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
5 hours ago, Scott75 said:

For the audience, User literally cut out my first sentence, where I made it clear that I -do- respond to what he says. Quoting:

Claiming you do it doesn't make it accurate. 

I responded to the only part of your response that was relevant. 

4 hours ago, Scott75 said:

The evidence that these definitions exists is irrefutable.

That is not what I asked. 

4 hours ago, Scott75 said:

I agree that you didn't say that you think "you are the judge of all humankind",

Perfect. Thanks. Not interested in your dishonest inference in things I did not say as if I did. 

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

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

 

Posted
3 hours ago, Scott75 said:

True, but it doesn't take a doctor to point out that a person seems to have a certain condition. But if you don't think you have a case of transphobia, you're free to explain why you believe this.

Well, it certainly takes more than an ignorant a$$hole like you on an online forum. 

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

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

 

Posted
4 hours ago, Scott75 said:

I have yet to see any hard evidence that there -is- a "trans agenda". There are people like me who believe that trans people should be treated with respect though.

Of course you can't see evidence; you're a hardcore activist. 

Talk about what you think is unfair for the trannies. 

5 hours ago, Scott75 said:

Slave owners were quite annoyed when political activists started calling for the abolishment of slavery as well. More recently, many were annoyed when people started calling for legalizing gay marriage. I think almost everyone agrees that the abolition of slavery was a good thing. I suspect you might be one of those who is annoyed at the expanded rights of the LGBT community. In time, I believe that such people will be viewed as former slave owners are viewed now. Time will tell.

Talk about what you think is unfair, or unjust toward the trannies. 

Posted
5 hours ago, Scott75 said:

1. I define myself as a -type- of man, a cisgender one. There are also transgender men.

2. I agree I have taken sides when it comes to the definition of terms like gender, man and woman. I -don't- agree that I have "abandoned the biological aspects of this debate". Far from it. In fact, it's precisely because I think biology is important that I have embraced terms like transgender and cisgender. I also think that cisgender women should have the right to compete in sports where only cisgender women can participate.

1. You're defined as a man who's been brainwashed by trans activists. 

2. You've relegated biology, and that is errant thinking. 

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Scott75 said:

As I've repeated many times, there are many who now define men and women as anyone who identifies as such. Because of this, I think transforming men's and women's bathrooms into unisex bathrooms may be the best solution. I think it's somewhat akin to getting rid of the "colored" vs. "white" bathrooms back in the segregationist days. There was certainly a part of the population that was quite vocal against that too, but I think at -this- stage, we can all agree that it was the right decision.

And there are even more who define you as a man, and just a man, which is correct. MOST people don't give a shit about identity and the politics behind it - the proof is in last year's election. 

You're wrong about transforming bathrooms into tranny rooms; it's a stupid idea, and most Americans will reject it.

This has nothing to do with race - blacks and whites can't change their DNA; they were BORN black or white. 

Trannies weren't BORN trannies - the vast majority of them are radicalized converts, just like you. 

Edited by Deluge
Posted
9 hours ago, Scott75 said:

You have? Where?

In. This. Thread. 

This is another one of my favorite games that the left plays. You explain something. They ignore it and carry on. You explain it again. They fail to address it again and just carry on. You finally put your foot down and say you are not addressing this. And they pretend that they've never ever heard of it.

What a piece of crap you are

Posted
8 hours ago, Scott75 said:

It seems you haven't taken society's acceptance, or lack thereof, into account when it comes to gender dysphoria.

 

Another dishonest lie. If anything I think that society's acceptance of gender dysphoria is substantial. It's seen correctly as an illness that the person isn't responsible for. Just like Cancer or the like. So there's sympathy. 

but you're equating and conflating acceptance of an illness with acceptance of every single demand that the sick people make. It's one thing for a disabled person to reasonably require a request that a wheelchair ramp be installed to provide access to a building that they otherwise would not be able to access. It is not reasonable for the disabled person to expect everyone around them to drop what they're doing and carry them up the stairs.

You have not addressed your own hypocrisy. A tiny fraction of the population wants to use terms like cis And you absolutely demand that this be accepted yet if a large percentage of the population does not want to play ball with allowing men to use women's bathrooms and there is wide acceptance of that then you freak out and demand that this is inappropriate

Your entire argument is dishonesty and you don't address anyone's points ever. All you do is try and claim that they're wrong because you've tried to explain it before as if that makes any difference.

Posted
On 1/8/2025 at 8:58 AM, Deluge said:
On 1/8/2025 at 8:00 AM, Scott75 said:

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?

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.

This notion that members of the LGB community can only be alright in your book if they "keep to themselves" is really something. Anyway, I'm glad that you're now at least saying agendas, plural. If the LGBTQ community was truly united, none of them would have supported Trump. And yet:

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/trump-pride-gay-republicans-why-they-re-backing-president-n1243469

Posted
On 1/8/2025 at 8:58 AM, Deluge said:
On 1/8/2025 at 8:00 AM, Scott75 said:

[So] 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?

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. 

I've seen marchers march for and against LGBT rights, with both having issues because of it. I've personally never been much of a marcher myself, I prefer discussing things online.

Posted (edited)
On 1/8/2025 at 8:58 AM, User said:
On 1/8/2025 at 7:24 AM, 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.

Well, it looks like you're beginning to accept the fact that these new definitions exist, at least, which is progress.

Edited by Scott75
Posted
1 minute ago, Scott75 said:

Well, it looks like you're beginning to accept the fact that these new definitions exist, at least, which is progress.

This has always been some imaginary argument about nothing I have said that you have been having with yourself. 

Why? Because you are an ignorant a$$hole. 

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

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

 

Posted
On 1/8/2025 at 9:01 AM, User said:
On 1/8/2025 at 7:16 AM, 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.

Yes, you have. I keep on pointing out that this isn't always the case, but you keep on snipping off those bits. Quoting from where you snipped off:

**

In many circumstances, this may well not matter, in which case, fine. As I've said before, for the past 3 years living in Mexico, I've never once felt the need to tell anyone I was cisgender. But there are some circumstances where it -does- matter, and in those circumstances, I could say that I am cisgender.

**

Posted
9 minutes ago, Scott75 said:

Yes, you have. I keep on pointing out that this isn't always the case, but you keep on snipping off those bits. Quoting from where you snipped off:

You keep asserting it is not always the case, that doesn't make it so. 

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

Its that simple. 

You are arguing to make this more complicated based on a made-up problem. 

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

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

 

Posted
On 1/8/2025 at 9:04 AM, Deluge said:
On 1/8/2025 at 7:52 AM, 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.  

I think what you're doing above can safely be classified as trying to alienate those in the LGBTQ community, as the opposite of normal is abnormal, which I think we can agree has negative connotations. The better way of putting it is that -most- people date people of the opposite sex. Generally speaking, those in the LGBTQ community don't, with some exceptions. 

Posted
On 1/8/2025 at 9:11 AM, Deluge said:
On 1/8/2025 at 7:48 AM, 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.

The problem with your logic here is that many people these days can simply tell you they're a man or a woman, not what their biological sex is. Now, if it doesn't matter whether they are the same sex as the gender they identify with, no worries. If it -does- matter, however, you may want additional information. You could, ofcourse, ask them what their biological sex is, but from what I've seen, the better question is whether they are cisgender or transgender.

Posted (edited)
On 1/8/2025 at 9:46 AM, Deluge said:
On 1/8/2025 at 7:27 AM, Scott75 said:
On 12/29/2024 at 1:25 PM, Deluge said:

That's easy. If you're tolerant of woke bullshit then you're a RINO. 

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.

I certainly agree that you don't like my thinking, at least when it comes to the main subjects of this thread. What you may want to ask yourself is why.

Edited by Scott75
Posted
4 minutes ago, Scott75 said:

You could, ofcourse, ask them what their biological sex is, but from what I've seen, the better question is whether they are cisgender or transgender.

If they simply identify as what they really are, instead of lying, there is no problem. 

You don't need to identify as cisgender if they identify as transgender. 

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

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

 

Posted
On 1/8/2025 at 10:22 AM, User said:
On 1/8/2025 at 10:08 AM, Scott75 said:
On 12/29/2024 at 1:45 PM, Deluge said:

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/

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

I feel like I'm in a debate with a kid saying "I know you are but what am I?". Did you even read beyond the first sentence of my post?

Posted
On 1/8/2025 at 10:22 AM, User said:
On 1/8/2025 at 10:20 AM, Scott75 said:
On 12/29/2024 at 1:49 PM, Deluge said:

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.

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

When I've made references to the Nazis or the KKK, it's to try to start from a point where we agree- that is, that the Nazis and the KKK are generally pretty bad. I then build on that, saying how some of the arguments you and others make are similar to arguments made by the Nazis and the KKK, in an effort for you and others here to see the errors of your ways. 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Scott75 said:

I feel like I'm in a debate with a kid saying "I know you are but what am I?". Did you even read beyond the first sentence of my post?

This is what happens when you make ignorant a$$hole comparisons of people to Nazis. It gets done back to you. Just following your playbook here. 

1 minute ago, Scott75 said:

When I've made references to the Nazis or the KKK, it's to try to start from a point where we agree- that is, that the Nazis and the KKK are generally pretty bad. I then build on that, saying how some of the arguments you and others make are similar to arguments made by the Nazis and the KKK, in an effort for you and others here to see the errors of your ways. 

If you are unable to articulate your argument on its own merits free from Nazi and KKK comparisons, it is not much of an argument. 

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

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

 

Posted (edited)
On 1/8/2025 at 10:40 AM, Deluge said:
On 1/8/2025 at 10:08 AM, 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 don't see that as a problem at all. In fact, I think that's far better, as trying to persuade a Nazi that their path is a bad one is not where I want to spend my time. My assumption from the start was that you weren't a Nazi. I was trying to point out that Nazis used fear and resentment against people they disliked, but that was only the beginning. I think they preferred saying things like degenerate instead of "stunted pervert", but I think the general sentiment was the same. I think we can agree that their "final solution" to those they deemed to essentially be unfit for life was terrible and I ask you to consider where you are headed with your own insults of people you dislike.

Tell me, have you seen a film called V for Vendetta? The trailer itself doesn't bring it up, but it actually has a very powerful case, in more modern terms, of where such sentiments can lead.

Edited by Scott75
Posted
13 hours ago, Scott75 said:

I don't see that as a problem at all. In fact, I think that's far better, as trying to persuade a Nazi that their path is a bad one is not where I want to spend my time. My assumption from the start was that you weren't a Nazi. I was trying to point out that Nazis used fear and resentment against people they disliked, but that was only the beginning. I think they preferred saying things like degenerate instead of "stunted pervert", but I think the general sentiment was the same. I think we can agree that their "final solution" to those they deemed to essentially be unfit for life was terrible and I ask you to consider where you are headed with your own insults of people you dislike.

Tell me, have you seen a film called V for Vendetta? The trailer itself doesn't bring it up, but it actually has a very powerful case, in more modern terms, of where such sentiments can lead.

I get your concern for the trannies, but that isn't going to change my mind about the activists. They are stunted perverts and they need to be kept away from kids and the public in general. 

As I said before, getting dolled up and going out for the night is fine, but at the end of the day, they need to be going to the men's room, not the women's room, or any other room that fuels their fantasies. 

Posted
13 hours ago, Scott75 said:

When I've made references to the Nazis or the KKK, it's to try to start from a point where we agree- that is, that the Nazis and the KKK are generally pretty bad. I then build on that, saying how some of the arguments you and others make are similar to arguments made by the Nazis and the KKK, in an effort for you and others here to see the errors of your ways. 

There errors are all on your side. I'm not the one fueling the tranny fantasy - you are. 

I'm here to help you undertand that wokeness is fading, and it might be time for you to pull your head out of the Left's ass. 

13 hours ago, Scott75 said:

I feel like I'm in a debate with a kid saying "I know you are but what am I?". Did you even read beyond the first sentence of my post?

You're in a debate with someone much smarter than you. 

My advice is that you stop pretending men have vaginas, and come back to normalcy. 

Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, Scott75 said:

I certainly agree that you don't like my thinking, at least when it comes to the main subjects of this thread. What you may want to ask yourself is why.

I already know why. It's because you believe some men with penises, really have vaginas, and it's fueling a cause that is a complete waste of everyone's time, but it still has to be addressed due to its pervasiveness. 

Edited by Deluge

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.


×
×
  • Create New...