Jump to content

Are you a man or a woman?  

20 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Posted
15 hours ago, phoenyx75 said:

Perhaps we should just agree to disagree on this one.

There is no agree to disagree. You accused me of something, you can't back it up, its that simple. 

15 hours ago, phoenyx75 said:

Perhaps we can agree to disagree on this one too.

Nope. You are the one here pushing this madness. If you are not interested in defending it, stop. 

15 hours ago, phoenyx75 said:

I and a fair amount of others define terms like male and female gender by including the word male and female, but it's not the whole term. So, someone who is of the male gender is someone who identifies as a male. It's similar to someone who is a democrat is someone who identifies as a democrat. The point is that it's a social construct. You can ofcourse call it "gibberish" if you like, but it's a concept that's now embedded in Wikipedia and in some dictionaries and I suspect it's a definition that's here to stay whether you like it or not.

I have already addressed this bad argument of yours. A democrat is not defined as someone who identifies as a democrat. 

It is gibberish because it is gibberish. You have offered no real definition of the terms. Constantly saying Wikipedia this or Wikipedia that doesn't change that fact. 

 

LOL, when people have to tell you they are ignoring you... 

From Robosmith: "IGNORE AWARDED DUE TO WORTHLESS POSTS. BYE."

 

Posted
On 11/9/2024 at 10:45 PM, CdnFox said:
On 11/9/2024 at 8:13 PM, phoenyx75 said:
On 11/8/2024 at 12:17 PM, Deluge said:

The key now is to get the trannies, and all the other radical activists, back in their lane so America can recover from the woke infection. 

I'm sure the KKK said similar things about black people back in the day too. It's so easy to just say that some other group is wrong and use whatever means is necessary to try to put them "back in their lane", as you say. What's hard is to actually try to understand the other group's reasoning.

People certainly said it about the Nazis and the fascists.

He probably on the wrong side of that equation kiddo

If you want to argue that transgender people and those who support some of their causes such as defining gender as anyone who identifies as said gender are somehow like the Nazis and the fascists, you're welcome to do so. However, I think it's worth pointing out that good arguments require good evidence.

Posted
15 hours ago, phoenyx75 said:

My reasoning is fairly simple- some people who are born of one biological gender identify as the other one socially.

That is not what you are here doing. You are here wanting us to use different definitions of the words to accommodate these delusions. 

Truth is truth, reality is reality. 

Just because someone says they are a male or female, doesn't make it so. You are trying to muddy the language to further this ruse. 

 

  • Like 1

LOL, when people have to tell you they are ignoring you... 

From Robosmith: "IGNORE AWARDED DUE TO WORTHLESS POSTS. BYE."

 

Posted
46 minutes ago, phoenyx75 said:

First of all, it would be nice if you'd acknowledge that I'm not the person who expanded the meanings gender terms. It was done long before I arrived on the scene and is now included in places like Wikipedia and some dictionaries.

Secondly, it -is- done with Democrats and Republicans. A Democrat is someone who identifies as a Democrat, same thing with a Republican.

You are the one arguing for changing the meanings and using them. It was not done long before you arrived here either. This is just your circular argument now that you have realized you can't really defend your bad arguments, so you are just trying to claim it is already accepted instead. 

No, I have already made this argument to you and you ignore that and just keep repeating your same bad assertion. A Democrat is not merely someone who identifies as a Democrat. They belong to or support the Democratic party. There is a meaning behind that term and it is not defined as simply as you assert here. 

The fact that you repeatedly have to resort to these bad arguments and then dishonestly continue to make them ignoring what I have already pointed out only further shows how absurd your arguments are here and that you know it. 

LOL, when people have to tell you they are ignoring you... 

From Robosmith: "IGNORE AWARDED DUE TO WORTHLESS POSTS. BYE."

 

Posted
44 minutes ago, phoenyx75 said:

If you want to argue that transgender people and those who support some of their causes such as defining gender as anyone who identifies as said gender are somehow like the Nazis and the fascists, you're welcome to do so. However, I think it's worth pointing out that good arguments require good evidence.

There is no good argument for mainstreaming transgenderism. This is about what the citizenry wants, not what activists want. YOU are an activist, and Americans are sick of your activism - it's a sickness, and now it's time for America to heal from that sickness. The voters have spoken. ;) 

  • Like 1
Posted
On 11/1/2024 at 11:48 PM, phoenyx75 said:

I don't know what reality robosmith was referring to. As to having 2 XX chromosomes, that can certainly determine a person's sex or biological gender, but not necessarily one's gender. Again, it all depends on who's defining the term.

XX chromosomes DOES certainly not, can certainly determine a person's sex and gender. You can think you're a chicken but that doesn't make you a chicken. I dont care how you define chicken. If we can agree that a person isn't a chicken simply because they declare themselves so, how then can a man be a woman simply by declaring it so? 

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, phoenyx75 said:

I guess I'll find out, as well as whether it's fine to call posters what you just called me. Regardless, it's sad when people stoop to such crass insults. But then, some people just never really got a decent education. A real shame.

I actually joined this forum back in April, though I didn't post that much before I got into this thread. As to reporting to the mods, I think it's a good idea to try to see what type of insults are allowed in a forum, as this type of thing tends to get me to decide on how much I'd like to participate in said forum. 

If you act like a useless piece of shit. And people call you a useless piece of shit. Blaming the people who noticed what you are rather than yourself for being that in the first place is stupid

You have been dishonest and ignorant since the moment you showed up. You've brought this on yourself

Edited by CdnFox
Posted
On 11/10/2024 at 2:59 PM, CdnFox said:
On 11/10/2024 at 1:08 PM, phoenyx75 said:

Good to know. It suggests you don't care much for what I have to say.

It's not a question of caring. It's a question of whether or not anything you say has value. If it contributes to a conversation or not or is just you being a pathetic little weasel.

One thing I hope you learn one day- personal attacks never contribute to a discussion in a positive way. Your emotions are in control, not you. 

Posted
14 minutes ago, phoenyx75 said:

One thing I hope you learn one day- personal attacks never contribute to a discussion in a positive way. Your emotions are in control, not you. 

Kid you have nothing to teach me. This isn't a discussion, this is you Dishonest and me laughing at you and pointing out your stupidity to others.

If there's something to be learned here it should be learned by you and it should be that if you use cheap debate tactics and behave like a child in front of adults they may not take you seriously.

Instead of being an ambassador for your argument you've turned out to be an embarrassment. Your entire behavior on this thread has been an insult. To quote sweringen from deadwood - "what a type you must consort with to say such things and not fear of beating".

Grow up a little and come back when you learn what logic and reason is and how to actually communicate with people. Then we can talk. Right now you're just contemptible.

Posted
On 11/10/2024 at 2:59 PM, CdnFox said:
On 11/10/2024 at 1:57 PM, phoenyx75 said:

First of all, responding to posts is easy, as is making unsubstantiated assertions. Substantiating assertions, on the other hand, is frequently quite hard. It frequently requires doing research and then responding in a persuasive way, frequently with quotes from recognized sources of information and links to said recognized sources.

All you make is unsubstantiated assertions.

No, that would generally be posts you and others like you make. Full of assertions, yet almost completely lacking in evidence for said assertions.

Posted
1 minute ago, phoenyx75 said:

No, that would generally be posts you and others like you make. ulFl of assertions, yet almost completely lacking in evidence for said assertions.

Oh look, the loser lefty is accusing others of what he has done himself.

Kid you're an embarrassment. You ignored the vast majority of points I made so there was no discussion. And nobody in this entire board made more unsubstantiated claims than you.

And even after it was pointed out to you and people were saying please stop being so dishonest you continue.

Kid. I'm sure you wow them on the playground at recess but you are dealing with adults here who have logic and reason. You have embarrassed yourself and there's no reason to take anything you say at this point seriously. You were insulting, you did not discuss issues in good faith, you did not address the points that were brought to you.

And now somehow you want it to be my fault. Go back to playing with your Lego

Posted
On 11/10/2024 at 3:24 PM, User said:
On 11/10/2024 at 1:50 PM, phoenyx75 said:

And what problem do you think I'm creating?

The very problem you are sitting here claiming you are solving. That there is some need for language to clarify what a real man is. 

No, we already have that language. Men are men and trans people are trans.

Your solution only works if everyone defines a man as a biological man and a woman as a biological woman and perhaps do our best to simply ignore intersex people. I and many others think that's a bad solution, which is why we no longer define gender to only include people of a given biological gender, but rather anyone who identifies as that gender. Now, I know, this isn't the traditional way of doing things, and I also know that conservatives tend to love traditions, but sometimes, traditions hold us back from a better world. I believe this is one of those cases. I have in the past mentioned a recent animated film that I think gets into all of these concepts without the lengthy words. I think it has a very good metaphorical way of describing gender fluidity. It's called Nimonia and it's available on Netflix. Here's the trailer:

 

Posted
On 11/10/2024 at 3:24 PM, User said:
On 11/10/2024 at 1:57 PM, phoenyx75 said:

First of all, responding to posts is easy, as is making unsubstantiated assertions. Substantiating assertions, on the other hand, is frequently quite hard. It frequently requires doing research and then responding in a persuasive way, frequently with quotes from recognized sources of information and links to said recognized sources.

Posting links instead of actually engaging in a real argument is easy too.

I clearly do both. You and people like you, on the other hand, tend to rely solely on what you already believe, and generally don't have much in the way of evidence to back up your beliefs.

On 11/10/2024 at 3:24 PM, User said:

Wikipedia is not substantiation.

That depends on how you're defining substantiation. I think the second definition of substantiate from the American Heritage Dictionary, 5th Edition is educational here:

**

The act of substantiating or giving substance to anything; the act of proving; evidence; proof.

**

Source:

https://www.wordnik.com/words/substantiation

I can certainly agree that most if not all Wikipedia entries don't prove anything. They -do- provide evidence for things, though. Evidence is not proof, but it's the first step towards it. And it always beats having no evidence at all.

 

On 11/10/2024 at 3:24 PM, User said:

Certainly is not any research

Research is frequently defined as a very thorough afair, which in turn implies something that can't be done quickly. But there are some definitions of it that fit the bill here. One I particularly like is "inquire into", that one being from Princeton University. Whenever a term is under debate, I think it's good to inquire or look into well known sources to see what they have to say on the matter.

Posted
21 hours ago, phoenyx75 said:

One thing I hope you learn one day- personal attacks never contribute to a discussion in a positive way. Your emotions are in control, not you. 

This is funny coming from a trans sympathizer. 

You never were in control, my friend. You're fighting for a group of people that deny their true sex - it doesn't get more out of control than that. 

Posted

Are you guys still arguing this?

@phoenyx75, most people just can't make the leap of sexuality you do. That will always be the case.

Wouldn't it be more productive to simply find another word. Trying to warp sex and gender is always gonna meet with stiff resistance. 

Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.

Posted
1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Are you guys still arguing this?

@phoenyx75, most people just can't make the leap of sexuality you do. That will always be the case.

Wouldn't it be more productive to simply find another word. Trying to warp sex and gender is always gonna meet with stiff resistance. 

The problem for that for these people is that most of their argument is emotional. Words like male and female are already well established, so if you steal their meaning and change it while keeping the word the same it makes it much easier to argue your point.

For example we all agree that women should be allowed to play in women's sports. Most disagree with the idea that men should be allowed to play in women's sport. So if your goal is to make it possible for a person who wants to be a woman to play in women's sports even though they're a man, all you have to do is redefine woman to include men.

That saves you from having to make any arguments about why men should be allowed to compete with women, or why that would be fair, or anything else. Of course women should compete with women! And now, thanks to our new definition tony here is also a woman. We changed his name to toni as well so it's official. 

 

We wouldn't buy this nonsense anywhere else. 

Here's norm:  A huge inspiration to the Trans-vehiclular community:

 

  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, phoenyx75 said:

Your solution only works if everyone defines a man as a biological man and a woman as a biological woman and perhaps do our best to simply ignore intersex people.

If this is your dumb game... not everyone defines male or femalethe nonsensical way like you are here arguing for... so, there goes your big argument. 

 

LOL, when people have to tell you they are ignoring you... 

From Robosmith: "IGNORE AWARDED DUE TO WORTHLESS POSTS. BYE."

 

Posted
1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

The problem for that for these people is that most of their argument is emotional. Words like male and female are already well established, so if you steal their meaning and change it while keeping the word the same it makes it much easier to argue your point.

For example we all agree that women should be allowed to play in women's sports. Most disagree with the idea that men should be allowed to play in women's sport. So if your goal is to make it possible for a person who wants to be a woman to play in women's sports even though they're a man, all you have to do is redefine woman to include men.

That saves you from having to make any arguments about why men should be allowed to compete with women, or why that would be fair, or anything else. Of course women should compete with women! And now, thanks to our new definition tony here is also a woman. We changed his name to toni as well so it's official. 

 

We wouldn't buy this nonsense anywhere else. 

Here's norm:  A huge inspiration to the Trans-vehiclular community:

 

A Transcyclist...hilarious. 

Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.

Posted
28 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

A Transcyclist...hilarious. 

His pronouns are "chopper" and "Vrrrrooooooommmmm"      :) 

We have to start realizing that 'bicycle' means different things to different people, and we can't be assuming people's transport mode. 

 

The moment you start putting these Arguments in contacts it's instant that everybody can see how ridiculous they are. If someone said they wanted the right to park in handicapped parking because even though they're able-bodied they identify as disabled, we would look at them and say you can walk fine Leave this for the people that genuinely need it.

If you say you identify as black even though you're white because you feel your transracial and 'black' means different things to different people the black people lose their freaking minds.

Walk into a dennys as a 25 year old and say you want the senior's discount because you 'indentify' as 65 and your pronoun is "Geezer". 

But we're supposed to accept this losers argument as verbatim and perfectly normal.

I've got no problem humoring someone if they would prefer to be a different gender to a point. And I get that there is a medical condition attached to this in many cases which deserves a certain amount of sympathy.

But these guys go way too far as we see here in this specific example.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
54 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

His pronouns are "chopper" and "Vrrrrooooooommmmm"      :) 

We have to start realizing that 'bicycle' means different things to different people, and we can't be assuming people's transport mode. 

 

The moment you start putting these Arguments in contacts it's instant that everybody can see how ridiculous they are. If someone said they wanted the right to park in handicapped parking because even though they're able-bodied they identify as disabled, we would look at them and say you can walk fine Leave this for the people that genuinely need it.

If you say you identify as black even though you're white because you feel your transracial and 'black' means different things to different people the black people lose their freaking minds.

Walk into a dennys as a 25 year old and say you want the senior's discount because you 'indentify' as 65 and your pronoun is "Geezer". 

But we're supposed to accept this losers argument as verbatim and perfectly normal.

I've got no problem humoring someone if they would prefer to be a different gender to a point. And I get that there is a medical condition attached to this in many cases which deserves a certain amount of sympathy.

But these guys go way too far as we see here in this specific example.

Keep sexual kwirks and kinks where the belong...NOT in elementary schools...and if you are a man LARPing as a woman...don't expect me to be sensitive to your pronouns...that's just ridiculous. 

"Hey Vrrrrooooooommmmm. Whatcha doing tonight?" 

Lol...

Edited by Nationalist

Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.

Posted
5 hours ago, phoenyx75 said:

Your solution only works if everyone defines a man as a biological man and a woman as a biological woman and perhaps do our best to simply ignore intersex people. I and many others think that's a bad solution, which is why we no longer define gender to only include people of a given biological gender, but rather anyone who identifies as that gender. Now, I know, this isn't the traditional way of doing things, and I also know that conservatives tend to love traditions, but sometimes, traditions hold us back from a better world. I believe this is one of those cases. I have in the past mentioned a recent animated film that I think gets into all of these concepts without the lengthy words. I think it has a very good metaphorical way of describing gender fluidity. It's called Nimonia and it's available on Netflix. Here's the trailer:

 

And your solution doesn't work at all - in fact it confuses the hell out of most people and causes real psychological damage to those who aren't prepared to deal with it properly. This is why it's best to stick with what has been, unburdened by what people like you, want. 

 

Posted
On 11/10/2024 at 3:27 PM, User said:
On 11/10/2024 at 1:59 PM, phoenyx75 said:
On 11/9/2024 at 11:03 AM, User said:

You can't argue against what I say, all you can do is play this dishonest game of saying Wikipedia says something different.

Yet more unsubstantiated assertions. You're just reinforcing my point- what you do is easy. Backing up assertions isn't.

No, your posting links without any thoughts of your own is easy.

I've put a lot of thought into my posts, but I also back up many of my points with evidence picked up from various sources. Most of the time, you and others on your side of this debate don't actually post evidence of any kind, instead just voicing your opinions and calling it a day.

Posted
On 11/10/2024 at 7:41 PM, CdnFox said:
On 11/10/2024 at 4:57 PM, phoenyx75 said:

You've presented no evidence that calling biological males and females who identify as their biological gender would create a problem for 99% of the population.

But we have.

Where?

On 11/10/2024 at 7:41 PM, CdnFox said:

Most find it insulting and derogatory

And your evidence for this is where?

Posted
On 11/10/2024 at 7:54 PM, CdnFox said:
On 11/10/2024 at 7:49 PM, phoenyx75 said:

If a person doesn't know the answer to a question, I think the best thing to do is to say that.

Well no, that's kind of stupid.

Yet another unsubstantiated assertion. 

On 11/10/2024 at 7:54 PM, CdnFox said:

If I don't know the answer to a question I go find the answer.

I do that at times, if I think looking at that point in time is worth the trouble and I actually find the answer I'm looking for. Not everything is just an internet search away. 

On 11/10/2024 at 7:54 PM, CdnFox said:

But I don't just ignore the question and remain stupid.

You definitely seem to like using the word "stupid". Anyway, it seems that you're implying that I've ignored some question. If so, which question do you think I've ignored?

On 11/10/2024 at 7:54 PM, CdnFox said:

And you're here making statements of fact that you claim to be absolute and then when you are questioned on it suddenly you don't know the answers?

First of all, what statements are you referring to?

Posted
On 11/10/2024 at 9:03 PM, Deluge said:
On 11/9/2024 at 8:03 PM, phoenyx75 said:

First of all, I'd like to think that calling posters a troll is a personal attack and thus now allowed. However, I'm not sure, so I've asked the moderation team to clarify.

Secondly, if no one cared what I had to say, I think the logical thing to do would be to just put me on ignore. Instead, I got 4 responses to the post you're responding to. So it's not that no one cares, it's that a lot of people in this thread don't like my point of view. Which is fine in and of itself, but I've always felt that personal attacks is the way to derail productive discussions. If I don't care to argue with someone anymore, I just stop conversing on my end. No need to attack the messenger.

You ignore the answers and they're all stronger than anything you've got, yet you keep flapping your cyber gums.

What "answers" are you referring to?

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,857
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Tony Eveland
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...