genuinely requires transition, for they might just be curious about the other sex or find themselves lacking in their own. I believe sex-confirming hormones should be explored in such cases, but honestly, it would hurt me if I had a child who was genuinely transsexual but couldn't be treated properly like I was. That conundrum you present does raise some questions in my heart, but I believe, along with a certain national socialist pamphleteer, that "the Nordic spirit [opens] the door to a new scientific worldview." Maybe by my real life definitive example something can be done to change the way national socialists today conceive the notion of sex-change.

Until then, I can't really answer you, for on the whole transsexuality has been an agent of disintegration in terms of the difference of the sexes, and as such has the reputation necessary for suppression…

>>10187

The family unit is certainly the life-giving, original ethical tie that defines an entire civilization, and I understand completely where you are coming from here. If national socialism does not confirm the family it is not worth caring about. If this group does reject a healthy family, I will reject it wholeheartedly.

As for the practice of this, I don't blame them for rejecting the notion of a family with some aberrant parts. A transsexual mother, when has that been proven to be effective or traditional? This is the generation in which to grant proof. Otherwise, they have the right to be cautious and skeptical.

You make an excellent point: I will not lay down my life for a cause that destroys me for the sake of some lifeless dogma that necessitates my death. I agree that my flesh and blood family goes beyond that. However, until I vindicate myself in reality I cannot really speak or write any justifications against those who might wish ill on my aberrant family ideal. Once I do have a healthy family, I will absolutely think just like you and defend them, us, against any outside attack, even if it meant treason.

>I for one would have you be a healthy and wealthy mother.

That is quite possibly the sweetest thing Ive ever read. Danke… I will absolutely put my family first. You've certainly helped develop my thinking in all of this, so thank you again for that as well.

>>10192

I don't believe in left versus right but it's easy to use in speech and keeps the masses who don't recognize this in mind. I personally think we have to get beyond national socialism because it's almost been a century since it came about. Danke for the information.

This thread gives me hope