Are you a man or a woman?

[Deluge]

46 minutes ago, Scott75 said:

1. You certainly used the word all. Quoting:

**

It's not "some" of the trans community; it's ALL of it, including the LGB cultists. 

**

Source:

Post #851

So, do you think that all trans people and "LGB cultists" (whatever that means) have the same agenda?

2. Some you're fine with those in the LGBT community who "stay home and keep to themselves"? Are you suggesting that you are only "cool" with members of the LGBT community if they remain silent on issues that are important to them?

1. I'm sure there is a small percentage that keeps to themselves, but the vast majority of both groups want the entire country onboard with their agendas. 

2. No, they should be able to shout their issues on the rooftops. Of course, the opposition should be able to shout their disapproval on the rooftops as well. And they should be able to do it without being doxxed or having their jobs threatened. 

[User]

1 hour ago, Scott75 said:

I have already said numerous times that I think the new definitions are good. The one thing that I think you don't fully understand is that these new definitions were created long before I arrived here and I sincerely doubt they'll be leaving.

Oh, I fully understand people like you will continue to try to advocate for this madness and engage in it yourselves. 

I will continue to soundly reject it. 

1 hour ago, Scott75 said:

Note, I think that I myself have a bit of transphobia, but I think I'm working hard on overcoming this, in part by having this long discussion here. 

You are also an ignorant a$$hole. You should work harder on overcoming that too. 

[User]

1 hour ago, Scott75 said:

There are certainly circumstances where just saying that you are a man or a woman may not answer whether you are cisgender or transgender.

Like I said before, this is simple. 

Men are males. Women are females. Trans are trans. 

[Deluge]

1 hour ago, Scott75 said:

I think I've made clear that I think it's important to differentiate between people who are cisgender and transgender in certain circumstances. I think most people only want to date people who are cisgender. 

You've made it clear that you're a convert to the trans community, but that only proves that you are confused. 

NORMAL people date people of the opposite sex. CONFUSED people just say and do whatever the hell the trannies and queers dictate.  

Edited January 8, 2025 by Deluge

[Deluge]

1 hour ago, Scott75 said:

I'm -pretty- sure that you know that many people now define being a male as anyone who identifies as a male. I'm also pretty sure that you don't consider transgender males and cisgender males to be the same. I certainly don't. So, how can we differentiate between these 2 types of males? Well, one easy way is to preface the term male with either cisgender or transgender. 

Wrong. The easiest and best way to identify anyone is by their sex. You are a man and so am I - it doesn't get simpler than that, and it's also right; right as rain. It's how our parents did it, and it's how their parents did it all the way down the line. 

What you're pushing is the product of a bored and corrupt society - it has zero practicality. 

 

[Deluge]

2 hours ago, Scott75 said:

I'd say that if your screening for people you don't like includes crass insults, you're already off to a bad start.

I like all people. The reason I like all people is because they are sons and daughters of God. 

What I don't like is some people's thinking. 

I don't like YOUR thinking. It's why I'm throwing your thoughts back in your face.  

[Scott75]

On 12/29/2024 at 1:45 PM, Deluge said:

On 12/29/2024 at 7:48 AM, Scott75 said:

On 12/27/2024 at 3:07 PM, Deluge said:

If a person acts like a degenerate then he needs to be called out. The KKK and the Nazis have nothing to do with it. You need to grow a pair. 

I think this article is useful in understanding the danger of hateful words used on a group of people:

https://itstartedwithwords.org/statements/

It has nothing to do with hate. "Hate" is a word radicals like you throw at your opposition to try and force them into silence.

When I call someone a stunted pervert, it means that person is an actual stunted pervert. I don't sugar coat. I just tell it like it is.  

I imagine that the Nazis could have made the same argument. Quoting from the article I linked to previously:

**

“Propaganda is a truly terrible weapon in the hands of an expert”  wrote Hitler in 1924 when he was a somewhat marginal figure in German public life. But he was not marginal to the emerging Nazi Party where he served as its first director of propaganda. His insight was how to use its powerful messaging and new technologies to build a mass political and social movement in the context of German democracy.

Building on fear and resentment coupled with longstanding antisemitism, the Nazi Party deployed propaganda to offer a bold new vision for Germany. That propaganda helped to create a climate that emboldened the perpetrators, provided justifications for the collaborators, and helped silence the bystanders. All helping to make the genocide of the Jews possible.

**

Source:

https://itstartedwithwords.org/statements/

 

The part about the Jews we know, but many are unaware that the Nazis also held a special place for the LGTB community as well. Quoting from an article on the subject:

**

DEATH IN CAPTIVITY

From 1933 to 1945, around 50,000 men were convicted of homosexuality and sent to prison. Of those, around 10,000 ended up in concentration camps where they faced slave labor, torture, rape, forced castration, medical experimentation, and murder.

One of these victims was Liddy Bacroff, a transgender woman from Hamburg who was arrested in the late 1930s. Bacroff maintained her identity in the face of police persecution, telling her captors that her “sense of sex is fully and completely that of a woman.” Nonetheless, they prosecuted Bacroff as a male homosexual and sent her to Mauthausen, where she was murdered in 1943.

Queer inmates faced abuse from guards and other inmates who often saw pink triangles as the lowest of the low among those imprisoned. Isolated from inmate support networks and subjected to daily abuse, gay and trans prisoners faced some of the highest death rates among non-Jewish camp prisoners, with an estimated two-thirds dying in captivity.

**

Full article:

https://holocaustcenter.org/german-lgbtq-community/

 

[Scott75]

On 12/29/2024 at 1:49 PM, Deluge said:

On 12/29/2024 at 6:22 AM, Scott75 said:

What I've been trying to do is explain to you and a few others here why I believe what I believe.

You're doing more than that. You're trying to convince others to believe what you believe.

What I'm trying to do is use logic and evidence to try to come to a mutual agreement as to what is true.

On 12/29/2024 at 1:49 PM, Deluge said:

You've taken a simple declatarion and turned into an argument for trannies.

There you are, insulting transgender people again. For those who don't know, tranny has been considered to be a slur for transgender people for a while now:

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

Anyway, could you elaborate on this simple declaration you're referring to?

On 12/29/2024 at 1:49 PM, Deluge said:

You're a soldier, Scott75, a soldier for the trans community.

No, I'm not a soldier for anyone, at least if we're defining a soldier by one of the following 3 definitions:

**

• noun One who serves in an army.
• noun An enlisted person or a noncommissioned officer.
• noun An active, loyal, or militant follower of an organization.

**

Source:

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

I've never served in any army, or been "an enlisted person or a noncommissioned officer". Finally, I'm just not the militant type, by which I mean I don't fit any of the following definitions for militant:

**

• adjective Fighting or warring.
• adjective Having a combative character; aggressive, especially in the service of a cause.
• noun A fighting, warring, or aggressive person or party.

**

Source:

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

Edited January 8, 2025 by Scott75

[User]

13 minutes ago, Scott75 said:

I imagine that the Nazis could have made the same argument.

Interesting. So, you consider yourself like a Nazi now?

1 minute ago, Scott75 said:

What I'm trying to do is use logic and evidence to try to come to a mutual agreement as to what is true.

Not when you make irrelevant personal comments and comparisons to Nazis and the KKK. 

[Deluge]

Just now, Scott75 said:

I imagine that the Nazis could have made the same argument. Quoting from the article I linked to previously:

**

“Propaganda is a truly terrible weapon in the hands of an expert”  wrote Hitler in 1924 when he was a somewhat marginal figure in German public life. But he was not marginal to the emerging Nazi Party where he served as its first director of propaganda. His insight was how to use its powerful messaging and new technologies to build a mass political and social movement in the context of German democracy.

Building on fear and resentment coupled with longstanding antisemitism, the Nazi Party deployed propaganda to offer a bold new vision for Germany. That propaganda helped to create a climate that emboldened the perpetrators, provided justifications for the collaborators, and helped silence the bystanders. All helping to make the genocide of the Jews possible.

**

Source:

https://itstartedwithwords.org/statements/

 

The part about the Jews we know, but many are unaware that the Nazis also held a special place for the LGTB community as well. Quoting from an article on the subject:

**

DEATH IN CAPTIVITY

From 1933 to 1945, around 50,000 men were convicted of homosexuality and sent to prison. Of those, around 10,000 ended up in concentration camps where they faced slave labor, torture, rape, forced castration, medical experimentation, and murder.

One of these victims was Liddy Bacroff, a transgender woman from Hamburg who was arrested in the late 1930s. Bacroff maintained her identity in the face of police persecution, telling her captors that her “sense of sex is fully and completely that of a woman.” Nonetheless, they prosecuted Bacroff as a male homosexual and sent her to Mauthausen, where she was murdered in 1943.

Queer inmates faced abuse from guards and other inmates who often saw pink triangles as the lowest of the low among those imprisoned. Isolated from inmate support networks and subjected to daily abuse, gay and trans prisoners faced some of the highest death rates among non-Jewish camp prisoners, with an estimated two-thirds dying in captivity.

**

Full article:

https://holocaustcenter.org/german-lgbtq-community/

 

Perhaps Nazis could make that argument; the problem is, that I'm not a Nazi. I'm just a regular guy who understands that you are confused. 

Think about it: You say that you started off thinking the way normal people do until you took a deep dive into gender confusion. Now you can't stfu about it. You've adopted their language and now you're running around spreading the message. Do you see the problem here? It's all in your head. Gender confusion is all in their heads - it has nothing to do with reality. 

[Deluge]

33 minutes ago, Scott75 said:

1. What I'm trying to do is use logic and evidence to try to come to a mutual agreement as to what is true.

2. There you are, insulting transgender people again. For those who don't know, tranny has been considered to be a slur for transgender people for a while now:

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

Anyway, could you elaborate on this simple declaration you're referring to?

3. No, I'm not a soldier for anyone, at least if we're defining a soldier by one of the following 3 definitions:

**

• noun One who serves in an army.
• noun An enlisted person or a noncommissioned officer.
• noun An active, loyal, or militant follower of an organization.

**

Source:

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

I've never served in any army, or been "an enlisted person or a noncommissioned officer". Finally, I'm just not the militant type, by which I mean I don't fit any of the following definitions for militant:

**

• adjective Fighting or warring.
• adjective Having a combative character; aggressive, especially in the service of a cause.
• noun A fighting, warring, or aggressive person or party.

**

Source:

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

1. There is no logic in your argument, and the "evidence" is delusional. You can't just foist your beliefs on society just because you think you're a woman. That's not how it works. Biology is based in reality. Gender identity is based in fantasy - it's all in your heads, and it needs to stay in your heads, or it needs to be medically treated. 

2. And I will continue to insult the trannies for as long as they keep pushing their agenda. 

3. Yes you are. You fall under this definition:

"noun An active, loyal, or militant follower of an organization." You've been arguing trans points for weeks, just like a soldier, or even a cultist. 

 

Edited January 8, 2025 by Deluge

[Scott75]

On 12/29/2024 at 3:08 PM, CdnFox said:

On 12/29/2024 at 6:29 AM, Scott75 said:

On 12/26/2024 at 11:35 PM, CdnFox said:

On 12/26/2024 at 2:43 AM, Scott75 said:

I've been posting in online forums for around 3 decades now. Which has certainly given me enough time to realize when someone is trying to foist the blame for their own typos on me using spurious logic.

Not my typos kiddo and not even your typos.

Explain to me how "Do people are just sick of dealing with your dishonesty" is a proper English sentence and then we can talk about who made a typo.

I see you're back to your usual game of trying to change the channel.

No, just trying to point out that you made a typo, while you've been trying to "change the channel" as you say. For those who'd like to see the typo in question, it's all in the nested quotes in my post #786. 

 

 

[Scott75]

On 12/29/2024 at 7:59 PM, User said:

On 12/29/2024 at 7:52 PM, Scott75 said:

On 12/28/2024 at 11:35 AM, User said:

There is no if about it. This is a fringe group. Less than 1% of the population identifies as trans.

As if trans people were the only ones who were fighting for their rights. You do remember that I'm not trans, right?

Rights?

Calling normal people cis is not a "right"

Generally speaking, it is, Twitter notwithstanding. You certainly don't have to put any dollar signs on the term here, unlike another term you like to use on me. And I have yet to find a dictionary that says that it's a pejorative. The fact that I define myself as a cisgender male strongly suggests that it's not a pejorative as well.

[User]

2 minutes ago, Scott75 said:

Generally speaking, it is, Twitter notwithstanding. You certainly don't have to put any dollar signs on the term here, unlike another term you like to use on me. And I have yet to find a dictionary that says that it's a pejorative. The fact that I define myself as a cisgender male strongly suggests that it's not a pejorative as well.

No, not generally speaking at all. It is not a right. 

 

[CdnFox]

41 minutes ago, Scott75 said:

No, just trying to point out that you made a typo, 

That is the literal definition of trying to change the channel. Instead of addressing the issues you wanted to talk about a typo. A typo you very clearly knew was a typo.

You're dishonesty is becoming of epic proportion. Have you considered running for the liberal party as leader?

[Scott75]

On 12/29/2024 at 8:52 PM, User said:

On 12/29/2024 at 8:28 PM, Scott75 said:

On 12/28/2024 at 12:12 PM, User said:

My disagreement with your absurd attempts to redefine words

I made no attempts. I simply told you of the fact that words such as female have already been given new definitions. Even quoted a Wikipedia entry proving my point. You snipped off the Wikipedia entry, perhaps thinking that this fact would just go away if you snipped it from my quote. But ignoring reality doesn't make it go away.

Yes, you certainly did make an attempt...

What do you think I attempted to do?

[Scott75]

On 12/29/2024 at 9:08 PM, Nationalist said:

On 12/29/2024 at 8:19 PM, Scott75 said:

The first time you mentioned hubris, back in your post #482, all you said in your post was "Lol...the hubris of this is fckin' monumental. Your article proves that". In my response to your post, I couldn't grasp that you would somehow think that my article 'proved' this alleged hubris. I thought you must be thinking of something else, so I asked you what you thought my article proved. This time, when you said "monumental hubris", I got your meaning and wrote a lengthy paragraph explaining to you and anyone else reading that I saw no hubris in what I'd said in post #670. Quoting:

**

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.

**

Your only response was "Hubris and social rot". Talk about hubris -.- It's at this point that I think I came to the conclusion that you really weren't listening to what I was saying and were just repeating what you'd said before.

That you think your whims can dictate the meaning of words and that you can force this unnatural trap on society is...hubris.

My whims have nothing to do with this. I've simply been pointing out that the definition of male and female, when used in the context of gender, has expanded for a great deal of people, and has reached places such as Wikipedia and even the legal system. And yes, I also think this is a good thing. 

[User]

6 minutes ago, Scott75 said:

What do you think I attempted to do?

Not playing your dumb dishonest games. Quote the entirety of what I said from over a week ago. 

[CdnFox]

3 minutes ago, Scott75 said:

My whims have nothing to do with this. I've simply been pointing out that the definition of male and female, when used in the context of gender, has expanded for a great deal of people, and has reached places such as Wikipedia and even the legal system. And yes, I also think this is a good thing. 

Bullshit. You've created your own ideology and are attempting to bend definitions to fit it. Claiming that this has to do with your whims is surprisingly accurate

[Scott75]

On 12/29/2024 at 9:14 PM, Nationalist said:

On 12/29/2024 at 8:31 PM, Scott75 said:

No, that's not what it says. For the audience, who may not have seen the post Nationalist was responding to, this is what the Wikipedia article said:

**

In humans, the word female can also be used to refer to gender in the social sense of gender role or gender identity.^[5][6]

**

Source:

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

You're pushing vapor. Whims. Sexual fantasy. It's not real.

That wiki posts it only serves to amplify the need to dispense with such insanity as soon as possible. 

I'm glad that you at least recognize that Wikipedia is posting what I'm quoting. You can ofcourse ignore whatever I say as fantasy, but the Wikipedia posts are a solid sign that this is much larger than me. Even more important is the legal cases that have gone through the court system. As I have acknowledged in the past, what I suppose I could call the gender identity movement hasn't won every court battle, but I think they've been winning more than they've been losing and I see that trend continuing in the future. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how things will go if that trend continues. 

Edited January 8, 2025 by Scott75

[User]

4 minutes ago, Scott75 said:

And yes, I also think this is a good thing. 

Good, so stop hiding behind this game you are playing like you are just here pointing out things like some neutral observer when your arguments are challenged. 

Let's see you defend these absurd definitions you are here pushing. 

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, Scott75 said:

I'm glad that you at least recognize that Wikipedia is posting what I'm quoting. You can ofcourse ignore whatever I say as fantasy, but the Wikipedia posts are a solid sign that this is much larger than me.

Not at all. All that shows is that there's a couple of deranged people out there and we always assume that.

[Scott75]

On 12/29/2024 at 9:24 PM, CdnFox said:

On 12/29/2024 at 7:52 PM, Scott75 said:

As if trans people were the only ones who were fighting for their rights. You do remember that I'm not trans, right?

Even worse. [insults follow]

I think Radiorum had a good response to you there:

On 12/30/2024 at 4:51 PM, Radiorum said:

Caring about the welfare of others is never scummy.

 

[Scott75]

On 12/30/2024 at 4:51 PM, Radiorum said:

On 12/29/2024 at 9:24 PM, CdnFox said:

Even worse. You're one of those losers who spent their lives professionally buthurt on behalf of other people who probably never asked you to. You make them look bad and they have to live with the results of your scummy Behavior.

Caring about the welfare of others is never scummy. The efforts of @Scott75 have been honourable

Very well said, and thank you :-). I just think the last bit was a bit too much, this part:

On 12/30/2024 at 4:51 PM, Radiorum said:

yours have been despicable.

I strongly suspect that CdnFox -thinks- he's doing the right thing with all these insults. I certainly don't think he's thinking logically here, but these subjects tend to have emotions running high.

[Scott75]

On 12/30/2024 at 6:06 PM, CdnFox said:

On 12/30/2024 at 4:49 PM, Radiorum said:

How dare you, or anyone like you, reduce the very real struggle of fellow human beings to “whims”?

Well I tend to disagree that it's a whim, given the lack of respect shown here in this very thread as well as everywhere else on the internet for people who aren't transgender

I find your above statement to be quite ironic. I can't speak for the internet, but in -this- forum, what I've seen is a -lot- of lack of respect for people who are transgender as well as others from the LGTB community.