Are you a man or a woman?

NAME REMOVED · December 17, 2024

5 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Wow!

A YouTube video from an obscure far right Christian TV network, with a 30 second clip of a Transgender reading, and entertaining school children. .

I'm convinced. Thank you for opening my eyes.

CdnFox · December 17, 2024

8 minutes ago, DUI_Offender said:

Wow!

A YouTube video from an obscure far right Christian TV network, with a 30 second clip of a Transgender reading, and entertaining school children. .

I'm convinced. Thank you for opening my eyes.

Sure, first one that popped up. Plenty more there for those who actually want to look.

And like I said Dozens posted here over time

But did you want to address that? No. Did you even want to address this one sample which is real even if you don't like the network? No

You would rather lie and stick your head in the sand and pretend that it doesn't happen at all then actually address the issues because you know that you are in the wrong. If you were in the right you would have no fear tackling the issue straight on but you know you're wrong so you dance around it.

And this is why people on the right become extremely distrustful. If there was nothing wrong with what they were doing why would you go so far out of your way to avoid the conversation by pretending that they don't do what they do.

Your own behavior proves you know the concerns are legitimate

NAME REMOVED · December 17, 2024

23 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Sure, first one that popped up. Plenty more there for those who actually want to look.

And like I said Dozens posted here over time

But did you want to address that? No. Did you even want to address this one sample which is real even if you don't like the network? No

You would rather lie and stick your head in the sand and pretend that it doesn't happen at all then actually address the issues because you know that you are in the wrong. If you were in the right you would have no fear tackling the issue straight on but you know you're wrong so you dance around it.

And this is why people on the right become extremely distrustful. If there was nothing wrong with what they were doing why would you go so far out of your way to avoid the conversation by pretending that they don't do what they do.

Your own behavior proves you know the concerns are legitimate

I can see why you are very concerned about LGBTQ issues. @Black Dog had accused you of hanging around late night Truck Stop restrooms, to suck dick. Maybe there is some truth to his claim.

Edited December 17, 2024 by DUI_Offender

CdnFox · December 17, 2024

18 minutes ago, DUI_Offender said:

I can see why you are very concerned about LGBTQ issues. @Black Dog had accused you of hanging around late night Truck Stop restrooms, to suck dick. Maybe there is some truth to his claim.

I love that you two are now swapping sexual fantasies about me It's extremely creepy but it's also kind of hilarious

With both of you having so many homosexual fantasies about many of the people here when you lose arguments with them I imagine this was only inevitable.

And it's even more hilarious that supposedly lefty who's supposed to be fighting for gay and trans rights so consistently uses the idea of being homosexual as a pejorative insult. Like I'm supposed to be outrageously offended at the mere idea of being gay, that's how you and black dog actually look at gay people.

I guess that's why you two repress your own homosexuality so much and it only comes out when you're angry those who have dominated you in conversation.

Oh well. You're a messed up little individual aren't you. It really is kind of sad to see a little bit

User · December 17, 2024

15 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:

Can you provide evidence that this is happening on a grand scale?

This is dumb and dishonest question. Transgenderism is already 1% of the population. There is no "grand scale" and that is entirely subjective.

So, you define what "grand scale" means.

Also, if this is done to one child, it is wrong. How many kids have to be butchered and drugged before you say that is a bad thing?

15 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:

Having said that, I was curious as to how many biological males are competing in women's sports in America. One estimate says it is roughly 100, of a population of 338 million. It's not right, but hardly the issue that people of the right make it out to be.

So, which is it then? You say these things are bad and wrong now, but you claim none of this is happening before.

Now your argument seems to be, oh well, who cares about those girls impacted, it just isn't that many.

So... when does it become too many? When do you care?

15 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:

I'm not in favour of biological men being in women's personal spaces (change rooms, etc). You have become a victim of ridiculous propaganda, that suggests this is a problem in every single school in North America (it is not), and if we fail to act now, tens of thousands of children will be brainwashed into wanting gender reassignment surgery (there is no evidence of this happening).

No, now you are just making up crap like you always do. I said no such thing about it being in every school, but that is exactly what the left is pushing for where they have the power and control to do so.

So... when do we care?

I say, we can care right now, we can oppose it right now. It costs us nothing more to do so than it does for those pushing it.

You are playing a dishonest game, first you deny it, now you downplay it.

Deluge · December 17, 2024

8 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:

Wow!

A YouTube video from an obscure far right Christian TV network, with a 30 second clip of a Transgender reading, and entertaining school children. .

I'm convinced. Thank you for opening my eyes.

DrunkAss_Offender can't understand why pedophilia isn't legal.

Edited December 17, 2024 by Deluge

NAME REMOVED · December 19, 2024

On 12/17/2024 at 9:00 AM, User said:

This is dumb and dishonest question. Transgenderism is already 1% of the population. There is no "grand scale" and that is entirely subjective.

So, you define what "grand scale" means.

Also, if this is done to one child, it is wrong. How many kids have to be butchered and drugged before you say that is a bad thing?

So, which is it then? You say these things are bad and wrong now, but you claim none of this is happening before.

Now your argument seems to be, oh well, who cares about those girls impacted, it just isn't that many.

So... when does it become too many? When do you care?

No, now you are just making up crap like you always do. I said no such thing about it being in every school, but that is exactly what the left is pushing for where they have the power and control to do so.

So... when do we care?

I say, we can care right now, we can oppose it right now. It costs us nothing more to do so than it does for those pushing it.

You are playing a dishonest game, first you deny it, now you downplay it.

I copied and pasted some of your replies, into a reddit forum. Many posters were suggesting you are secretly Gay, and your contempt for Transgenders and the LGBTQ community, is really a form of self-hatred. Don't feel like this, User. Accept yourself the way God made you.

Having said that, I am dedicating this music video to you. Express yourself, User. We only have one life to live, and I want you to be happy.

User · December 19, 2024

1 minute ago, DUI_Offender said:

I copied and pasted some of your replies, into a reddit forum. Many posters were suggesting you are secretly Gay, and your contempt for Transgenders and the LGBTQ community, is really a form of self-hatred. Don't feel like this, User. Accept yourself the way God made you.

LOL, do you have my quotes on your refrigerator too?

Just amazing how nuts you keep proving to be.

NAME REMOVED · December 19, 2024

41 minutes ago, User said:

LOL, do you have my quotes on your refrigerator too?

Just amazing how nuts you keep proving to be.

You are saying one thing, but you are subconsciously trying to get me to post more RightSaidFred videos. So here ya go, Cowboy!

Edited December 19, 2024 by DUI_Offender

CdnFox · December 19, 2024

1 hour ago, DUI_Offender said:

You are saying one thing, but you are subconsciously trying to get me to post more RightSaidFred videos. So here ya go, Cowboy!

LOL you are just so broken

User · December 19, 2024

10 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:

You are saying one thing, but you are subconsciously trying to get me to post more RightSaidFred videos. So here ya go, Cowboy!

No, this is what folks like you do when you have lost the discussion.

Nationalist · December 19, 2024

On 12/17/2024 at 4:19 AM, DUI_Offender said:

I can see why you are very concerned about LGBTQ issues. @Black Dog had accused you of hanging around late night Truck Stop restrooms, to suck dick. Maybe there is some truth to his claim.

Again and again we are witness to the abject failure of Libbie logic and their response to having their logic blown up by reality and truth.

The fact is, Libbies are forced to re-write reality and warp it in order to argue for their ideology. It's sad really.

Deluge · December 19, 2024

12 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:

You are saying one thing, but you are subconsciously trying to get me to post more RightSaidFred videos. So here ya go, Cowboy!

As a full blown homosexual, DrunkAss_Offender is always willing to share his personal favorites with strangers.

CdnFox · December 19, 2024

4 hours ago, User said:

No, this is what folks like you do when you have lost the discussion.

Crazy folk maybe

Scott75 · December 21, 2024

On 12/14/2024 at 10:17 AM, User said:

On 12/14/2024 at 8:47 AM, Scott75 said:

On 11/11/2024 at 8:26 AM, User said:

On 11/10/2024 at 5:05 PM, Scott75 said:

On 11/9/2024 at 11:10 AM, User said:

On 11/9/2024 at 10:47 AM, Scott75 said:

What you have is an inability to realize that you keep flip flopping on whether or not terms like gender have more than a single definition. I'm sure you'll figure it out at some point, but until you do, it's pretty hard to debate with you whether there -should- be more than one defition of these terms.

I have not flip-flopped on anything.

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.

I've already backed it up, you just didn't notice. If anyone else is intersted in the evidence I gathered on the subject, by all means take a look at the nested quotes in post #394 in this thread, which can be seen here:

https://repolitics.com/forums/?app=core&module=system&controller=content&do=find&content_class=forums_Topic&content_id=54465&content_commentid=1765873

All you did is link back to the same baseless assertion. LOL

I imagine you only looked at what I wrote in the post of mine that I linked to, not the nested quotes in said post. Perhaps the following post, which was one of the nested quotes, will help jog your memory as to your flip flopping:

Edited December 21, 2024 by Scott75

Scott75 · December 21, 2024

On 12/14/2024 at 10:23 AM, User said:

On 12/14/2024 at 8:54 AM, Scott75 said:

On 11/11/2024 at 8:26 AM, User said:

On 11/10/2024 at 5:05 PM, Scott75 said:

On 11/9/2024 at 11:10 AM, User said:

On 11/9/2024 at 10:47 AM, Scott75 said:

What you have is an inability to realize that you keep flip flopping on whether or not terms like gender have more than a single definition. I'm sure you'll figure it out at some point, but until you do, it's pretty hard to debate with you whether there -should- be more than one defition of these terms.

You can't even defend the lousy definition of the terms you want to use.

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.

"Madness", eh? Your language betrays your mindset. What I'm concerned about is if it makes sense to continue to try to get you and others here to see certain things that you seem determined not to see.

I was never hiding my mindset. It is absurd what you are trying to argue here.

You are conflating a lack of agreement and acceptance of your nonsensical definitions and bad arguments with an inability to see. I can see just fine what you are doing and I soundly reject it.

As I've said many times before, this isn't about me. What I find ironic is that before I started posting in this thread, I had some different points of view. For instance, I thought that J.K. Rowling was right when she made her famous tweet. But the more I got into this debate, the more I came to believe that she was slightly off. Certainly not so off that she deserved the blacklisting she got, but off in the sense that I now agree with the new definitions of terms like man and woman in that they should be for people who identify as such, and add terms like cisgender or transgender if knowing a person's biological sex is important.

Scott75 · December 21, 2024

On 12/14/2024 at 10:23 AM, User said:

On 12/14/2024 at 9:03 AM, Scott75 said:

On 11/11/2024 at 8:26 AM, User said:

On 11/10/2024 at 5:05 PM, Scott75 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.

That depends on what definition is being used.

No, it doesn't. None of the definitions you provided say that a Democrat is merely someone who identifies as a Democrat.

True, but some of the definitions I -did- provide are so inclusive that it'd certainly be easier to simply identify a Democrat as someone who identifies as a Democrat. If we simply went by some of the definitions from the American Heritage Dictionary, I think we'd be hard pressed to find people in the U.S. who -weren't- Democrats.

Scott75 · December 21, 2024

On 12/14/2024 at 10:25 AM, User said:

On 12/14/2024 at 9:12 AM, Scott75 said:

On 11/11/2024 at 8:29 AM, User said:

On 11/10/2024 at 5:22 PM, Scott75 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.

You always want to make this about me, when this issue is so clearly much larger than me.

You are the one here making these arguments. I am not making the issue about you. I am responding to the absurd and nonsensical things you are here arguing for.

You haven't provided any evidence that what I am arguing for is "absurd and nonsensical". In composing this post, I went through the posts in the nested quotes above and I found something that I think was interesting. Back in post #433, I said the following to explain why I believe it makes sense to allow people to define themselves as the gender they identify with, which you quoted:

**

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

**

The beginning of your response was this:

**

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

**

I focused in on the fact that you seemed to think this was all about me, but there was another element I didn't address at all, which was your contention that "that" was not what I was doing. What is it that you think I wasn't doing? The reason I think this is important is because I said a lot more in the post you were responding to then the one sentence that included the bit that "some people who are born of one biological gender identify as the other one socially". Here is the complete paragraph of what I said:

**

My reasoning is fairly simple- some people who are born of one biological gender identify as the other one socially. Now, we can accept this fact, or we can harass them to the point that they come to think they need to get hormones/hormone blockers and surgery just so that they can look more like the biological gender they identify with. I for one thing this is a terrible tragedy, one that I believe could frequently be avoided if we'd just let people identify with social gender they believe they belong to. As well as letting some identify as the gender neutral "they" and recognizing the gender neutral single person Spivak pronouns, which I personally find is better as it avoids wondering if people are referring to 1 or more people when saying "they".

**

I've seen some of the posters here talk about hormones/hormone blockers and surgery as generally bad things and the thing is, I've always been fairly sympathetic to that viewpoint. I've certainly stated that I don't think that minors should be using them and I'm even skeptical that it's truly the best solution for many adults. But it all comes back to, why do people of any age feel that these things are necessary? I've come to think that it's precisely because many people who identify as trans don't feel that they can be accepted if they don't conform to gender norms and so they start to think that their best choice is to get the hormones/hormone blockers and/or surgery. The key, I think, is to be less rigid on gender norms- the first step may be to allow people to define themselves as the gender they identify with.

Edited December 21, 2024 by Scott75

Scott75 · December 21, 2024

On 12/14/2024 at 11:29 AM, Deluge said:

On 12/14/2024 at 9:22 AM, Scott75 said:

On 11/11/2024 at 9:15 AM, Deluge said:

There is no good argument for mainstreaming transgenderism.

Perhaps we should just agree to disagree on that point.

Agreed.

But in the meantime, I'll be here to listen to any arguments you may have for mainstreaming trannies.

Well, for starters, it'd probably help bring awareness to the fact that using the term tranny/trannies is now generally considered offensive:

**

Tranny is an offensive and derogatory slur for a transgender individual,^[1] often specifically a transgender woman.^[2]

During the early 2000s, there was some confusion and debate over whether the term was considered as a slur, was considered acceptable, or a reappropriated term of unity and pride, but by 2017, the term had been banned by several major media stylebooks and was considered hate speech by Facebook.^[3]^[4]

**

Source:

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

To be fair, I myself didn't know it was offensive until I looked up the term.

Scott75 · December 21, 2024

On 12/15/2024 at 5:27 AM, Nationalist said:

On 12/15/2024 at 4:00 AM, Scott75 said:

On 11/16/2024 at 8:20 AM, Nationalist said:

On 11/16/2024 at 5:09 AM, Scott75 said:

On 11/11/2024 at 7:53 AM, Nationalist said:

Can a woman procreate without a man? No.

Can a man procreate without a woman? No.

Thus...law of nature.

A biological woman can't procreate without a biological man's sperm. But for people who define men and women as people who identify as such, a woman could in fact procreate with another woman's sperm- it's just that this other woman would have to biologically be a man and identify as a woman. This actually turned into a real life issue not too long ago:

N.J. trans prisoner who impregnated 2 inmates transferred to men's facility | NBC News

There are certainly laws of nature, but those laws don't include words. Words are defined by groups of people and can mean whatever said groups want them to mean.

Lol...the hubris of this is fckin' monumental. Your article proves that.

What do you think my article proves?

As I said...monumental hubris. In your article and your argument, what's to stop the following fron happening?

I don't see any hubris in the article I posted. You had asked whether a woman can procreate without a man. I pointed out that if we are defining women as people who identify as women, the answer is yes, so long as one of the women is a biological man- the article proved that.

As to what's to stopping things like the video you linked to from happening, I think the police officer made a pretty compelling case why a person identifying as a cat doesn't work if you're driving a car.

Edited December 21, 2024 by Scott75

Nationalist · December 21, 2024

41 minutes ago, Scott75 said:

I don't see any hubris in the article I posted. You had asked whether a woman can procreate without a man. I pointed out that if we are defining women as people who identify as women, the answer is yes, so long as one of the women is a biological man- the article proved that.

As to what's to stopping things like the video you linked to from happening, I think the police officer made a pretty compelling case why a person identifying as a cat doesn't work if you're driving a car.

Hubris and social rot.

Deluge · December 21, 2024

2 hours ago, Scott75 said:

Well, for starters, it'd probably help bring awareness to the fact that using the term tranny/trannies is now generally considered offensive:

**

Tranny is an offensive and derogatory slur for a transgender individual,^[1] often specifically a transgender woman.^[2]

During the early 2000s, there was some confusion and debate over whether the term was considered as a slur, was considered acceptable, or a reappropriated term of unity and pride, but by 2017, the term had been banned by several major media stylebooks and was considered hate speech by Facebook.^[3]^[4]

**

Source:

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

To be fair, I myself didn't know it was offensive until I looked up the term.

I use perjoratives on agenda pushers. I always have and I always will.

Agenda pushers are aggressive and highly obnoxious, so if you can't handle the pushback then it's best to just walk away and self-insultate.

CdnFox · December 21, 2024

2 hours ago, Scott75 said:

Well, for starters, it'd probably help bring awareness to the fact that using the term tranny/trannies is now generally considered offensive:

**

Tranny is an offensive and derogatory slur for a transgender individual,^[1] often specifically a transgender woman.^[2]

During the early 2000s, there was some confusion and debate over whether the term was considered as a slur, was considered acceptable, or a reappropriated term of unity and pride, but by 2017, the term had been banned by several major media stylebooks and was considered hate speech by Facebook.^[3]^[4]

**

Source:

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

To be fair, I myself didn't know it was offensive until I looked up the term.

So that's THREE accounts you have here

The fact you don't know how to post quotes is a giveaway btw. You're the only one who does that.

User · December 21, 2024

4 hours ago, Scott75 said:

I imagine you only looked at what I wrote in the post of mine that I linked to, not the nested quotes in said post. Perhaps the following post, which was one of the nested quotes, will help jog your memory as to your flip flopping:

Nope.

If you want to accuse me of flip-flopping, then let's see the flip and then the flop you are specifically calling out.

3 hours ago, Scott75 said:

You haven't provided any evidence that what I am arguing for is "absurd and nonsensical".

Yes, you tried to define a term with the term.

That is absurd and nonsensical.

User · December 21, 2024

3 hours ago, Scott75 said:

What is it that you think I wasn't doing?

If you want to go back and dig up long past posts, then go back to quote them all. I am not playing this dumb game where you pick out things long past to try to revisit.