Perspektiv

Link? Proof she is pretending? Crowd looked aggressive, and obviously she was surrounded by cops. Doesn't mean she can't be touched, nor that cops could do much as were vastly outnumbered. Link? If you make accusations you should be able to back them up. I have personally only heard her talking about male bodied "women" having no business competing with biological women, even less showering with them.

By your logic, me not affirming a trans woman is the same as a biological woman, is "anti trans". Or at least activists in general. Its a fact. People are trying to move the goal posts as to what constitutes fact or reality. The word transphobic has lost its meaning. It's been used to silence. Am not anti anyone. But am definitely anti BS. Telling me a trans person is no different than a biological person. Heck, that biological person must cowtoe to this group by calling themselves cis, chest feeders or essentially erase who they are to "support" this community. I was in a relationship like that before. Its toxic, and its not in your best interest.

Trump is a crook. He surrounds himself with crooks. Once they no longer do his dirty work, he throws them under the bus. They tend to write books about it. He bullies people with lawsuits and drama. Main reason few want to challenge him. The headache would be enough to keep most away.

What am saying, is that being most at risk is irrelevant. Being at risk, is what should matter. My wife being at a high risk during covid of assault because she is Asian (and mistaken for being Chinese even though she isn't) to me is just as bad as any other demographic dealing with this, including my own. What bothers me, is the at risk point, is put front and center. The risk of death, when the black community has the highest risk of death of any community. Look up murders. Shootings. Environments where growing past 21 years of age, are seemingly 50/50. This is socially accepted. Why is there no outrage about this? Ghettoization of neighborhoods in the US? Where segregation that occurred in the past, are still prevalent in some cities when looking at the demographics in the areas at play. If I publicly make an anti trans statement, am likely front page news. Cancel culture and doxxing would take care of the rest. I shoot and kill someone who looks just like me, I barely make an article unless am a white cop. This has nothing to do with protecting the vulnerable. Its using the vulnerable to advance an ideology.

You mean inventing new genders and gender ideology, and bullying businesses and the medical industry to comply with them? The civil rights movement is about respect and dignity. This is about indoctrination. Started with respect and dignity, then it got greedy. Extremists who feel that they can't exist as long as there are women and men in the way. Best way to fix this is to feminize men, and to reduce women to talking points like "menstruating person", "cis", or "chest feeding person". Best even is to start this grooming at childhood. That doesn't sound too "please just respect us" like. Main reason the resistance will be swift to it as many become fed up with what the activists behind this movement are doing, from deliberately confusing you on what gender is, to evade scrutiny and right down to removing rights from parents in order to advance their indoctrination.

I then specified black people, who top up the list. Find me a more at risk of being killed demographic.

"A wise man is aware of how little they know." Woke culture goes against this humility that governed such awareness. Someone telling me how woke that they are, likely will be regurgitating talking points, and likely doesn't know how to think for themselves. Precisely what I hate about woke culture. Take such people out of their box, and they lose their marbles. Often turn physically or verbally violent. Since grade school I have been obsessed about knowledge, sociology and political history. But I knew talking points weren't enough. I traveled, and truly started to see all the lies I had been told my entire life. Saw the world differently. "The diameter of your knowledge, is the circumference of your activity." I hear most woke people spewing talking points. Taken out of their element ate lost. Being woke is what all should strive for. But the essence of the word, the awareness. Woke culture is about SJW slacktivism on behalf of others. People with nothing going in their lives, finding purpose with being angry about everything, again, on behalf of others. The epitome of privilege. The irony.

Not really. I feel safe as a black person, as does my wife who is Asian, even though there have been spikes on hate crimes on people who look like us. Especially so, for people who look like her. We understand that those crimes are isolated, and don't reflect the vast majority of experiences we have had. The vast majority would be disgusted, and the outcry would be heavy handed--a better measuring stick. There is a concentration of crimes that predominantly and overwhelmingly affects three demographics. Black, Asian and Jewish. The size of the demographic doesn't matter. The fact the crime is happening to anyone, should. Sorry, am not of the train of thought that a smaller demographic is more important based on size. Should be based on crime. Hate crimes don't belong, period. Protecting the vulnerable should be a blanketed statement. Am eluding to the worst type of hate crime. Physical assault. Race overwhelmingly is the leading target. Being rejected from a woman's washroom because you don't pass in the slightest and still have male genitalia is exactly why enabling and normalizing mental illness doesn't work. Anyone outside of their circle, will see a man. Still doesn't justify assault, but most would let them know they were in the wrong washroom. Clearly what we are doing doesn't work. Sure, if she identified as a white male and demanded to be seen as such or you could get doxxed, lose your job or be seen as transphobic. Otherwise you are fighting for basic human rights that they did not have vs fighting to normalize mental illness (being trans).

There is also data on limitless genders. Your point? Data can be manipulated in any way you wish. Pro Marijuana websites will point to its positives. Some advocating against will point to its negatives. Both are using data. Riley Gaines data is seen as transphobic. What about it is transphobic? Be specific. Data that goes against hers, is inclusive. Both use accurate data. Racism is prevalent, but when a black unarmed person is shot by police, data tries to make us believe this is an epidemic. White people being shot by police, dwarf black people. They also commit far less crime per capita, hence those numbers. Where's the data on the news?

Thats a boy or a girl. Just because deformations or disorders occur, don't mean new genders are invented. The vast majority of children born like this will associate with one gender. Sure, you can invent genders to make people feel better, but softening language to the tune of changing it based on feelings vs evidence, won't change reality. This talking point is used, to silence people. You said it yourself. Its a deformity. I prefer anomaly, as there shouldn't be a stigma just for being different, but to state there are additional genders due to this, is ridiculous. It doesn't add genders. This isn't an "aha!" moment. Your logic, is telling me that black people aren't black. Saying the word itself, is racist and then refusing to describe my skin color altogether because its "complicated". Uh, it's not. That skin color is malleable. Then pointing to black people being born albino, which again, is an anomaly which affect their skin color. They aren't white. Want proof? Let one have a baby. What color do you think the baby will be? Here's a hint. It won't be purple. Some use the same logic on trans women. "Aha!...biological women at times can't have kids too..same difference!" Uh, no. My ex wife couldn't bear children, but she had a vaginal canal, fallopian tubes, a uterus and the ability to lactate that only a biological woman can have. Of course, again-anomalies occur. It doesn't make her any less a woman than an albino black person stops being black just because their skin tone is white. You're essentially using rare anomalies to generalize your argument. People like this if left unchallenged, will then turn to men being able to give birth, which is physically impossible unless you're a biological woman who identifies as a man. Heck, many are now stating that trans women have periods. Some buy tampons. Next will be demanding vaginal pap smears. Same argument that has black people stating police kill more black people than any other race, when statistics quickly disprove this. This line of debate hopes to silence while sensionalizing "facts" in order to silence debate. I will stick to what I was taught in school on gender, as is demonstrable, vs trying to confuse people into submission.

I'm not denying the hate crimes. Being targeted by more hate crimes doesn't mean its a significant percentage of the population committing the acts. Like I said, on a social scale, a microscopic percentage of the population are committing these acts. Statistics prove this point. You misconstrued my point. There is a problem. The scale of it isn't as vast as activists wish for you to think. Top targets for hate crimes, if considering north America, would be race. Where is the demands for this to stop? Social pressure? What about religious belief, like being Jewish? Where is the social rush to rapidly end it. Cancel culture? Some things aren't written, so you must read between lines to get them. This has nothing to do with rights. Its social control.

So if you don't see racism, it doesn't exist? That's horrible logic.

Its not pressure. Its bullying. Wide scale. Hate crimes vs the LGBTQ community, were isolated events. Socially frowned upon. But committed by a minute minority. Most people couldn't care less about a gay couple, or transgendered individual. Where people started to care, are when we were told we are to believe something like a trans woman, is no different than a biological woman--or else. This is when the push back became a bit heavier, and in my opinion--rightfully so.

Its hard to violently attack people, when the simple threat of it, silences most. Ever heard of a panipticon prison concept? Banks use this concept all the time. A monitor at the entrance, shows you an image of yourself entering. It psychologically controls your behavior not only letting you know you're being watched. It shows you it. Suicides are reduced at train stations that employ similar tactics, such as having reflective mirrors near tracks. Knowing you are being watched (or the illusion of it), controls behavior. Why does this matter? Why do you think the reactions to people publicly speaking against anything trans has always been overkill? Withering, even. The common tactic, was forcing the celebrity not only to apologize, but somehow to take a path to redemption via revisiting their beliefs or something to that effect. Similar to the Panopticon prison, people wanting to publicly comment are reminded of celebrities forced to apologize. Humiliated. Socially shamed, only to have to beg for redemption. Why would anyone within their right minds speak against such a voice? Publicly no less? Dave Chapelle made a trans joke, and activists overreacted. Demanded an apology. He refused. Every single city he was to perform, the pressure was blistering, to cancel the show. Venues that didn't, had guests interviewed almost having to justify their attendance. Death threats were abundant. Even though he ultimately sold out show, the damage was done. No comedians would dare to offend this community, and face that level of backlash. It wasn't worth it. That's the point. You want data showing violence, but will find little, because most will be petrified to publicly speak out. This is a form of social control I have only experienced in communist or socialist countries. Where what you say out in public, is carefully put out there. To say there isn't a fear, would be ridiculous. Who do you know would be willing to correctly define the word woman? Who do you know would correctly or even approximately mention how many genders that there are? This is fear based. Woman, has become a hot potatoe word. Going against a trans activist with logic gets you doxxed and your family or home threatened. There is a reason some news don't show this. But to deny it happens, showcases bias at best. Supporting the suppression of freedom of speech, at worst.

Woke policies at work for you, there. There's a reason they don't work. You can't just imagine things and put them into policy. Or worse, work based on emotion vs logic. Policies should be researched, and at the very least have an understanding of them, better yet of unintended consequences based on demonstrable data. You're otherwise putting a male into a female environment and hoping all goes well.

This is truly grasping at straws. It is called a disorder for a reason. An anomaly. This doesn't complicated gender just like people born blind doesn't complicate the fact most are born with two functional eyes. Anyone approaching me with "its very complicated" have no clue what they are talking about. What kind of an expert points out how complicated their subject matter is, yet providing nothing but ambiguity? You're trying to pass an anomaly which isn't normal, as a gender or additional gender, which is or would be. Me being born with male genitals but a female reproductive system, doesn't negate the fact that my genetics were attempting to create a gender. It certainly doesn't negate that virtually all born with such anomalies naturally gravitate to a gender. Birth defects shouldn't cause social stigmas, but to act like this is perfectly normal is teaching kids 7 fingers on on hand is normal. That's false. They teach 10 fingers and 10 toes as the vast majority of humans will be born with them. Same with a penis or a vagina. The vast majority of women born will have a vagina, and a penis for the vast majority of men. Why is it an insult or bigoted to state this? Personally, I really don't care. I won't fight people like this, no more than I would fight my nephew adamant that the globe is flat. "If it was round, we would fall off!" Again, he's a child, so I explained gravity to him. He responded with anger, and his oldest siblings started mocking him. I stopped their teasing, and reiterated facts, which he forcefully rejected. "Its ROUND!" So, I did what it seems most of society are doing when people like this have been given a megaphone. "Okay, you're right. The world is flat." SEE! I told you! "You sure did." His siblings laughing at him, but I asked them to stop. People aren't fighting people like this, as its equally exasperating. I will fight with my votes. I would say education, but we now have a school system validating this crap. "A woman is whatever you want it to be" Why fight people like this. You're right. A woman is what a woman is. "Whats that even mean?!" To each their own. It means the earth is flat and women is a wide ranging word that describes nothing and everything at the same time. *flies off on a spaceship, but flies straight to avoid falling off straight planet*

I feel people are free to identify as they please. I would respectfully call her a woman. But yeah, hitting a biological woman because you feel you're a woman, is wrong. It also shows why so many women are petrified of coming forward with complaints. These people will devour their own.

Those unable to even listen to the other side and can only hate it and despise Trump or Biden are hypocrites. Quick IQ test on someone like this. Ask them to list 3 qualities of someone like that (that they hate). Its impossible for such people to think outside the box. They are like a fish out of water. Their usual go to, will be anger.

Why did Wonder Woman do good at the box office? Terminator? Who was one of the strongest non robotic characters? A woman. Alien? Rey from the Star Wars franchise? I could go on for days, on iconic female characters. You're trying to present an argument but are missing the mark. What many people dislike, it isn't a conservative thing, is that when being a woman takes precedent on being strong. Rey was just a very strong person. Sarah Connor, was an incredibly strong person. She happened to be a woman, which made her awesome. Them being women didn't matter. Really shouldn't matter. A lot of movies now, instead of entertaining, are lecturing. Being a woman takes precedent to how good a movie is. Being gay. Trans. Black, etc. I remember the producer of movie Bros, lambasted homophobia for his paltry box office numbers. Uh, no, your movie looked like it sucked, and most see movies on them looking like they are really good. Most of the advertising focused on the room com involving an unprecedented gay couple. I heard more about them being gay, than any of the characters in the movie. That I should see this, as it represents progress. Again. I watch movies to entertain myself. Not go make a moral code check on myself. Most do, too. This isn't an inert attempt to suppress gay voices. I know tons of liberal people who didn't nor would watch that movie. What does it make them? You need to think outside of your tribal box you have locked into, which limits you to thinking conservative = bad and liberal = good. Critical thinking is your best friend. Means you can have a heated debate and avoid personal insults. A sign someone doesn't have an argument to bring to the table. Also the irony is lost on you, in that you question the validity of an opinion based on the political alignment pushing it, ignoring a lot of black people, including myself, consider themselves as conservatives. How is that any different than someone thinking a woman couldn't lead a role in a movie or that a black person couldn't carry a franchise? Focus on the data, and point, and skip the political talking points. Thank you. #everybody on this website

They should design aircraft based on practicality, ergonomics and safety as well as redundancy. Same as my being left handed won't affect me driving a car. The vast majority of people as a result will be able to operate both. Now, if you're 7'0 tall, should aircraft be designed with you in mind? Should terms like height shaming be coined for door designers that don't account for your height, when entering a room? Or better yet, should tall people be taught that they are short, and height be altered past a certain point, to avoid judgment even though you physically look tall. Gender dysphoria is a mental health illness. Changing its name doesn't change the treatment required for those who suffer from it. Sorry, but chopping off genitals isn't normal. People are born in the right body. Just like an anorexic person likely isn't fat. Them being incredibly distress on being fat doesn't make it fact. You're doing no service to such people to play along. Same with trans people. The moment they get out of their safe spaces, they will be quick to realize that all the affirmations that they were sheltered under don't apply around this planet. Dating is usually the quickest means one can find this out. There is a reality, and to activists, there is an alternative reality.

What about Japan? Chopsticks were invented based on practicality. I use them, myself. Chinese culture, or understanding it, is understanding how deeply ingenious that they are in that society.

I'm a proud Canadian, not proud North American. I don't see anything wrong with competing for your country's colors. Mind you, am incredibly competitive so can understand the allure of doing something for your country. Or if discussing figure skating, there are more complexities used, less errors, and execution is judged based on that. If I only try a single axle in figure skating, and my competitor skates just as well, and attempted a triple axle, they deserve the higher ranking. I again, don't see the issue. What you're pointing out, is that you don't like competition.

I don't think I've ever used Mrs. or Mr. in an email in my entire career. I'll use the customer's name. I think if you choose to use your pronouns, do you--but for a workplace imposing it, or "encouraging it", meaning my refusal, would make me somehow act in a reprehensible manner. Its policing speech. Its more practical in my humble opinion, to put out there, the types of behavior that will not be tolerated. I'm against policing speech, in any way shape or form.

You can't, in reality. However, Jean Bertrand Aristide was their last president pressing a country for reparations (in that his approach was incredibly direct and public--and he also put an amount that France owed), and they applied return pressure, forcing him to flee his country as he knew his days were numbered had he remained. Its a sad cycle, that I don't think will ever be broken.

The unrest of him extending his term was him putting a bull's eye on his head, to begin with. Someone executing on it, was just a formality.