The transgender insanity movement

[OftenWrong]

16 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I don't quite understand why the question of trans people competing and what to do in washrooms is seen as such an upsetting issue to some.

Perhaps it’s more of a personal issue. Perhaps some people abhor them and consider them as mentally unstable, as a person who has made a bad choice and has sexual hangups. IE perverted.

It’s not a hot news item. I only hear about it around here.

Edited July 25, 2021 by OftenWrong

[dialamah]

13 hours ago, bcsapper said:

On here sure.  There are a lot more men than women on here. 

Not just here.  I don't hear anyone offline talking about this, so I only have online reaction to go on.

13 hours ago, bcsapper said:

But we support women, that's the important thing

Why does male support for women so often coincide with denigration of a minority group?  "Protecting women and/or children" was used for the Jewish problem in Germany, to create distrust of Japanese in WW2, to keep gays from acceptance in the 60s, 70s and 80s (maybe longer), to object to women wearing religious attire and now to object to transgender people.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:

I’m sure many will sleep better at night. Just one question- do your feet not touch the ground when you walk?

 

Not when I walk on water...

[Guest]

45 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Not just here.  I don't hear anyone offline talking about this, so I only have online reaction to go on.

Why does male support for women so often coincide with denigration of a minority group?  "Protecting women and/or children" was used for the Jewish problem in Germany, to create distrust of Japanese in WW2, to keep gays from acceptance in the 60s, 70s and 80s (maybe longer), to object to women wearing religious attire and now to object to transgender people.

Never objected to women wearing religious attire or transgender people, but I can't argue with someone who compares me to a Nazi.

[dialamah]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

but I can't argue with someone who compares me to a Nazi

Pointing out similarities in propaganda throughout recent history isn't "comparing you to a Nazi".  Your response is overly sensitive.  

[Guest]

1 minute ago, dialamah said:

Pointing out similarities in propaganda throughout recent history isn't "comparing you to a Nazi".  Your response is overly sensitive.  

Okay, but as I've said in the past, on this issue and others, it seems the only way people can argue a point is to set their opponent up as having extreme views, and arguing against those.

I'm anti Trump, so I must be an Antifa/BLM looting and burning supporter.

I believe in man made climate change, so I must think humans are going extinct.

I don't believe a man is a women just because he says he is, so obviously I object to women wearing religious attire and I object to transgender people.

It doesn't really argue the point.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:

It’s not a hot news item. I only hear about it around here.

I guess that's pretty insightful, and it leads me to this question.. is that a good thing or bad thing? Is this site about fighting the culture War or about people with Divergent political perspectives comparing notes? And I think the answer is obvious that it is both. So my part in the culture war will be telling people with forum personas to pick more interesting battles after 5 years.

[Michael Hardner]

And then again, if people want to talk about it am I much better than they are for telling them to not? I don't know it just bugs me that people who ostensibly care about our culture don't have more interesting things to offer me.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

And then again, if people want to talk about it in my much better than they are for telling them to not? I don't know it just bugs me that people who ostensibly care about our culture don't have more interesting things to offer me.

I have to say offering you interesting things isn't among my top 50 reasons for coming on here.

Sorry about that.

[Michael Hardner]

50 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Sorry about that.

Apology accepted ☺️

[dialamah]

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

Okay, but as I've said in the past, on this issue and others, it seems the only way people can argue a point is to set their opponent up as having extreme views, and arguing against those.

I'm anti Trump, so I must be an Antifa/BLM looting and burning supporter.

I believe in man made climate change, so I must think humans are going extinct.

I don't believe a man is a women just because he says he is, so obviously I object to women wearing religious attire and I object to transgender people.

It doesn't really argue the point.

Again you miss my point.

Propaganda against something is generally similar.  Present the *something* as a threat to culture, society, women/children; get as many people as possible to buy  in.

Nazi's did it with Jews; racists did it with Blacks (for decades) and with Japanese during World War 2; conservatives did it with gays from the 60s-80s (at least); Islamaphobes do it with the hijab/burqa; conservatives now using it against transgender.

It doesn't mean that everyone who buys into this is a Nazi, racist, Islamophobic, homophobic.  It seems to me that when propaganda patterns are repeated, one should be aware of that and consider the information their viewpoints are based on in light of that.  

You brag that you don't read links; your opinions often appear to be based on headlines/memes rather than any real thought.  You admit you are here to argue and little else: another indication that your opinions are not deeply thought out - with the exception of climate change, about which you come across as knowledgeable.

Women are not in any more danger from "men who claim to be women" than they are from any random male.  This doesn't mean that "every random male" is a danger to women.  It's also true that not every random transsexual is a danger to women.  Yet, to read the arguments presented, one could be forgiven for believing that the only reason transsexuals exist is to victimize women.  It's a ridiculous idea based solely on propaganda directed against transsexuals - who are dismissively and demeaningly referred to as "men claiming to be women".

Edited July 25, 2021 by dialamah

[Guest]

36 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Again you miss my point.

Propaganda against something is generally similar.  Present the *something* as a threat to culture, society, women/children; get as many people as possible to buy  in.

Nazi's did it with Jews; racists did it with Blacks (for decades) and with Japanese during World War 2; conservatives did it with gays from the 60s-80s (at least); Islamaphobes do it with the hijab/burqa; conservatives now using it against transgender.

It doesn't mean that everyone who buys into this is a Nazi, racist, Islamophobic, homophobic.  It seems to me that when propaganda patterns are repeated, one should be aware of that and consider the information their viewpoints are based on in light of that.  

You brag that you don't read links; your opinions often appear to be based on headlines/memes rather than any real thought.  You admit you are here to argue and little else: another indication that your opinions are not deeply thought out - with the exception of climate change, about which you come across as knowledgeable.

Women are not in any more danger from "men who claim to be women" than they are from any random male.  This doesn't mean that "every random male" is a danger to women.  It's also true that not every random transsexual is a danger to women.  Yet, to read the arguments presented, one could be forgiven for believing that the only reason transsexuals exist is to victimize women.  It's a ridiculous idea based solely on propaganda directed against transsexuals - who are dismissively and demeaningly referred to as "men claiming to be women".

And you miss mine.  The propaganda examples you cite don't apply to this argument.  They are a way of avoiding arguing the actual point, as are the other examples I posted.  I'm not saying propaganda doesn't do as you say it does, only that such things are no excuse not to look at the issue critically.  I could refer to the activists who describe those who sympathize with women in this issue as TERFs.  That's propaganda.  But again, it doesn't apply.

I don't read links (It's not a brag.  I just don't want people to think I'm failing to respond) as much as I read stuff I want to read.  That includes a lot of articles from mainstream newspapers and magazines.  Just because I (mostly, not always) don't read someone else's link doesn't mean I'm relying on headlines and memes. (On this issue, I also know people who make you look like Taxme, so it's not like I haven't argued the points before)

Aren't we all here to argue? 

I certainly agree that women are not in any more danger from "men who claim to be women" than they are from any random male. I also think that the vast majority of random transsexuals are not a danger to women.  None of that is to the point though.  (Not all Muslims, right?)

A man is not a woman just because he says he is.

Women have a right to define their own fears, and they have a right to feel safe.  They are the ones who will say whether or not they feel safe, and in a matter of conflicting rights, I will throw my support behind the women.  That doesn't mean I want transgender people put in concentration camps or experimented on.  It just means I have picked sides in an area where rights conflict.

It's the same with sports.  A person who has the physical advantages of growing up as a male should not be allowed to compete with women.  I'm sure there are cases where I am wrong here, but it seems that, in most cases, it would give them an unfair advantage, and in some cases, like Rugby, could be downright dangerous for the women who grew up as such.

 

Edited July 25, 2021 by bcsapper

[dialamah]

6 hours ago, bcsapper said:

The propaganda examples you cite don't apply to this argument.  They are a way of avoiding arguing the actual point, as are the other examples I posted.  I'm not saying propaganda doesn't do as you say it does, only that such things are no excuse not to look at the issue critically.  I could refer to the activists who describe those who sympathize with women in this issue as TERFs.  That's propaganda.  But again, it doesn't apply.

Change the word "propaganda" to argument and see if that makes more sense to you.  The Nazi's are argued that Jews were dishonest, were a danger to their culture, society and their woman and girls. "Patriots" argued that Japanese were came from a completely different culture, threatened our culture and society, and threatened our women and children ("our" being Westerners).  Conservatives/religious people argued that homosexuals and gay marriage were a danger to culture and children; Islamophobes argue that Muslims are completely unfit for our culture, they're dishonest and they threaten our way of life, women and children.  And now the argument against transsexuals is that they threaten women/girls, and that they are by definition, dishonest.

The arguments to disenfranchise these groups are nearly identical.   And equally wrong.

6 hours ago, bcsapper said:

A man is not a woman just because he says he is.

So, you don't believe transsexuals exist, at all.  That every indeterminate baby born and assigned either male or female must remain that way throughout their life.   That every child who knows, by the time they are five or six that something is "wrong" in the way they feel, must feel that way for the rest of their life.  That every teenager pretending to be what they simply do not feel must continue that way, or commit suicide?  Is that what you believe?

6 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Women have a right to define their own fears, and they have a right to feel safe.  T

Did you know that there are perverted women in the world, that would love to get little boys/girls in their power and abuse them sexually.  Why aren't you bunch worried about all the F2M transexuals lying about being a man so they can access men's areas to catch glimpses of little boys?  Or are only women/girls needing to be 'saved'?

6 hours ago, bcsapper said:

  They are the ones who will say whether or not they feel safe, and in a matter of conflicting rights, I will throw my support behind the women. 

Except I don't need  your "support" when it means you are prejudging someone else - incorrectly almost 100% of the time.  And, given the remarks from women online (and women I know offline) about this issue, I'd say we outnumber the ones you think you are 'protecting'.

6 hours ago, bcsapper said:

It's the same with sports.  A person who has the physical advantages of growing up as a male should not be allowed to compete with women.  I'm sure there are cases where I am wrong here, but it seems that, in most cases, it would give them an unfair advantage, and in some cases, like Rugby, could be downright dangerous for the women who grew up as such.

That much, I agree, is controversial and I don't know that science has settled it.  This article is remarkably good at bringing that out, whilst leaning slightly towards "it matters" that a female has grown up male.  

[Guest]

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

Change the word "propaganda" to argument and see if that makes more sense to you.  The Nazi's are argued that Jews were dishonest, were a danger to their culture, society and their woman and girls. "Patriots" argued that Japanese were came from a completely different culture, threatened our culture and society, and threatened our women and children ("our" being Westerners).  Conservatives/religious people argued that homosexuals and gay marriage were a danger to culture and children; Islamophobes argue that Muslims are completely unfit for our culture, they're dishonest and they threaten our way of life, women and children.  And now the argument against transsexuals is that they threaten women/girls, and that they are by definition, dishonest.

The arguments to disenfranchise these groups are nearly identical.   And equally wrong.

Sure, but that's got nothing to do with me.  I don't accuse you of being one of those pro trans people who want to hurt TERFS, because I don't know that you are one.  And I'm not one of the above.

 

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

So, you don't believe transsexuals exist, at all.  That every indeterminate baby born and assigned either male or female must remain that way throughout their life.   That every child who knows, by the time they are five or six that something is "wrong" in the way they feel, must feel that way for the rest of their life.  That every teenager pretending to be what they simply do not feel must continue that way, or commit suicide?  Is that what you believe?

That doesn't make any sense, and it certainly doesn't argue against the quote of mine you put it under.  I didn't say gender was locked in.  Just that it takes more than just a say so to change a man into a woman.  Legally, I mean.  A person can say what they want. (or, it should take more than that legally.  I don't know what the laws actually say)

 

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

Did you know that there are perverted women in the world, that would love to get little boys/girls in their power and abuse them sexually.  Why aren't you bunch worried about all the F2M transexuals lying about being a man so they can access men's areas to catch glimpses of little boys?  Or are only women/girls needing to be 'saved'?

I did not know that, and now it's something else to worry about.  Thanks a lot.

I'd ask for a cite, but of course, I wouldn't read it, so what's the point?

 

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

Except I don't need  your "support" when it means you are prejudging someone else - incorrectly almost 100% of the time.  And, given the remarks from women online (and women I know offline) about this issue, I'd say we outnumber the ones you think you are 'protecting'.

Okay, you don't have it.  And it's not protecting, it's supporting.    I support those who want to affirm their rights, even at the expense of certain other rights.

It's the same with all those burka clad Muslims I support.  Those who don't want it don't have to accept it.

Are you suggesting that, as a white, straight male, I should limit my support to only those white, straight males who need it?

Edited July 26, 2021 by bcsapper

[OftenWrong]

12 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. is that a good thing or bad thing? Is this site about fighting the culture War or about people with Divergent political perspectives comparing notes? And I think the answer is obvious that it is both.

2. So my part in the culture war will be telling people with forum personas to pick more interesting battles after 5 years.

1. You have answered the question, at least in part.

The media should report on important things and not inflate stories. The media is also biased toward leftism and their causes du jour. It is interesting to consider why that is. Perhaps the business model for media companies is unfair. 

By fair I mean without political bias.

Media is the most important tool and is more like a weapon. The pen is mightier than the sword or gun.

2. I like it when people find their niche.

[OftenWrong]

12 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

it just bugs me that people who ostensibly care about our culture don't have more interesting things to offer me.

All is not lost however, as long as we maintain a clear vision of what is Canada. I’m for being more accommodating. Just build more washrooms and ensure they’re safe for anyone to use. Walking around naked in a washroom is generally considered uncool, no matter who it is or what genitalia they may have. I have never seen nor heard of it in my life.

I like the “Family” washroom concept. Let it be for people with children. In other words the child and their caretaker. Private stalls, Hopefully no one will take offence to that. All other adults whether they be male, female, trans, etc. have to use a different room. 

 

 

[Michael Hardner]

5 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

1. The media is also biased toward leftism and their causes du jour. 

2. Media is the most important tool and is more like a weapon. The pen is mightier than the sword or gun.

1. There is right wing media now.  And the left media that you refer to is socially left of the average but pro corporate, reflecting the values of the class that produces media specialists and journalists.

2. But the inherent values contained in the discussions are insidious and effective.

[Michael Hardner]

5 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Walking around naked in a washroom is generally considered uncool, no matter who it is or what genitalia they may have.

I generally agree with what you posted, but wanted to point out that even with the fake stories, and the puffed up stories nobody has come up with a story about someone insisting that they can walk around a washroom naked.

[dialamah]

14 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I did not know that, and now it's something else to worry about.  Thanks a lot.

Not surprising; our society doesn't like to believe there are female child sexual offenders (FCSO).  Women are considered to be the nurturers and protectors of children, sexually passive and if they offend sexually, it's because they're under the control and direction of men.  FCSO target boys more than girls, from children to adolescents, so why isn't there any outcry (online or off) about how 'women lie about being male so they can access male areas'?  Along with some testosterone-overloaded guys declaring "If a woman pretending to be a man is in a washroom with my boy, I'd beat the crap outta her!"  

The reason the outcry is only about MtF trans people is because it resonates emotionally with people.  It seems a lot more plausible than FtM accessing male spaces for perverted reasons, so that's the focus.  Get people responding viscerally to 'protect the women and children' and all objectivity disappears.

Also, consider that every day, millions of pedophiles access spaces where there are children.  Yet, nobody is up in arms about that - insisting that adults who enter spaces where there are children should have to prove they aren't perverts.  Such expectations are directly solely towards MtF trans people because that is what gets people emotional instead of thoughtful.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

 "If a woman pretending to be a man is in a washroom with my boy, I'd beat the crap outta her!"  

They just don't want trans people to exist.  A large male-looking trans woman is wanted in no washroom by such people.  I propose we let them pee on the hoods of the cars in the parking lot with MAGA stickers.  Problem solved.

[Argus]

On 7/24/2021 at 4:35 PM, Michael Hardner said:

This is happening all over the western democracies.

I don't quite understand why the question of trans people competing and what to do in washrooms is seen as such an upsetting issue to some.  I think most people in the world, including the tiny percentage of trans people, can just move on with it.

I think most trans people don't care and have long adapted. On the other hand, I think there are a lot of emotionally and mentally ill people who THINK they are trans and have adopted this as their cause and excuse for all their life's problems. They care deeply. There are also some perverts who take advantage of this sort of thing to get away with things like being sent to female prisons instead of male prisons, or to walk into female changing areas to flaunt themselves.

[Argus]

On 7/24/2021 at 8:10 PM, dialamah said:

I see a lot more men complaining than women.

I see a lot of women complaining, and being shouted down for it. That's particularly so of feminist groups, where you're no longer welcome, no matter your multiple years of cred as a staunch feminist, if you have a problem with 'female' penises in your face.

Edited July 26, 2021 by Argus

[Argus]

On 7/24/2021 at 8:19 PM, Michael Hardner said:

Yeah, this seems unlikely.  You're probably too close to it.

 

I'm pretty far, so I say move on.

For someone who is pretty far you seem deeply immersed in this topic. It's clearly very important to you. And yes, I do occasionally skim the discussion on this on that 'other' board.

[Argus]

On 7/25/2021 at 12:16 PM, dialamah said:

Women are not in any more danger from "men who claim to be women" than they are from any random male. 

Women aren't likely to encounter a random male in the womens shower. And if they get arrested they're not likely to find a two hundred pound 'female' with a penis sitting across from them in their cell. 

On 7/25/2021 at 12:16 PM, dialamah said:

- who are dismissively and demeaningly referred to as "men claiming to be women".

Most people make a distinction between legitimate trans who are undergoing gender reassignment and some guy who was arrested for sexually assaulting a woman yesterday and claims to be one today.

If you really believe you're a woman you ought to be doing something about it other than wearing a dress and wearing your hair long. If you don't want to then you're not a woman and shouldn't be treated like one.

[Argus]

7 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I generally agree with what you posted, but wanted to point out that even with the fake stories, and the puffed up stories nobody has come up with a story about someone insisting that they can walk around a washroom naked.

Washrooms have stalls and are generally not the concern. Shower rooms, changing rooms at swimming pools, prisons, etc. these are the issue.