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
On 1/30/2025 at 1:44 PM, Radiorum said:

So you accept the legitimacy of transgender women and  men?

I'm great, thanks for asking.

There's nothing legitimate about any of that. 

Hopefully this tranny bullshit is just a phase and we'll all be able to laugh about it in 5 years. 

Posted
6 hours ago, Matthew said:

Ah so then certainly you could explain what my alleged "dna angle" is?

kenan-thompson-kenan.gif.bdfcf0c383a0d28876be80c60598a7b2.gif

 

You want me to explain your point of view that you yourself cannot explain :) 

image.jpeg.fd2fe22ef99efc197f27f64335cfa1bc.jpeg

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

You want me to explain your point of view that you yourself cannot explain

Oh I did explain my point of view. If you comprehended it then you know that it has nothing to do with DNA.

Posted
1 hour ago, Matthew said:

Oh I did explain my point of view. If you comprehended it then you know that it has nothing to do with DNA.

No you can't. That was my point. Your inability to do so since then has proved my point already. Thanks for playing kiddo :) 

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

No you can't.

Yep I did, that's what you replied to here initially. Of course I can't explain some other BS you fabricated about a "DNA angle" that only exists in your imagination.

Posted
7 minutes ago, Matthew said:

Yep I did, 

No, you didn't which is why I mentioned it in my reply. And you can't now.

Why don't you make three or four more posts not explaining your position, that'll really prove your point :) 

I suppose you could always try and come up with some fake ass answer to make it look like you've thought about it since then but you very obviously cannot explain your position.

I on the other hand can explain in detail clearly any of the positions I hold. I arrive at them with thought and logic and reason I'm like you who arrive at yours with emotion and repeating the bullet points of your echo chamber.

Which is why you're struggling now. Typical left-wing, you can repeat what you've heard but you can't think or understand what it means. You are slightly less intelligent than a parrot

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

No, you didn't which is why I mentioned it in my reply. And you can't now.

Why don't you make three or four more posts not explaining your position, that'll really prove your point :) 

I suppose you could always try and come up with some fake ass answer to make it look like you've thought about it since then but you very obviously cannot explain your position.

I on the other hand can explain in detail clearly any of the positions I hold. I arrive at them with thought and logic and reason I'm like you who arrive at yours with emotion and repeating the bullet points of your echo chamber.

Which is why you're struggling now. Typical left-wing, you can repeat what you've heard but you can't think or understand what it means. You are slightly less intelligent than a parrot

I responded to someone else, not to you. You chimed in seemingly wanting to talk to me about it. So you're the one who came to me to talk supposedly about something I said.

So, what the f*ck is it that you want to talk about otherwise if you can't even describe what it is then why are you even talking to me?

Edited by Matthew
Posted
4 minutes ago, Matthew said:

I responded to someone else, not to you.

So you still can't explain your position :)  

 

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
8 minutes ago, Matthew said:

So you're just trolling.

No, you're just dodging. It was a very simple question. You said i didn't understand your positon, i said you didn't have one but if you do lets hear it and it turns out you can't. 

So obviously you were just full of shit and can't explain yourself at all. Like most on the left you just repeat the talking points you're told and don't understand them or care to and can't explain them if asked

and now everyone can see your full of shit.

Well, that's probably about as much fun as I should have at the expense of the mentally disadvantaged, did you want to continue looking stupid o r did you want ;to move on now?  LOL

 

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
4 hours ago, Matthew said:

Ok what do you think the talking point is that I'm repeating?

Why don't you explain your position and then we can go over it?

You're so afraid that your position and what you said is completely indefensible that you are actually scared to try to explain it.

Even you know that the transgender rights  movement is a fraud, And that's why you are absolutely petrified about being exposed and why you refuse to explain your position. Honestly you should feel terrible

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
49 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Why don't you explain your position

Sure you can see it here. Not that it matters to you. You seem more content to just be having this conversation with yourself and your imaginary pretend world. So don't let me interrupt you.

I think you're just lonely and these fake attempts at conversation are how you deal with it.

Posted
1 hour ago, Matthew said:

Sure you can see it here. Not that it matters to you.

Oh you mean the thing that I specifically referred to and quoted but that you then pretended you never said and then changed your story to I didn't understand it and still can't explain it.

So in other words I understood it just fine, I quoted it, I called you out on your inconsistencies and you are unable to address that so you have attempted to lie and change the subject

Gosh nobody would ever guess you're a left Winger :) 

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Oh you mean the thing that I specifically referred to and quoted

You quoted the entire thing and then proceeded with a non sequitur rant related to none of it.

Posted
7 hours ago, Matthew said:

You quoted the entire thing and then proceeded with a non sequitur rant related to none of it.

I quoted it and addressed specific points in it. Firstly I pointed out that you can't even define some of the terms, and then you proved me right by not being able to define the terms or your supposed point .

Kid everybody can see you. Everybody can see that you are unable to make the most simple Arguments or provide the most simple definitions. You are looking like a m0ron to literally everybody. Either address the points or admit that you can't and move on. I'm actually becoming embarrassed on your behalf just watching you flounder through this like Urkel fighting Hulk Hogan

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

and addressed specific points in it

Nope you didn't. Not one.

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Firstly I pointed out that you can't even define some of the terms

You asked me about the word  "legitimate" as if I had made some claim hinging on that word, maybe confusing me with someone else.

What i did say is that "people tend to think that if one is not born with a thing in one's DNA or physically in their body or brain, then the thing is not real or legitimate." That's not me making a claim about legitimacy, Im commenting on all these people fixated on that concept. So asking me to define it is pointless as I have no belief about the legitimacy of a gender.

Edited by Matthew
Posted
2 hours ago, Matthew said:

Nope you didn't. Not one.

Sure I did and I just reiterated it. And you still can't offer that definition or explain what your position is

And you're so mentally buthurt about it that you're now following me around on other threads  and misquoting me trying to pretend I said things that I didn't to make yourself feel better :)  LOL!!!!

And I bet good money that you're an extra play also doesn't show that you can define that word or explain your point.

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

or explain what your position is

I literally just did and you ran away from it because you can't handle any form of nuance. Youre not just lazy but also a coward. You beg me to talk to you and then run away from anything complicated.

Posted
On 2/4/2025 at 3:19 PM, Matthew said:

The false dilemma here, as usual, is people tend to think that if one is not born with a thing in one's DNA or physically in their body or brain, then the thing is not real or legitimate. But most of who we are and what we think is a socially constructed reality. Even the neurological evidence you've cited involves chemical functions largely occurring within social contexts. Things that are social fabrications are still real in their effects (see the Thomas Theorem)

No, the dilemma is giving a voice to radicals like you. This wasn't an issue until a bunch of bored activists got together and decided to reimagine humanity. 

Your brand of thinking is flawed. It's not practical, and it's nowhere near crucial to a successful society.

We DON'T need trannies. We DON'T need DEI, we DON'T need woke bullshit. We DON'T need anything you're peddling.

What we DO need is two sexes - man and woman - to replenish our species and keep the country moving in a healthy direction. There is nothing healthy about what you're pushing. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Deluge said:

No, the dilemma is giving a voice to radicals like you. This wasn't an issue until a bunch of bored activists got together and decided to reimagine humanity. 

Your brand of thinking is flawed. It's not practical, and it's nowhere near crucial to a successful society.

We DON'T need trannies. We DON'T need DEI, we DON'T need woke bullshit. We DON'T need anything you're peddling.

What we DO need is two sexes - man and woman - to replenish our species and keep the country moving in a healthy direction. There is nothing healthy about what you're pushing. 

It's none of your business. Just keep living in your hovel collecting urine in mason jars and eating dogfood out of the can and you'll be fine.

Posted
1 hour ago, Deluge said:

No, the dilemma is giving a voice to radicals like you.

I've never had any particularly radical notions about gender. Though m0rons like you certainly make adopting new gender ideas more appealing.

Posted
9 minutes ago, Matthew said:

I've never had any particularly radical notions about gender. Though m0rons like you certainly make adopting new gender ideas more appealing.

It's always struck me as interesting that the side that's all about "personal freedom" is so invested in enforcing a rigid social gender binary when 99 per cent of the time how some one chooses to identify doesn't effect anyone but that individual it's almost like conservatism is less a coherent ideology and more of an aesthetic.

Posted
1 minute ago, Black Dog said:

It's always struck me as interesting that the side that's all about "personal freedom" is so invested in enforcing a rigid social gender binary

Parents choiiiiice!!!

Posted
14 minutes ago, Matthew said:

I've never had any particularly radical notions about gender. Though m0rons like you certainly make adopting new gender ideas more appealing.

Don't kid yourself. Indoctrination is what drove you to DEI. I'm just here to let you know that you've planted your flag on the wrong hill. ;) 

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
      10,904
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    LinkSoul60
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

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