Random Thoughts - Current Events edition [Archive]

Galactus

03-08-2022, 11:30 AM

No-one buys your lies, sweetheart.

She is being attacked, because, she dares to stand up to women, especially those who are being attacked by trans lobby and receive death and rape threats. Of course, how a mere woman dare to say "no" to men!?

If a man says he is a woman and wants to get into women showers and changing rooms and shelters, than he is a woman and has all rights to do so, whether he has dick or already chopped it off. You know, because, he is a man. More important than a woman and her pesky rights. :roll:

An example of a "very horrible twanzophobic" tweet, which literally kills dozens upon dozens of twanz peoplez. (https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1470092815506063365?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5 Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1470092815506063365%7Ctwgr% 5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailywire.com%2Fnews%2Ft he-penised-individual-who-raped-you-is-a-woman-j-k-rowling-slams-scotland-police-for-move-to-record-male-rapists-as-women-based-on-self-identity)

In the context of your post I think you mean "she dares to stand up for women"...although with you I can never quite be sure what you mean.

The truth is trans women have been using female bathrooms and changing rooms largely without incident for as long as there has been a transgender and transvestite communities. It's only in the last decade that it's been built up into this big culture wars issue. While statistically there is no evidence that letting trans women use these spaces changes anything I can certainly see why some women may feel uncomfortable or even unsafe.

For me personally even if we take JK Rowling at face value there is a big contradiction in her beliefs. If she is supportive of trans people's right to live a lifestyle approximating the gender they feel they are then surely they have to be allowed access to female spaces or is she suggesting they use male bathrooms and changing rooms? I can't imagine that is a scenario that will ever end well. That's a problem that TERFS that claim to support most trans rights have yet to come up with an answer to. (Interestingly there isn't anywhere the same level hysteria as trans men using male spaces). Also there are definitely TERFS who limit their arguments around protecting women. I don't see why Rowling can't retweet them and not ones with who have history advocating violence against trans women. Like I said it's hard to view her as entirely sincere that her arguments are just about supporting women when she supports actual transphobes.

I don't know what you think I'm lying about? The fact that Rowling used to be a homophobe? That she is currently supportive of transphobes? Pretty sure both can be proven. The tweet you linked won't come up on my phone but I assume it's Rowling making a very reasonable sounding argument against trans women using female only spaces...and that'd be fine. It doesn't negate all the bad faith arguments she's made.

Andrew NDB

03-08-2022, 11:58 AM

I wonder, how our local SJW gonna spin it? Is he gonna argue that dick is a female organ?

I've seen it argued vehemently many times, and straight-faced (no pun intended) by people of this mindset. Nuts (also no pun intended).

Sumac

03-08-2022, 12:55 PM

In the context of your post I think you mean "she dares to stand up for women"...although with you I can never quite be sure what you mean.
Oh, please, spare me your cowardly whining.

The truth is trans women have been using female bathrooms and changing rooms largely without incident for as long as there has been a transgender and transvestite communities. It's only in the last decade that it's been built up into this big culture wars issue. While statistically there is no evidence that letting trans women use these spaces I can certainly see why some women may feel uncomfortable or even unsafe.
The truth is trans "women" are men and they don't belong to the women showers and changing rooms. No matter what.

Also, about "no incidents" - another lie.
"Kind and accepting trans" everyone!! Oh, poor victims of oppression! (https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipOM9J_ZIrYtiMagVRr_jhagMR-XP59TBsJFLwNlcS13iIUT4ovqKRN9zttevr0PmA?key=NmJuV1 AyRnVSU3dOS2VObVhLSm1uNUkxRjRBSk9R)

For me personally even if we take JK Rowling at face value there is a big contradiction in her beliefs. If she is supportive of trans people's right to live a lifestyle approximating the gender they feel they are then surely they have to be allowed access to female spaces or is she suggesting they use male bathrooms and changing rooms? I can't imagine that is a scenario that will ever end well. That's a problem that TERFS that claim to support most trans rights have yet to come up with an answer to. (Interestingly there isn't anywhere the same level hysteria as trans men using male spaces). Also there are definitely TERFS who limit their arguments around protecting women. I don't see why Rowling can't retweet them and not ones with who have history advocating violence against trans women. Like I said it's hard to view her as entirely sincere that her arguments are just about supporting women when she supports actual transphobes.
Right of small group of dangerous psychopaths, even if they are supported by some bleeding-heart idiots, should not supersede rights of 50% of humanity. Simple as that.

I don't know what you think I'm lying about? The fact that Rowling used to be a homophobe? That she is currently supportive of transphobes? Pretty sure both can be proven. The tweet you linked won't come up on my phone but I assume it's Rowling making a very reasonable sounding argument against trans women using female only spaces...and that'd be fine. It doesn't negate all the bad faith arguments she's made.
About...everything?
From Rowling supporting some "howwible twanzphobes" to "men can be women and totes not dangerous".

FredWolfLeonardo

03-08-2022, 02:36 PM

I love it when two people argue, and I'll be happy regardless of who loses because I detest both of their worldviews :tlol:

Sumac

03-08-2022, 03:04 PM

I love it when two people argue, and I'll be happy regardless of who loses because I detest both of their worldviews :tlol:
Not really sure where's my opinion crossed you, but, honestly, you can go to swim with sharks, with your "detest", kid.

FredWolfLeonardo

03-08-2022, 03:10 PM

Not really sure where's my opinion crossed you, but, honestly, you can go to swim with sharks, with your "detest", kid.

In this particular discussion and topic, I definetly agree with you more than Galactus. When it comes to both of your overall worldviews though, I am definetly not in either of the self-professed anti-authoritarian camps, as I am an authoritarian.

Andrew NDB

03-08-2022, 03:56 PM

In this particular discussion and topic, I definetly agree with you more than Galactus. When it comes to both of your overall worldviews though, I am definetly not in either of the self-professed anti-authoritarian camps, as I am an authoritarian.

Well, points for honesty. It's the people that pretend they're not pro-authoritarian but very clearly are that bug me.

Galactus

03-08-2022, 05:04 PM

Hey, Sumac. I'm not sure how clarifying what you meant is "cowardly whining". I'm not someone who likes to pull up others for typos or using the wrong words sometimes as I do that myself but sometimes it's necessary to clarify what someone actually means. When this happens I don't get angry at that person.

I'm also not sure why you attributed a quote to me of something I didn't say. There's a difference between saying that trans people have been using bathrooms and changing rooms of their choice for decades "largely without incident" to saying that there are "no incidents" at all. Of course there is going to be incidents of assault in public spaces but incidents of trans people attacking anyone in places like rest or changing rooms is substantially less than people of the same cis gender attacking each other in these places.

No one ever said that maintaining a free and equal society would be easy. There will occasionally be instances were the rights of one group will conflict with the rights of another. The idea that the rights of the larger group should be protected more than the smaller is not something that should happen in an equal society. They are never pleasant but that's why we have conversations about these issues to find a path forward. Maybe the answer is gender neutral bathrooms/changing rooms but I tend to think the more likely outcome is that the hysteria surrounding trans people will die down in everyday life and people will simply accept them for what they are and allow them in to the spaces they feel are appropriate.

We've danced fandango before and I'll repeat what I said then; Most scientists say there are genetic reasons why someone's gender identity which is routed in the brain doesn't always align with the physical way they were born. It's also the common consensus that it's healthier for them to live their lives as the gender they identify as. Frankly this whole idea that they are their lifestyle is a choice, they are mentally ill, that they are rapists and shouldn't be allowed in public changing rooms is 100% what people used to say about gay people. Now we look back at that and think it was all ludicrous and I would bet ten or twenty years from now people will think the same about trans people...but hey it's easier to say that everyone that disagrees with you on this issue of lying.

Andrew NDB

03-08-2022, 05:26 PM

Most scientists say there are genetic reasons why someone's gender identity which is routed in the brain doesn't always align with the physical way they were born.

So what part of the brain says, "I really, really feel like I need to put on makeup, long painted nails and put on a dress!" Because there's nothing genetic about that whatsoever. We invented these things. Yet they're the first thing transgender people get excited about doing.

Galactus

03-08-2022, 05:43 PM

So what part of the brain says, "I really, really feel like I need to put on makeup, long painted nails and put on a dress!" Because there's nothing genetic about that whatsoever. We invented these things. Yet they're the first thing transgender people get excited about doing.

Well I'm not a scientist myself (big shock I know) but I imagine nothing about their genetic makeup or their brains actually compels trans women to wear dresses, put on makeup and wear false nails. Those are fairly typical behavioral and cultural norms for women that I imagine someone who strongly feels from a very young age that they are female is going to gravitate to them.

Now I could be entirely wrong about that. I'd probably have to read more about it but when the majority of the scientific community says that there is evidence to show that there are genetic reasons that explain why trans people feel they were born into the wrong bodies I don't see why anyone would doubt it. In another thread Sumac suggested that it was huge conspiracy but frankly there aren't many companies that get rich just on gender re-alignment surgery. I suspect the number of people that would come out as trans and want to transition would be greater if the stigma around it disappeared but I still doubt it would make anyone Scrooge Mcduck level rich.

IMJ

03-08-2022, 06:03 PM

Well I'm not a scientist myself (big shock I know) but I imagine nothing about their genetic makeup or their brains actually compels trans women to wear dresses, put on makeup and wear false nails. Those are fairly typical behavioral and cultural norms for women that I imagine someone who strongly feels from a very young age that they are female is going to gravitate to them

But even your explanation right there implies a neurological issue. By this explanation it implies the difference between being you inhabiting your body or being a consciousness piloting your body. Nobody pilots their body. There is a connection to self there, otherwise you would perceive that you are looking out of your eyes like windows instead of using your eyes to see.

And in absence of "their brains actually compelling" them to undertake behavior (which would be a cognitive anomaly), you then have them behaving "according to cultural norms" that they identify with although inhabiting a body they feel disconnected with - piloting their bodies rather than inhabiting them (which would be a cognitive anomaly).

Therefore by both paradigms you have anomalous cognitive disconnects. A boy strongly feeling from a very young age that they are female is a cognitive anomaly.

And this is the part of debate with virtue signalers and peasant-simps that I can't stand. It's not enough to recognize that their is a cognitive issue there that we should accept and live and let live. But instead we have to play-pretend some fabrication that this disconnect is a "3rd gender" or some other nonsense of language. I'm happy to live and let live, but I'm sick of the fool's bull $#!(.

Leo656

03-08-2022, 06:11 PM

Galactus

03-08-2022, 06:14 PM

I think you're misunderstanding what I said there. I never said that their brains compel them to take on certain behaviors. Their brains make them feel they are a certain gender. There is nothing in cis women's brains that compel them to wear dresses, put on make up and get their nails done. A lot of them do that stuff because those very typical cultural norms that have developed around women for centuries. By that same token if a person from a young age strongly feels they are female then the likelihood is that they are going adopt those same cultural and behavioral norms. Also just like not all the women wear dresses and put on makeup etc not all trans women do that either. Even if you count that as a "cognitive anomaly" since it's routed in genetics there is nothing that can be done to make trans people feel like they are the gender they were born as and history shows it's very damaging to try. I'd say it's not a "live and let live" attitude if people keep denying them very basic things like being able to identify as the gender they live as.

I sometimes wonder how much of it is self-loathing gay people, too. Statistically, has to be a few. "No way, I'm not gay, I could never be gay. Turns out I'm a woman, thus explaining perfectly my overwhelming desire to wear dresses and suck c*ck. But no way, not gay, never gay. Just born in the wrong body, otherwise totally normal. And definitely not gay."

Like yeah, maybe that's not all or most of 'em. But bound to be a few of 'em. Y'know?

If a guy can't accept he's gay then it's seems very extreme behavior to become something which there is an even greater stigma around. Most self-loathing gay people tend to become homophobes.

Vegita-San

03-08-2022, 06:55 PM

I sometimes wonder how much of it is self-loathing gay people, too. Statistically, has to be a few. "No way, I'm not gay, I could never be gay. Turns out I'm a woman, thus explaining perfectly my overwhelming desire to wear dresses and suck c*ck. But no way, not gay, never gay. Just born in the wrong body, otherwise totally normal. And definitely not gay."

Like yeah, maybe that's not all or most of 'em. But bound to be a few of 'em. Y'know?

And also notice that bout 80% of the trans community, if not more, also seems to be a WHITE Problem. which I find rather interesting. I don't know of any black, latino, asian folks with this problem. at least no famous ones. and if they do have it, they keep it on the downlow, unlike white folk who parade it around.

I just find it amusing that every few months, JK Rowling trends on twitter, and it's always a chess game to figure out why.

But, based on my opinions above, this would make me anti trans. and maybe I am, because, quite frankly, I don't understand or suport any of it. But, do what you wanna do with your self...just don't harm others :).

IndigoErth

03-08-2022, 08:04 PM

I don't know of any black, latino, asian folks with this problem.
Funny enough, the first one I'd crossed paths with (first that I know of at least) was black. Back in high school in the 90s and nobody, at least none that I ever witnessed, had any issue with it. (Bathroom access was supposedly via the nurse's office bathroom.)

A little bit of a curiosity, but I never really saw anyone giving them a hard time. (Granted, I was a grade lower so we only shared a lunch period sometimes.) Back then "he" was just considered a guy who was the school cross dresser, as the "trans" issue/discussion wasn't a thing yet, but it would not surprise me if this individual has been living as a trans woman for most of her life now. If so and they're happy with that life and choice, then so be it. That student's choice wasn't hurting anyone back then and if a bunch of 90s teens can deal with it, then it's unfortunate if adults of the same era 25 years later suddenly can't. I haven't seen any evidence that this kid went on to ruin local society by existing they way they chose to.

I'm not sure I've actually ever known or crossed paths with any white trans people in person. Either I haven't or they passed really, really well.

Leo656

03-08-2022, 08:24 PM

The single biggest giveaway is whether or not the lady before you can palm a basketball or not. If so, then once upon a time that "Christine" was probably "Chris".

Most of the ones I've met also have that warbly Nicole Bass kind of voice but I assume not all of them do. But yeah, to be kind I've never met one who could "pass". The ones you see on TV have the benefit of Hollywood level lighting and make-up. In real life you can generally tell. Not "polite" to say that, but... Still true.

They used to say you can't tell if someone is gay just by looking at them either but I think we've all accepted that to be bullsh*t by now. You can ALMOST always tell if someone is gay or not from a mile away. And not just because nowadays they'll have it on their shirt or something, although that definitely helps. :lol:

Prowler

03-08-2022, 09:43 PM

I don't think I've ever met a trans person in my life. At least not that I recall. But my point is, no one I personally know is trans. I think I'd be able to tell or guess if they were.

As for gay people, there's some people I've met throughout my life that I strongly suspected were gay. Obviously I didn't ask nor they tell me so, but I wasn't the only one to get that impression from the vibe they gave off.

But, ofc, for all I know, there might be plenty of gay people out there that fly under the radar. Recently in my country there was a somewhat known politician who came out as gay. I don't know the guy personally nor have I ever met him or seen him in public, but judging from his body language and his tone of voice on TV, I wouldn't have guessed him to be gay. Several people were somewhat surprised as well.

There are cases of gay men who spend or spent nearly their whole lives hiding the fact they were gay. Some of them while even married to women. And, somehow, not even their wives could tell something was off. My mother knew this woman who was married to the same man for 30 years. Until one day, he came home and confessed to her he was gay and had fallen in love with a man. The woman was shocked by this and never forgave him for lying to her for around 3 decades. Must have been one nasty divorce, I imagine.

Sumac

03-09-2022, 05:38 AM

In this particular discussion and topic, I definetly agree with you more than Galactus. When it comes to both of your overall worldviews though, I am definetly not in either of the self-professed anti-authoritarian camps, as I am an authoritarian.
I wonder why? There is nothing good about authoritarian countries.
No progress. No freedom. No innovations.
Only stagnation and control of people who barely understand what the hell they are doing most of the time.

I'd recommend you to read some of the history to get better acquainted with this subject.

Hey, Sumac. I'm not sure how clarifying what you meant is "cowardly whining". I'm not someone who likes to pull up others for typos or using the wrong words sometimes as I do that myself but sometimes it's necessary to clarify what someone actually means. When this happens I don't get angry at that person.
It means that you dodge questions or reform your answers in such way they don't actually answer to the subject at hand. Typical behavior of zealots.

I'm also not sure why you attributed a quote to me of something I didn't say. There's a difference between saying that trans people have been using bathrooms and changing rooms of their choice for decades "largely without incident" to saying that there are "no incidents" at all. Of course there is going to be incidents of assault in public spaces but incidents of trans people attacking anyone in places like rest or changing rooms is substantially less than people of the same cis gender attacking each other in these places.
Typical.
First you say "there is no incidents". Now there are "some" incidents.
Well, at least you decided not to die on the hill "nothing ever happens when trans are involved". Points for that, I guess.

Even though, your logic is flawed. How many incidents with trans you need to consider this a problem? I'd consider one, already too many, given what kind of people they are.

Or do we need 5, 10, 20, 100 to consider it a problem?
Wouldn't be it easier to not let this problem to exist in the first place?

No one ever said that maintaining a free and equal society would be easy. There will occasionally be instances were the rights of one group will conflict with the rights of another. The idea that the rights of the larger group should be protected more than the smaller is not something that should happen in an equal society. They are never pleasant but that's why we have conversations about these issues to find a path forward. Maybe the answer is gender neutral bathrooms/changing rooms but I tend to think the more likely outcome is that the hysteria surrounding trans people will die down in everyday life and people will simply accept them for what they are and allow them in to the spaces they feel are appropriate.
I agree, that in equal society none groups should have preferences over others. However, we are not talking about normal "minority group" here and rights of this "group" are inherently at conflict with rights of everyone else, basically.

Once again, a reminder that trans are not like people of other race or culture. They are mentally unstable people, whose beliefs quite often contradict each other and who had proclaimed themselves a minority oppressed group. Feel the difference, as they say.

As such it creates two important questions: first, why rights and demands of mentally ill people should be considered as important as rights of other people and, second, why people should listen to the mentally ill people in the first place?

Should we listen to people who promote incest, zoophilia, pedophilia, cannibalism, as well? Those groups of people too have supporters and lobbyists and quite often they are affiliated with bigger LGB+ organizations. Or at least, they try to pretend they are affiliated. And LGB+ rarely does anything to kick those people out, since they are afraid of being called "bigots".

Quite similar situation had happened in the 80s, when group of pedophiles, under acronym "MAPs" attempted to use LGB+ movement to prop themselves up. LGB kick them out, which helped them to be ore accepted in modern Western world. Seems nowadays LGB has become an open field for perverts and psychos of all kinds and they don't really care about their reputation or values anymore.

As for how good trans are at supporting any Feminist or LGB values, here's two examples: Michigan Feminist Festival (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_Womyn%27s_Music_Festival), which was running since 70s was closed, when its leaders refused to accept men in dresses and Boston LGB parade (https://www.wcvb.com/article/massachusetts-boston-pride-dissolves-no-further-events-programming-planned/36985553) was shutdown, because, psychotic trans and their allies could never got enough power and attention.

This is what trans and modern "queer" people are - toxic power hungry locusts. As the case with other modern Left and SJW movements, they can only rot and destroy everything they touch.

We've danced fandango before and I'll repeat what I said then; Most scientists say there are genetic reasons why someone's gender identity which is routed in the brain doesn't always align with the physical way they were born. It's also the common consensus that it's healthier for them to live their lives as the gender they identify as. Frankly this whole idea that they are their lifestyle is a choice, they are mentally ill, that they are rapists and shouldn't be allowed in public changing rooms is 100% what people used to say about gay people. Now we look back at that and think it was all ludicrous and I would bet ten or twenty years from now people will think the same about trans people...but hey it's easier to say that everyone that disagrees with you on this issue of lying.
Gender identity is a fiction. It is a social construct, unless you want to support point of view that all women are genetically predisposed to like pink and stay in the kitchen , so to speak and that all men are genetically predisposed to like cars and football.

Also, yes, trans are mentally ill. They are not different from people suffering from any other kind of body dysmorphia, like those who starve themselves to death or think they don't have perfect faces or something like that.

Unless you want to say, that people who think they are not thin enough are genetically predisposed to that and this is inherent part of their identity, so its better for them to starve themselves, because, it would be "empathic" and "compassionate" to allow them to follow their identity, as opposed to trying to cure them and make them functioning people with as less mental problems as possible.

Also, from personal experience: pandering to mentally ill people of any kind is a bad idea. They usually just destroy themselves or destroy lives of everyone else, before destroying themselves.
Recommend reading on this subject. (https://www.transwidowsvoices.org/)

Since majority of trans are mentally unstable abusive men, trust me, those are not people you want to pander to. They will destroy you, because, for those people, even sky is not enough. They want more and more, total obedience, adoration, respect even they did nothing to deserve it. And if you say no, things can get violent, which we can see on example of Feminists and random women being harassed by trans and their allies.

Also, I recommend to read about person who was at the source of modern trans ideology. John Money (https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueOffMyChest/comments/c603q1/john_money_was_a_pedophile_a_pseudoscientist_and/). It might explain why trans are ultimately indeed mentally ill people and an "oppressed minority" and why it has inherent links to pedophilia.

To be continued in the next post...

Sumac

03-09-2022, 07:00 AM

Continuation...

Well I'm not a scientist myself (big shock I know) but I imagine nothing about their genetic makeup or their brains actually compels trans women to wear dresses, put on makeup and wear false nails. Those are fairly typical behavioral and cultural norms for women that I imagine someone who strongly feels from a very young age that they are female is going to gravitate to them.
You basically had fallen in a typical trans argument loop:
- What is a woman?
- A human of female biological sex.
- Than how male can be a female / a woman?
- They know they are females.
- How?
- They feel it and have predisposition for all things females do (mannerism, make up, dresses, hobbies, e.t.c.)
- But none of those describes females. Those are social constructs.
- You are confusing sex and gender.
- But you literally describe biological sex as bunch of stereotypes.
- YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND! They feel it and if they feel it it must be TRUTH!!
- They feel "stereotypes"?
- No, they know they are women!
- How?
- They KNOW!!!
:ohwell:

Now I could be entirely wrong about that. I'd probably have to read more about it but when the majority of the scientific community says that there is evidence to show that there are genetic reasons that explain why trans people feel they were born into the wrong bodies I don't see why anyone would doubt it. In another thread Sumac suggested that it was huge conspiracy but frankly there aren't many companies that get rich just on gender re-alignment surgery. I suspect the number of people that would come out as trans and want to transition would be greater if the stigma around it disappeared but I still doubt it would make anyone Scrooge Mcduck level rich.
You once again putting words in my mouth, honey.
I didn't said it was a global conspiracy. I've said, trans movement, which has roots at Lefties going batshit insane, is supported by global pharma, because, it is a profitable venture.

Also, considering cost of operations and the fact that trans need to use treatment for the rest of their lives (and considering what kind of treatment it is, a lot of them need more than one operation), it is quite profitable anyway.

Also, literally any mental illness rooted in genetics. Once again, trans condition is neither unique or special in that regard. It is just another mental illness, which was chosen by Left to be "next Gay right movement", because, Gays got their rights in a Western societies already, and, because, Left and LGB at large need to fight for something and launder money while doing it.

I sometimes wonder how much of it is self-loathing gay people, too. Statistically, has to be a few. "No way, I'm not gay, I could never be gay. Turns out I'm a woman, thus explaining perfectly my overwhelming desire to wear dresses and suck c*ck. But no way, not gay, never gay. Just born in the wrong body, otherwise totally normal. And definitely not gay."

Like yeah, maybe that's not all or most of 'em. But bound to be a few of 'em. Y'know?
In the last few years, Trans propaganda is trying to convert Gays and Lesbians, who are not sure in their sexuality into Trans, using precisely the same routine, you've described. They are also trying to shame people who have second thought about it and label de-transitioners as "traitors" and "transphobes". Really everything you need to know about "accepting" and "friendly" movement.

I think you're misunderstanding what I said there. I never said that their brains compel them to take on certain behaviors. Their brains make them feel they are a certain gender. There is nothing in cis women's brains that compel them to wear dresses, put on make up and get their nails done. A lot of them do that stuff because those very typical cultural norms that have developed around women for centuries. By that same token if a person from a young age strongly feels they are female then the likelihood is that they are going adopt those same cultural and behavioral norms. Also just like not all the women wear dresses and put on makeup etc not all trans women do that either. Even if you count that as a "cognitive anomaly" since it's routed in genetics there is nothing that can be done to make trans people feel like they are the gender they were born as and history shows it's very damaging to try. I'd say it's not a "live and let live" attitude if people keep denying them very basic things like being able to identify as the gender they live as.
If it is possible to fix people who think they need to starve permanently to achieve a perfect body without letting them starve to death, it is possible to fix trans without letting them mutilate their bodies.

Also, who are de-transitioners in your logic? If we go by your words, than
nothing that can be done to make trans people feel like they are the gender they were born as, but de-transitioners do exist. So?
Nothing can be done to fix mental illness of trans people, except some of them apparently can figure it out on their own, but it is something that shouldn't really happen and being trans is totally not a choice or lifestyle or a mental illness, which can be cured.

And finally:
Their brains make them feel they are a certain gender.
In another words it is no different when some people feel like they are made of glass or need to starve themselves to death.
OK. You basically proved yourself that trans is a mental illness. Good job!

If a guy can't accept he's gay then it's seems very extreme behavior to become something which there is an even greater stigma around. Most self-loathing gay people tend to become homophobes.
Given amount of trans propaganda around the issue - it is very likely that Gay and Lesbians will do exactly that and start identify as trans, even if temporarily. Also, where do you think all those "queers" and "non-binaries" come from? They are a direct side-effect of trans agenda.

Vegita-San

03-10-2022, 07:56 AM

hmm, with JK Trending AGAIN on twitter today, I had no idea some trans people where trying to 'convert' normal gay folks into their world. that's a whole new level of bizzare.

In other random thought news... what's your opinion on this 'FBI Involved in the 6th' I saw trending? Clicking on it didn't give me an idea of what was going on, since the usual twitter trolls hi jacked it.

Vegita-San

03-12-2022, 04:40 PM

back to the original topic. when you see stuff trending like 'detrans awareness day'. yeah. wow. looking more and more like a bit of mental illness here. and psychiatry stuff you're not allowed to question, otherwise it's 'homophobia'...sigh.

Prowler

03-12-2022, 05:29 PM

When did the whole woke crowd begin hating JK Rowling? Because I remember her being very popular with that crowd several years ago.

Sumac

03-12-2022, 05:51 PM

When did the whole woke crowd begin hating JK Rowling? Because I remember her being very popular with that crowd several years ago.
I think few years ago, when she had vocally started to defend women against transinsanity.

Since, "queers" loved her books and movies and, as usual, saw them as metaphor for their mental illness, because, they see everything they like as a metaphor for their mental illness, they have felt "betrayed" by her, which explains amount of vitriol she receives from those psychos.

She is not just heretic for them, she is a traitor for them, even though she never said to be on their side in the first place. But you know, mentally ill people being mentally ill, so...

Andrew NDB

03-12-2022, 06:07 PM

FredWolfLeonardo

03-12-2022, 06:10 PM

My psychic powers tell me a very lengthy Galactus response incoming :tlol:

Leo656

03-12-2022, 07:29 PM

Some of Rowling's protestors even had her home address visible online, which could've potentially been pretty dangerous. And a LOT of people Tweeting that they hoped someone put a pipe bomb in her mailbox and stuff. Gross!

Like, I don't give a sh*t about Harry Potter at all and my only opinion of JK Rowling is I kinda wanna bang her because she's rich and she's a very chesty ol' broad, so that could be a lot of fun, in theory. But holy sh*t, man, I get screamed at for saying WAY less nasty sh*t than THAT. C'mon, "tolerant Left", let's stop short of full-blown "Advocate for Murder" because someone publicly disagreed with your lifestyle choices. Not a good look if you're trying to be the "Good Guys".

As for the transgender thing, I find it oddly serendipitous in light of this conversation that just yesterday an article showed up in my news feed about how a lot of doctors all over the world say off-the-record, without being named, that they're not always 100% on wanting to declare a positive diagnosis for gender dysphoria but they are "pressured" to comply even if their professional opinion may not align with making such a diagnosis. Supposedly, some of them have been threatened with being disbarred if they don't just go along. This kind of throws a wrench into the "Trust the Science" narrative, when so many doctors say that "I'm not especially in agreement with this BUT I have to go along with it anyway if I want to keep working in the medical field."

One of those articles seems to show up at least once a year or so. So like, I just can't help but wonder, if the whole thing is so completely and infallibly legit, then why do a lot of the "professionals" claim they're not actually allowed to give their "professional" opinion on the subject? Isn't that kinda weird?

Buuuuut... I guess it's not altogether surprising. Most "experts" think Covid came from the Wuhan lab, too, and we see how THAT played out. "You can't SAY that, even if it's true, it's Not Nice and it's gonna f*ck with our business. Just play along with the mainstream narrative and tell people what they want to hear."

But like, it all runs together. I'm skeptical of anything when people start saying "Just trust the experts", because off the record, a lot of times the "experts" don't agree but some of them aren't allowed to speak out loud. Which to me is kinda shady.

Galactus

03-12-2022, 07:36 PM

My psychic powers tell me a very lengthy Galactus response incoming :tlol:

I don't think you needed psychic powers to tell you that. Plus I was already typing one before Sumac went on another one. Speaking of which...

Hi again Sumac. I think you can forgive me for wanting to clarify certain points since you have a history of taking some very extreme positions on here that if most other people did it would be dismissed as hyperbole but more than once you've clarified you mean it literally. I know it's not nice being corrected on issue but it's certainly not deflection when I address all your points in your responses to me.

I never said there were no instances of violence involving trans people in women's spaces. That's something you mis-quoted me on and I think you did it deliberately since you put my original words in quote tags and put your made up words in quotes. Here's the proof...

The truth is trans women have been using female bathrooms and changing rooms largely without incident for as long as there has been a transgender and transvestite communities.

First you say "there is no incidents". Now there are "some" incidents.

Like I said there are bound to be some instances of violence in any public space but the amount of recorded instances of violence instigated by trans women in women only spaces like public toilets or changing rooms is remarkably low. To this day most violence in women only spaces is perpetrated by cis men that have violated those spaces. That's why I have a certain level of sympathy with some women who don't want people they see as previously being men being allowed in their spaces. I don't pretend to know the answer to that but I believe that with time and education people will eventually accept trans people for the gender they identify as and allow them to use the relevant spaces. Just like the majority of the population accepted that gay people were born that way and they weren't going to perv or sexually assault you if you shared a changing room or public toilet with them.

The problem with your argument is that you insist that trans people are all mentally ill when they are not. We've talked about this on another thread but here in the UK (as I assume in many countries) when trans people want to undergo gender realignment surgery they have to undergo psychological examination. These are conducted by doctors working for the NHS so there is no financial incentive for them to give a particular diagnosis. The conspiracy theory that entirety of the global scientific community advocate certain things because it's more profitable would be more believable if the things the right claims they advocate were more profitable. There are much easier and more profitable grifts than convincing people they are the wrong gender. I imagine a better grift (in the sense of being a big fish in a small pond) would be the de-transitioners as you put it. That's just as big hokum as gay conversion therapy. In reality things like this are incredibly damaging practices that prey upon people who have difficulty accepting who they are and even the few that think are 'cured' inevitably find themselves 'relapsing' because once you accept that there are genetic reasons why someone is gay or trans no amount of 'therapy' is going to alter that.

Also I have NEVER heard of Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual people promoting incest, zoophilia, pedophilia or cannibalism. That's such an outlandish claim I'm going to need some actual proof of that. These things are universally seen as morally wrong and frankly no sane member of the LGBTQ community would ever want to associate with anything like that. Far from fearing being labelled a bigot (by whom?) I imagine they would be very quick to denounce them for fear of bigots against them using it to further the age old stereotypes that they are sexual deviants. Links on this please or it didn't happen.

When did the whole woke crowd begin hating JK Rowling? Because I remember her being very popular with that crowd several years ago.

When she started being openly hostile to trans people. Even then most people cut her some slack on the issue until she started openly supporting far right bigots that advocate violence against trans people.

hmm, with JK Trending AGAIN on twitter today, I had no idea some trans people where trying to 'convert' normal gay folks into their world. that's a whole new level of bizzare.

That doesn't happen. Sumac made it up.

In other random thought news... what's your opinion on this 'FBI Involved in the 6th' I saw trending? Clicking on it didn't give me an idea of what was going on, since the usual twitter trolls hi jacked it.

Nonsense spread by grifters and believed by idiots.

Andrew NDB

03-12-2022, 07:50 PM

As for the transgender thing, I find it oddly serendipitous in light of this conversation that just yesterday an article showed up in my news feed about how a lot of doctors all over the world say off-the-record, without being named, that they're not always 100% on wanting to declare a positive diagnosis for gender dysphoria but they are "pressured" to comply even if their professional opinion may not align with making such a diagnosis. Supposedly, some of them have been threatened with being disbarred if they don't just go along. This kind of throws a wrench into the "Trust the Science" narrative, when so many doctors say that "I'm not especially in agreement with this BUT I have to go along with it anyway if I want to keep working in the medical field."

One of those articles seems to show up at least once a year or so. So like, I just can't help but wonder, if the whole thing is so completely and infallibly legit, then why do a lot of the "professionals" claim they're not actually allowed to give their "professional" opinion on the subject? Isn't that kinda weird?

Of course it must be true. You know how I know? Do you know of any times a potentially transgender person has gone to a doctor to see about getting hormones and the doctor has evaluated them and said "No"? Because I don't. It's always a yes, no matter what.

Galactus

03-12-2022, 08:04 PM

Like, I don't give a sh*t about Harry Potter at all and my only opinion of JK Rowling is I kinda wanna bang her because she's rich and she's a very chesty ol' broad, so that could be a lot of fun, in theory. But holy sh*t, man, I get screamed at for saying WAY less nasty sh*t than THAT. C'mon, "tolerant Left", let's stop short of full-blown "Advocate for Murder" because someone publicly disagreed with your lifestyle choices. Not a good look if you're trying to be the "Good Guys".

No one should be doing that but as I've said a few times in this thread it never got ugly with JK Rowling until she started palling up with some very dangerous people.

There is some truth that there is also a sense of disappointment with her since prior to this she was quite the advocate for progressive causes. A lot of people wrongly assumed she'd be a trans ally and even then people were willing to give her the benefit of the doubt that her skepticism was out of genuine (if misguided) concern for women and not bigotry. That was until she started retweeting genuine bigots. You can't say "hey guys I have nothing personally against trans people but I don't want them in women's changing rooms" then retweet people who think they should die. Even worse some of these people are also huge homophobes and have a history of misogynistic comments that I'm sure Rowling will have been made aware of by now (if she didn't already know) so it's not like trans people are the only community she's throwing under a bus. I tend to be wary of people who can change their entire ideology because of a disagreement one particular aspect. To me it shows her commitment to feminism and gay rights really was a meaningless virtue signal. Rowling is far from the only one which is why the right wants to make trans rights such a wedge issue.

I'll say again anyone attempting to dox JK Rowling or encouraging violence against her is wrong but it's funny when this happens often on the right we're supposed to accept that it's just a few bad eggs and doesn't represent the whole but that courtesy is rarely extended to the Left.

As for the transgender thing, I find it oddly serendipitous in light of this conversation that just yesterday an article showed up in my news feed about how a lot of doctors all over the world say off-the-record, without being named, that they're not always 100% on wanting to declare a positive diagnosis for gender dysphoria but they are "pressured" to comply even if their professional opinion may not align with making such a diagnosis. Supposedly, some of them have been threatened with being disbarred if they don't just go along. This kind of throws a wrench into the "Trust the Science" narrative, when so many doctors say that "I'm not especially in agreement with this BUT I have to go along with it anyway if I want to keep working in the medical field."

One of those articles seems to show up at least once a year or so. So like, I just can't help but wonder, if the whole thing is so completely and infallibly legit, then why do a lot of the "professionals" claim they're not actually allowed to give their "professional" opinion on the subject? Isn't that kinda weird?

I don't doubt that you've read that but it's just one guy. I'm going to need a bit more than one doctor or one doctor a year claiming this. It's not like any other whistle blowers would be short of sympathisers. The basic right for trans people to even exist isn't any where near the consensus it is for say gay people and frankly there's no shortage of homophobes who feel they shouldn't exist either.

Buuuuut... I guess it's not altogether surprising. Most "experts" think Covid came from the Wuhan lab, too, and we see how THAT played out. "You can't SAY that, even if it's true, it's Not Nice and it's gonna f*ck with our business. Just play along with the mainstream narrative and tell people what they want to hear."

But like, it all runs together. I'm skeptical of anything when people start saying "Just trust the experts", because off the record, a lot of times the "experts" don't agree but some of them aren't allowed to speak out loud. Which to me is kinda shady.

I've always been on the fence on the origins of Covid-19. I'd be fine accepting that it was manufactured in a lab but would that also mean that previous forms of Covid were also manufactured? Even the one that came from the US in alleged similar animals jumped to humans way?

Of course it must be true. You know how I know? Do you know of any times a potentially transgender person has gone to a doctor to see about getting hormones and the doctor has evaluated them and said "No"? Because I don't. It's always a yes, no matter what.

I didn't realise you knew so many transgender people.

Andrew NDB

03-12-2022, 08:54 PM

I didn't realise you knew so many transgender people.

You don't know a lot of things.

Galactus

03-12-2022, 09:12 PM

You don't know a lot of things.

So you're saying you do know a lot of trans people and they tell you that they were given hormones no questions asked?

Andrew NDB

03-12-2022, 09:20 PM

So you're saying you do know a lot of trans people and they tell you that they were given hormones no questions asked?

I know some, including a close family member. I didn't say no questions asked, just that the outcome is always the same. You will find a million videos on the internet of transgender people telling triumphant stories of going to the doctor and starting their hormones... yet you won't find one or even anything anecdotally of a transgender-to-be coming back from the doctor saying, "Damn, the doctor told me no! I'm devastated." And of course you would see these videos if they existed because the LGBTQ community would share them in an uproar at what an injustice that is, that a trans-to-be was denied, because now they're going to kill themselves probably (even though the stats of post-op transgenders killing themselves is significantly higher, but facts don't matter, only feelings and "my truth" and so on).

Leo656

03-12-2022, 09:30 PM

I don't doubt that you've read that but it's just one guy. I'm going to need a bit more than one doctor or one doctor a year claiming this.

It's not "one doctor a year". It's "at least one article per year which cites 'multiple medical experts' who would only speak off the record for fear of reprisal". Which is substantially different thing. And it's probably more than one article a year, I honestly don't pay it that much attention t how often it comes up in my Yahoo feed. I just notice how "Man, I see this same thing every so often, for years now, and that's interesting."

I am not the one who uses words like "numerous doctors" and "multiple medical experts", that would be the writers of said articles. And before you ask, I believe the most recent one I saw was linked to Yahoo through Associated Press, which as far as I know is relatively objective and non-partisan, although if they're known to have any noted political bias by all means someone can let me know, I honestly don't keep track of that too much.

So again, when I see these articles come up at least once per year, and probably more than that, and they ALL say things like, "A lot of doctors don't agree on this subject, but all of them are forced to play along if they want to keep their jobs," I can't help it, I go "Huh. That's kind of not how things are supposed to work."

But again, it's nothing new and not specific to things like gender dysphoria. A lot of doctors I've spoken to are not in agreement that ADHD is real, either, or at the very least feel strongly that it's over-diagnosed so the pharmaceutical companies can make a fortune by getting kids hooked on methamphetamines. I can't tell you how many doctors have told me, man-to-man and face-to-face, "Some of these kids are just naturally hyperactive or drink too much soda. But the parents want them to take a pill so they'll listen better and so I have to write the script if I want to keep my job, I'm not supposed to argue with them even though I don't think their kid really qualifies for this diagnosis. But my hands are tied."

One of my main PT clients was a doctor, and she was always bemoaning how it's the insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies nowadays who run the doctors. "You can't do ANYTHING unless they want you to, or you might get sued or worse. It's crazy anymore, a lot of people are quitting."

You don't quit a six- or seven-figure job you went to school for a dozen years to earn, unless someone is REALLY busting your balls, y'know? So when they say, "As a doctor, my hands are tied and I legally need to play the game the way I'm told regardless of whether or not I agree or think it's safe, or proper," I'm inclined to believe it's a legitimate phenomenon. And again, it's not new or exclusive. Gender dysphoria is the latest issue, but for decades now doctors have been saying about This or That, "I don't entirely agree with this, it may even be unethical," and are in turn told "Just write the script and keep your opinions to yourself."

But like, how is that helping? It may in fact be stifling actual progress.

Matter of fact, one of those articles I mentioned seeing in the past was from various psychiatric experts who have long-term experience treating transgendered individuals - therefore, they obviously are not "against them" because they legitimately try and steer them on a path to wellness. And they say interesting things, such as "A lot of people who transition come to find out, years later, that they're actually not happier as a result, some transition back, and in fact a lot of them end up committing suicide anyway, therefore transitioning may not be the perfect fix that many see it as, and in fact their depression issues may run deeper than they even know, and may come from something other than their dysphoria, and so more research is definitely needed in this area." And I feel like those things are worth discussing. But again, those same "experts" aren't allowed to hypothesize freely or put more study into it because it goes against the narrative. And again, they are sincerely trying to help these people. And that's WHY they point these things out. They simply say that stifling dissenting opinion does no one any good because there's much that still is not known on the subject. They want to do more research, they have legit concerns about the consensus, and are told, "Shut up and play along."

That's not how it works. If a lot of people still struggle post-transition, and their own doctors say "We think these folks have more going on than even they themselves are aware of, and we'd like to try and get into it but are literally not allowed to do so," then yeah, I think it's worth saying "Let's listen to these people, they seem to have some insight into the subject which we do not have."

Let them hypothesize freely, let them speculate, let them study more as needed. If the "experts" are the ones saying, "The science, in fact, is not settled," then what, they're suddenly not "experts" because it isn't what people want to hear? They're way above MY pay grade. If they think that unflinching adherence to a specific narrative is actually doing harm rather than help, then maybe we shouldn't stifle them. It's bad enough they can't speak freely without losing everything they worked for.

They're not even saying "This isn't a real issue," or trying to hurt anyone or "take their rights away", they're just saying it's more complicated than people think it is and it may in fact be an over-diagnosed condition. I don't see how that's bad in any way. Again, most of these off-the-record doctors have years and years, supposedly, of treating transgendered individuals, helping them transition and so forth. They probably know a good bit on the subject, I'd wager. They're just saying, "Even when we don't think a person warrants this diagnosis, which sometimes is the case, we have to grant it anyway, and that's a bit worrisome."

And again, I think there's some truth to that, objectively. Because again, various medical conditions get over-diagnosed all the time, in spite of doctors' protests on the matter. Their hands are tied. And to me, that's messed up. They probably know more about their patients than a lawyer or insurance agent does, and yet the doctors have to do what the lawyer or insurance agent says to do. No matter what.

That... is not how it is supposed to work. About anything, about any diagnosis at all. Doctors should make the call on that. Not the lawyers, not the ACLU, not the insurance companies. Otherwise, why do we even need doctors if we can just tell them what's wrong with us instead of trusting them to tell us?

Vegita-San

03-12-2022, 09:34 PM

Nonsense spread by grifters and believed by idiots.
and the fact that you denied it so simply and factly makes me think there must be some truth to it.

Vegita-San

03-12-2022, 09:35 PM

Leo656

03-12-2022, 09:38 PM

yet you won't find one or even anything anecdotally of a transgender-to-be coming back from the doctor saying, "Damn, the doctor told me no! I'm devastated."

I've known of a few who had to fight for a while to get their diagnosis. Going through multiple doctors, therapists, etc. Apparently lots of people do get turned down, at least initially.

But even that is... kind of troubling. Like, at that point you're "shopping" for the result you want, which isn't how medicine is supposed to work. If you swear you have fibromyalgia and need pain medication for it, and you have to go through six or seven different doctors before one of them agrees with you, maaaaaaybe you don't actually have fibromyalgia, or whatever else.

But yeah, I've heard of quite a few who were told no, initially. It happens. Maybe less so now than a few years ago.

Bahamut810

03-12-2022, 11:52 PM

I have been meaning to butt in here, but its hard to get a starting point so lets start here...

I think for about 85% or more of trans, it's more of a fetish than a mental illness. Like, dudes with a whole lot of free time and narcissism fantasizing about what they'd look like in a dress, or having people oogle them going down the street, and how much life would be easier if they aren't expected to be "the man" or ever "man up." And then you have the media and shrinks telling them "You CAN be a woman! You can be one today, if you want, and it'll be 100% valid! If anyone says different, they're the same as Hitler!" which only pushes them further into it and gets them excited.

I think a majority of it is the social clout. "Transtrenders" and people who say they are trans with little actual reason (look up Neo pronouns) because its 'in' right now. Its something that has caught on just like bellbottoms and slap bracelets.

I don't get the "trans man" stuff. That's probably much more weighing towards mental health than the former. With a heavy dose of not liking gender norms surrounding what is expected of a woman in society and how they'd rather just take on the traditional male norms. Or maybe they figure it's better to automatically be a special, protected and applauded member of an oppressed yet brave group than just another unremarkable woman in what they decide is "a man's world" anyway. Also, most of these pre-transition aren't exactly attractive to begin with, so maybe they think "well, I never had a chance anyway."

I have not met many Trans-men. I was married to one a decade and some ago, knowing he was trans and when we would talk about it that "not liking the gender" norms seems to be the core dysphoria, being weaker in conjunction to some physical abuse.

Like I said there are bound to be some instances of violence in any public space but the amount of recorded instances of violence instigated by trans women in women only spaces like public toilets or changing rooms is remarkably low. To this day most violence in women only spaces is perpetrated by cis men that have violated those spaces

Do you have any references to that, that also include notation how they know they were CIS men, rather then identified as men because of sex regardless of gender identity?

The problem with your argument is that you insist that trans people are all mentally ill when they are not.

This is incorrect. Gender Dysphoria is part of the DSM-5. It is a mental disorder that causes discomfort and more in the lives of the people who have it.

No one should be doing that but as I've said a few times in this thread it never got ugly with JK Rowling until she started palling up with some very dangerous people.

There is some truth that there is also a sense of disappointment with her since prior to this she was quite the advocate for progressive causes. A lot of people wrongly assumed she'd be a trans ally and even then people were willing to give her the benefit of the doubt that her skepticism was out of genuine (if misguided) concern for women and not bigotry. That was until she started retweeting genuine bigots.

This is funny. Your first sentence suggests that she is out having beers with people you disagree with. Liking a tweet, and agreeing with one or two things another person agrees with does not mean you agree with everything they say or did. The woman literally spent years after the last books came out promoting LGBT and Diverse ideals without prompt before it was a fad. There is no reason to believe that she does not hold those ideals, while still keeping a limit of flashing the old Johnson at little girls (see Jessica Yaniv)

I'll say again anyone attempting to dox JK Rowling or encouraging violence against her is wrong but it's funny when this happens often on the right we're supposed to accept that it's just a few bad eggs and doesn't represent the whole but that courtesy is rarely extended to the Left.

Do you have examples of when it has happened to people on the left? I don't necessarily doubt that it has happened, but I hear about it happening much more to people who are Central or right then on the left (i.e. people who question Progressive Ideology). It does not help that Progressive people seems to celebrate it a whole lot more then non-progressives.

You don't quit a six- or seven-figure job you went to school for a dozen years to earn, unless someone is REALLY busting your balls, y'know?

This is happening hard core in colleges as well. Its something like 95% Democrat-to-farther left people in teaching. There is story after story of people being harassed or forced out from their teaching jobs.

various medical conditions get over-diagnosed all the time, in spite of doctors' protests on the matter.

Its bad because it causes argument's like what we are seeing here. Being LGBT and Trans specifically is a huge trend right now. The more people that are 'trans' without being 'trans' and just taking half-ass measures while being jerks about it then having to de-transition just makes the less then .5% population of people who have this condition who need very specific help look like a joke and people stop caring. The huge backlash that people are having to overbearing and insulting individuals is proof of that.

Like, at that point you're "shopping" for the result you want

I mean...that's really what it is. My last friend that transitioned specifically went out of the way to find a trans-friendly psychologist who was known to rubber stamp the diagnosis.

Leo656

03-13-2022, 01:08 AM

This is funny. Your first sentence suggests that she is out having beers with people you disagree with. Liking a tweet, and agreeing with one or two things another person agrees with does not mean you agree with everything they say or did. The woman literally spent years after the last books came out promoting LGBT and Diverse ideals without prompt before it was a fad. There is no reason to believe that she does not hold those ideals, while still keeping a limit of flashing the old Johnson at little girls (see Jessica Yaniv)

And see, this is another thing I don't get about the current Left. The idea that, if I "Like" or repeat or agree with something a person says, that I am 100% in lockstep with everything they say, think, or believe. Like, NO, when did that sh*t start?

For example, I think Ben Shapiro's insights on economics are pretty spot-on and rather brilliant. On the other hand, I think his opinions on abortion are completely f*cking ridiculous. Therefore, if I "Like" a post of his about economic policy, to most people on the Left they'd assume I automatically agree with EVERY thing he says, when I most certainly do not. I think he's 100% Right about some things and 100% wrong about OTHER things.

But, like... that isn't how it works, now. "You like ______, and _______ said something nasty about ______, so therefore they're awful and so are you for agreeing with them." Uh... what if I DON'T agree with them about that one thing, though? What if on that particular subject, I more agree with you? Like, it's crazy.

Even George Carlin, the most brilliant man to ever walk the Earth, had some stuff in his head that was straight from f*cking Mars. Nobody bats a thousand. I can agree with some, or most of what someone says, and still be within my rights to think they're a complete idiot about something else. At least, that SHOULD be how it works.

I don't know, man. I think it's okay if me and Hitler both liked the color red, that shouldn't by default mean I agree with him about a single f*cking other thing beyond that. I don't get where this "All or Nothing" stuff comes from with these younger kids. It's like they don't grasp nuance.

Prowler

03-13-2022, 03:21 AM

Jesus this thread :lol:

Anyway...

I've only watched 3 of Harry Potter films. The first 2 were watched by nearly everyone of my generation when they came out. Don't remember them anymore but remember liking the 2nd one the best.

Then I saw one that came out around 2006 or 2007 and didn't like it much. By then I had outgrown the franchise anyway.

So, whatever JK Rowling says or things about anything is irrelevant to me, basically.

As for the last Leo post, that's true. I've had wrestling fans wonder why I keep liking Tessa Blanchard after the allegations made against her a few years ago came out. Because, after all, if you enjoy the body of work of someone who's allegedly racist, it means you're obviously a racist yourself too :roll:

Oh and tread carefully when saying something positive about Hulk Hogan among people aged 30 and under. I mean, that's been a rule of Internet wrestling discussions for a long time now, but it got worse since the whole Gawker incident.

Coola Yagami

03-13-2022, 04:04 AM

As for the last Leo post, that's true. I've had wrestling fans wonder why I keep liking Tessa Blanchard after the allegations made against her a few years ago came out. Because, after all, if you enjoy the body of work of someone who's allegedly racist, it means you're obviously a racist yourself too :roll:

I'll never not like Tessa Blanchard and her body of work (and her body as well). I will also always love AJ Lee and trust her judgement in working with her. It's impossible for her to not have heard the rumors, so if she's trusting Tess to work with her, that's good enough for me.

As for Hogan, dude apologized a million times by now and people like Mr. T and Booker T (heh) got no probs with him, which their opinion means way more than all the non-black people pretending to be offended on their behalf. To them I say, give a rest. Hulkamania will always run wild.

Andrew NDB

03-13-2022, 04:14 AM

Pretty bizarre stuff from these sort of people. Even going back a ways. Drunk Mel Gibson gets pulled over by the cops and says some actual racist stuff (I mean, he did)... and what? I need to burn my copies of Lethal Weapon? Of The Road Warrior? We need to make him give back his Oscars for Braveheart? On the other side of the equation there are tons of actors and directors on the other side saying downright evil and also actual racist things in the name of progressivism on Twitter or to anyone who will listen. I can't lie and say my level of respect for said actor or director or whoever doesn't go down in either situation, or hit bottom. But I'm able to divorce the actor from the work or the part. Good work is good work, and a good movie is a good movie. Or more on point, they can be brilliant in one way, but wrong in one or many ways and there is absolutely nothing wrong with acknowledging and respecting the former.

For example, I think Ben Shapiro's insights on economics are pretty spot-on and rather brilliant. On the other hand, I think his opinions on abortion are completely f*cking ridiculous. Therefore, if I "Like" a post of his about economic policy, to most people on the Left they'd assume I automatically agree with EVERY thing he says, when I most certainly do not. I think he's 100% Right about some things and 100% wrong about OTHER things.

Exactly. And I'm totally with this. Ben Shapiro is a super smart, eloquent dude. But as soon as he drifts into the anti-abortion stuff and the God stuff I tune completely out. I understand it, I respect it... but no. Though I give a pass to the God stuff, because even if I am completely not religious in the slightest... a lot of these guys speak the truth when they shine a light on what happens when religion is slowly removed from the equation entirely. Not anarchy, not all-out whatever. But we see it now clearly. They form their own religion. Their own ideology. Only its not sitting in a church closing your eyes and praying, it's getting high fives and likes on Facebook and Twitter, going after imaginary nazis and othering people and "Fixing" inequalities you find or invent.

And yeah, it's a very simple-minded "Gotcha!" kind of mentality from the left on that stuff, because they basically know they have nothing but they know they have enough people in their corner bally-hoing "Yeah! That's right!" so they just do it anyway. In regard to "See! This thing you like from this bad person! That means you're 100% the same as him!"

Coola Yagami

03-13-2022, 04:32 AM

Drunk Mel Gibson gets pulled over by the cops and says some actual racist stuff (I mean, he did)... and what? I need to burn my copies of Lethal Weapon? Of The Road Warrior? We need to make him give back his Oscars for it?

Ah, and there's another level of hypocrisy. They want you to boycott Mel Gibson stuff cause he waved at Trump that one time.... but all these people crying about JK Rowling don't dare suggest actually boycotting the Harry Potter franchise.

The left wants you to do everything as they do and say and even think in lockstep but they don't even follow their own rules.

Bahamut810

03-13-2022, 08:02 AM

And see, this is another thing I don't get about the current Left. The idea that, if I "Like" or repeat or agree with something a person says, that I am 100% in lockstep with everything they say, think, or believe. Like, NO, when did that sh*t start?

Really early on in the progressive history. Its where 'cancel culture' started and why people will search through years of tweets to find *THAT ONE* that proves that this person engaged in wrong think at some point in their history and they *have* to repent for whatever edge lord stuff they said when they were 13.

Its one of the solid "cult" indicators of the ideology.

Leo656

03-13-2022, 11:20 AM

As for Hogan, dude apologized a million times by now and people like Mr. T and Booker T (heh) got no probs with him, which their opinion means way more than all the non-black people pretending to be offended on their behalf.

And don't forget F*cking Virgil. :lol:

Sumac

03-13-2022, 11:30 AM

I think for about 85% or more of trans, it's more of a fetish than a mental illness. Like, dudes with a whole lot of free time and narcissism fantasizing about what they'd look like in a dress, or having people oogle them going down the street, and how much life would be easier if they aren't expected to be "the man" or ever "man up." And then you have the media and shrinks telling them "You CAN be a woman! You can be one today, if you want, and it'll be 100% valid! If anyone says different, they're the same as Hitler!" which only pushes them further into it and gets them excited.

I don't get the "trans man" stuff. That's probably much more weighing towards mental health than the former. With a heavy dose of not liking gender norms surrounding what is expected of a woman in society and how they'd rather just take on the traditional male norms. Or maybe they figure it's better to automatically be a special, protected and applauded member of an oppressed yet brave group than just another unremarkable woman in what they decide is "a man's world" anyway. Also, most of these pre-transition aren't exactly attractive to begin with, so maybe they think "well, I never had a chance anyway."

But again. They can do whatever they want as long as they're an adult and aren't hurting anybody else. 100% support them. Just don't expect society and every institution around them to bend and break to give them validation or over-representation. That's where we get into bad territory.
You have completely nailed it with this post.
Basically nothing else needs to be said.

As for the transgender thing, I find it oddly serendipitous in light of this conversation that just yesterday an article showed up in my news feed about how a lot of doctors all over the world say off-the-record, without being named, that they're not always 100% on wanting to declare a positive diagnosis for gender dysphoria but they are "pressured" to comply even if their professional opinion may not align with making such a diagnosis. Supposedly, some of them have been threatened with being disbarred if they don't just go along. This kind of throws a wrench into the "Trust the Science" narrative, when so many doctors say that "I'm not especially in agreement with this BUT I have to go along with it anyway if I want to keep working in the medical field."

One of those articles seems to show up at least once a year or so. So like, I just can't help but wonder, if the whole thing is so completely and infallibly legit, then why do a lot of the "professionals" claim they're not actually allowed to give their "professional" opinion on the subject? Isn't that kinda weird?
Our left friends will tell you that: "it is never happens" or "it is all alt-right propaganda" or "you are just bigot-nazi, who believes rumors, because you want to kill all trans, because, you are scared they are more sexy than you".

Hi again Sumac. I think you can forgive me for wanting to clarify certain points since you have a history of taking some very extreme positions...
As always you act like a coward who can't argue for his own position.

Also, I think defending mentally ill people right to control society and mutilate children is an extreme position to take as well, but it seems you don't think so. So I guess it makes two of us.

Like I said there are bound to be some instances of violence in any public space but the amount of recorded instances of violence instigated by trans women in women only spaces like public toilets or changing rooms is remarkably low.
Does it really matter that its low?

If you know that women statistically has bigger chance to be assaulted by psychos and there is a sure way to stop it, why do you think that leaving even remarkably low possibility of it is enough? It is almost like you think that women are lesser being than mentally ill males and, because, of this they deserve less.
Tell me, what do you really think?

I don't pretend to know the answer to that but I believe that with time and education people will eventually accept trans people for the gender they identify as and allow them to use the relevant spaces. Just like the majority of the population accepted that gay people were born that way and they weren't going to perv or sexually assault you if you shared a changing room or public toilet with them.
It will be impossible to accept person with beard and dick as a woman, no matter how many centuries had passed. Unless you are blind or stupid or brainwashed.

Also, Gays are not mentally ill people, who want to chop off their body parts to "fix" their bodies and achieve some "ideal". Which is why trans are always will be dangerous, because, it is a Russian roulette with psychos. Something that no-one should play, trust my personal experience (which most likely you won't give a **** about, because, you are brainwashed and self-absorbed lefty Westerner who cares only about himself and virtue signaling).

The problem with your argument is that you insist that trans people are all mentally ill when they are not.
Mate, listen here, when you think you are of different biological sex, then you really are and ready to dress the part and chop off your body parts to suit that "role" you are mentally ill. There can not be two opinions about it, no matter, what modern "infallible" science says. The same "science", which was adamant that COVID doesn't transmit between people or that virus "in no way shape or form could escape from a laboratory" and everyone who said it was were proclaimed lunatics and "racists".

There is literally no difference with people who starve themselves to death or gouge their eyes out or chop off their body parts, because, they fell like they don't fit their bodies and so on.

The only reason trans are excluded from that list is under the pressure of LGB+ organizations, because, they have already achieved everything they initially wanted and they need a way to preserve their ability to launder money and exert influence over society and governments.

We've talked about this on another thread but here in the UK (as I assume in many countries) when trans people want to undergo gender realignment surgery they have to undergo psychological examination. These are conducted by doctors working for the NHS so there is no financial incentive for them to give a particular diagnosis. The conspiracy theory that entirety of the global scientific community advocate certain things because it's more profitable would be more believable if the things the right claims they advocate were more profitable. There are much easier and more profitable grifts than convincing people they are the wrong gender. I imagine a better grift (in the sense of being a big fish in a small pond) would be the de-transitioners as you put it. That's just as big hokum as gay conversion therapy. In reality things like this are incredibly damaging practices that prey upon people who have difficulty accepting who they are and even the few that think are 'cured' inevitably find themselves 'relapsing' because once you accept that there are genetic reasons why someone is gay or trans no amount of 'therapy' is going to alter that.
You do understand that you put a logic bomb under your own argument, mate?

If, as you say, number of trans is so small that it is impossible to make a big profit on them, than number of de-transitioners is even smaller. And, naturally, even less, profitable.

You are basically arguing nonsense and all that just to deny possibility that doctors can use trans as source of income, which explains why they don't vehemently argue against trans being a mental illness, which it is.

Also I have NEVER heard of Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual people promoting incest, zoophilia, pedophilia or cannibalism. That's such an outlandish claim I'm going to need some actual proof of that. These things are universally seen as morally wrong and frankly no sane member of the LGBTQ community would ever want to associate with anything like that. Far from fearing being labelled a bigot (by whom?) I imagine they would be very quick to denounce them for fear of bigots against them using it to further the age old stereotypes that they are sexual deviants. Links on this please or it didn't happen.
You need a list of Gays outed as pedophiles? I suspect it will be quite long. But it is not exactly the easiest thing to research. So, pardon me, but no links for now.
Later I will provide such information.

When she started being openly hostile to trans people. Even then most people cut her some slack on the issue until she started openly supporting far right bigots that advocate violence against trans people.
Links or didn't happen.
Also, I ask you to provide quotes from her Twitter, which is significantly easier to find, especially since trans, like true zealots must be archiving everything she said just to fuel their enraged psychotic hearts.

That doesn't happen. Sumac made it up.
I didn't know I am so powerful that I've created massive propaganda campaign, which tells how amazing it is to be true to yourself and be LGB and T! :lol:

Nonsense spread by grifters and believed by idiots.
"My left magazine haven't said that, therefore it doesn't exist or have any substance".

Sumac

03-13-2022, 11:39 AM

Continuation...

No one should be doing that but as I've said a few times in this thread it never got ugly with JK Rowling until she started palling up with some very dangerous people.
Like who? Why are they dangerous?

Also, its funny how you are talking about supporting "Feminism" and "trans" in the same sentence, considering those "ideologies" literally oppose each other and encroach on each other's existence.

I'll say again anyone attempting to dox JK Rowling or encouraging violence against her is wrong but it's funny when this happens often on the right we're supposed to accept that it's just a few bad eggs and doesn't represent the whole but that courtesy is rarely extended to the Left.
Could it be, because, Western world largely controlled by Left virtue signaling media and corporations who, at least on a surface level, are on board with its agenda?

Nah, its just alt-rights propaganda, sure it has nothing to do with the "cancel culture" or how stupid "Me too" and "BLM" turned up. :lol:

The basic right for trans people to even exist isn't any where near the consensus it is for say gay people and frankly there's no shortage of homophobes who feel they shouldn't exist either.
I find this lefty logic adorable: "you think women have certain biological difference with men and they should be talked about = you want all trans DEAD!".

Talking about hyperbole and what Left can get away with.

I've always been on the fence on the origins of Covid-19. I'd be fine accepting that it was manufactured in a lab but would that also mean that previous forms of Covid were also manufactured? Even the one that came from the US in alleged similar animals jumped to humans way?
Why is that?

I don't get where this "All or Nothing" stuff comes from with these younger kids. It's like they don't grasp nuance.
Because, they stay kids mentally.
They are literally imbeciles who can't think in anything outside of "black and white".

I think, you have noticed that, whenever, they talk about any serious issue, they start to compare it, not to something that had happened in an actual history, but comic books and Hollywood movies.

And a lot of times, they take issue with fictional stuff, as if it is was a real problem, like half-naked women in video games or "supposed" racism in depiction of orcs in the Lord of the Rings.

Its like they are broken and don't know or comprehend where fiction ends and reality begins.

Leo656

03-13-2022, 11:53 AM

It only means that THIS specific Covid strain with all its very specific quirks would necessarily have been man-made. Nothing about that whatsoever rests upon ALL Covid being man-made. That's silly.

I'd have to pull the articles about it. But basically the theory is that the scientists were tinkering with various pre-existing viruses to find ways to make them more dangerous. To do that, you need a sample of an already-existing virus. Ergo, the idea that Covid-19, specifically, was a "designer" virus created in a lab in NO way suggests or supports that "all forms of Covid were man-made." Literally no one has ever said that was the case, all anyone has said is that they took a pre-existing form of Covid and made it even more dangerous.

All squares are rectangles. However, NOT all rectangles are squares.

ranger_scout

03-13-2022, 06:27 PM

Coola Yagami

03-13-2022, 07:43 PM

I didn't know where else to put this, but former President Barack Obama has tested positive for COVID-19.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/former-president-barack-obama-says-tested-positive-covid-19-rcna19848

I mean, unless he got hospitalized, why do we care? By now saying some got CoVid is similar to making a headline that someone got the flu or a real bad cold.

Andrew NDB

03-13-2022, 07:56 PM

It's already been proven that the Coronavirus lab in Wuhan was doing gain of function research with Coronaviruses -- and with our money, no less. Something Fauci swore they weren't doing.

Now, there is no direct link between that fact and COVID 19 that can be found... but certainly this doesn't look good. Also next to the fact that we have never found COVID 19 in any Wuhan animals to date.

Sumac

03-15-2022, 06:30 AM

Sane and amazing trans people, everyone. (https://imgur.com/a/D9aNMdE)

Coola Yagami

03-15-2022, 11:12 AM

Sane and amazing trans people, everyone. (https://imgur.com/a/D9aNMdE)

The tolerant left.

Bahamut810

03-15-2022, 11:17 AM

Sane and amazing trans people, everyone. (https://imgur.com/a/D9aNMdE)

I just took a look at the account and its pretty blatantly a joke account. Don't fall for 4Chan trolls like the left does. It only makes you look as foolish as they are.

Sumac

03-15-2022, 11:45 AM

Oh well, but anyhow that's not far off from the usual SJW activists say.

Coola Yagami

03-15-2022, 12:23 PM

I just took a look at the account and its pretty blatantly a joke account. Don't fall for 4Chan trolls like the left does. It only makes you look as foolish as they are.

LMAO naw, there are a lot of people with crazy thoughts like that posting all over Twitter every day.

It might be a parody account but it's poking fun at the reality of these clowns.

neatoman

03-15-2022, 04:02 PM

... I think it's odd that things Rowling said on twitter is what dominates the discussion right now, not anything about the contents of the books themselves. I can guarantee you, there is nothing about the LGBT in those books, at least nothing explicit.

Something that is explicitly in the book... Is inbreeding. That's probably the weirdest thing about the series, several characters are explicitly inbred and there are context clues even more characters are. Sirius Black and Tonks are first cousins once removed and the main characters speculated that they have been lovers, they weren't but it's kind of ****ed up that they would assume that knowing they're blood relatives.

ranger_scout

03-15-2022, 07:14 PM

The Second Gentleman, Doug Emhoff, has now tested positive for COVID-19.

https://www.businessinsider.com/doug-emhoff-second-gentleman-tests-positive-for-covid-19-2022-3

Leo656

03-16-2022, 02:51 PM

So being very sick, there's not much I can do but read. And going by my news feed, a LOT of people think it's SUPER important that we need to start talking to 5-year old kids about Gay and Transgender stuff, and if you don't think so you're a monster.

I'm talking of course about the bill in Florida, the so-called "Don't Say Gay" bill which is expected to pass soon. For those unaware, the specifics of it are that it would be officially offsides to talk about Gay and Transgender stuff with kids who are in Kindergarten through Third Grade. Meaning kids aged 4 through 8, give or take. That's all.

And yet... People seem REALLY mad about this. I was making soup the other night and I saw that John Oliver guy giving himself a stroke about it, saying it was awful and that Disney are evil for not taking a stand against it and "people are going to die" if the bill passes. And scrolling through my feed a LOT of people seem to feel the same way.

There's SO much wrong with that hyperbolic nonsense I don't even know where to start.

For one thing, 5 and 6 and 7 year old kids are NOT killing themselves because "nobody will let them be gay or trans". Zero. Kids that little don't know or understand ANY of that stuff. And even if you put it in their heads, they STILL don't have anywhere close to an actual understanding of it. They are not "at risk". This is gay and trans grown-ups projecting THEIR insecurities and hardships onto young children whose main concern is not being seen eating boogers. Teens and adults being suicidal because their "identity is being erased", I can believe. Kindergarten kids who just want to play with blocks and Play-Doh until it's time to go home and watch cartoons? No.

Furthermore, I can't even believe this is a conversation. It wasn't all that long ago that there was a push to introduce "general" Sex Education to kids as young as Kindergarten, and it was quickly shouted down - rightly so - because such topics are simply NOT appropriate for kids at that age. They weren't even pushing to teach kids about Gay or trans stuff, just the idea of "basic" Sex Ed for 5-year olds, and at that time common sense took hold and people collectively said, "That is NOT age-appropriate, period."

Back in my day, if you even SUGGESTED teaching these topics to kids in Grade K-3, you'd be labeled a deviant and maybe even locked up. Because WHO but a f*cking lunatic thinks that's appropriate? Straight, gay, whatever... They're too young to process it.

In my school district, we had two separate Sex Ed chapters; the first was a few weeks in 6th Grade Health, and again in 9th Grade. This is fine, this is appropriate. Kids in 6th Grade are entering puberty, their bodies and lives are changing and they naturally have a lot of questions. Likewise, most kids in 9th Grade are at least experimenting with sex and therefore need to be prepared so that they don't get pregnant/get someone pregnant, or else catch/spread a disease. As far as I'm concerned, the more information these kids get, the better... WHEN it is age-appropriate to do so.

I'll admit, our schools' Sex Ed spent hardly any time on gay stuff, and zero time at all on Trans stuff, but you have to remember it was the 90s. Parents back then were a lot more outspoken about not wanting their kids to be gay, and the idea was that "teaching them that it's an option will make them want to do it". Which... May or may not actually have some merit, although to say so out loud is controversial. I do know for a fact that when it came to "regular" sex, it was definitely true. The kids who learned the What and the How went about putting it into practice right away. Even at the 6th grade level, where the education was mostly about masturbation, wet dreams, and girls getting their periods, you had kids sneaking off in the woods after school to "fool around" just as soon as they knew the basic mechanics. So there is SOME merit to the idea that kids will copy what they see even when they shouldn't, or don't understand what they're doing, or whatever.

The whole thing just seems ludicrous, to me. Kids in Grades K-3 have NO business learning about anything sexual, outside of "Only your doctor and your parents should ever see or touch your privates." That's it, that's all.

And if it's about "teaching kids not to be homophobes" or whatever, that should start at home by parents setting an example. Don't use slurs in front of your kid, don't laugh or act disgusted if there's gay people on TV, things like that. It doesn't need to be taxpayer-funded curriculum, not at that age. Kids that age need to focus on reading, writing, and math. "If you'd like to suck a dick, that's Perfectly Fine" should NOT be part of their homework packet at that age, and if you think it does then I'm suspicious of your motives.

My parents were very sexual people ("Free Love" hippies who slept around a lot), but were very shy about discussing these topics with their own children. In my case, what they did was leave a contemporary book about everything to do with sexuality - with full illustrations - sitting in a prominent position on our family bookshelf. They knew I'd see it, and likewise, if I ever got "curious" enough that I'd read it, and when I was about 8 or 9 that's what happened. At which point, they noticed the book was missing from the shelf and decided to awkwardly ask if I had any questions about what I'd read. I didn't really, just a few general ones like "When am I gonna get hair?" and stuff. The book, to its credit, was VERY comprehensive. To the point where the next year when we had Sex Ed in school it was rather redundant, for me. I already knew way more than they were teaching me.

So if we want to talk about "normalizing" things, I'd argue that home is a better place than school. It worked well for me. That book was where I learned "gay people exist, and that's okay", and it did a better job of reinforcing the message than a schoolteacher likely would have. Granted, it was a small section of the book, but it was written in like the early-80s so just the fact that they'd go there was pretty progressive. For my part, it was information I shrugged off because it simply wasn't relevant to me. But it's good that it was in there, sure.

But again, I was like 9, reading a book meant for kids around age 10 and up. That's normal and appropriate. I think by that age, you absolutely should be getting as comprehensive as possible with this stuff, sure. At home, at school... Once they're of an appropriate age, fine.

But making it a goddamn CRUSADE to teach 5-year olds about Gay sh*t and trans sh*t? Jesus, what is WRONG with some people? That's way offsides, I'm sorry. And it has nothing - NOTHING! - to do with "bigotry" and "erasure" and everything to do with "MANY things are not age-appropriate for very young children, and this happens to be a case of that."

Like I said, why this is even a CONVERSATION, let alone a goddamn CRUSADE where people are screaming at Disney for not wanting to take a stand about it, just blows my goddamn mind. News Flash: Disney has operations all over the world, and MOST of the world thinks these aren't age-appropriate topics for little kids. They're just protecting their bottom line, like any huge corporation. Frankly, if people want to scream about Disney "being evil" or "protecting hateful people", they might want to start with how much of their products are produced through literal slave labor, often involving very young children. "Fight the real enemy", y'know? The fact that Disney profits from actual child slave labor is WAY worse than the fact that they gave money to politicians who don't want to teach Kindergarten kids about Gay stuff. I mean come on.

The whole thing is just bonkers. "We NEED to talk to kids who are just learning shapes and colors about how it's okay if boys wanna kiss boys and girls wanna kiss girls!" No, we actually do not. They'll figure it out. Let them be kids for a while first. That's not "hate", that's common f*cking sense.

Andrew NDB

03-16-2022, 02:56 PM

"But what if you have a transgender 6 year-old in school? Shouldn't they feel like they exist and matter?"

Let's make it really, really simple. If you have a transgender 6 year-old at all, you belong in prison. Flat out.

Sumac

03-16-2022, 03:22 PM

For one thing, 5 and 6 and 7 year old kids are NOT killing themselves because "nobody will let them be gay or trans". Zero. Kids that little don't know or understand ANY of that stuff. And even if you put it in their heads, they STILL don't have anywhere close to an actual understanding of it. They are not "at risk". This is gay and trans grown-ups projecting THEIR insecurities and hardships onto young children whose main concern is not being seen eating boogers. Teens and adults being suicidal because their "identity is being erased", I can believe. Kindergarten kids who just want to play with blocks and Play-Doh until it's time to go home and watch cartoons? No.
As always, grown up imbeciles, who have inferior complex, project their issues on others and make life worse for everyone involved.

It is indeed sick and awful. And I find rather ironic, that back in the day, the whole idea of a modern childhood, was that kids should be, well, kids, doing kids stuff without burden of adult world.

But nowadays, bunch of mentally ill sexually bothered lunatics want to push their problems onto their heads and drag them in the world of adult problems or rather world of mentally ill freaks, who think that chopping off your body parts is a good answer for their ailment.
Pathetic.

Leo656

03-16-2022, 03:32 PM

Andrew: Y e a h... Like, WHERE are they learning that stuff at that age?

I remember being 6 more vividly than most people. What we did with our genitals was not a priority.

ONE person I went to Kindergarten with "came out" to a mutual friend in high school, saying they felt like they were trans and that was why they were such an asshole to everyone (this boy - at the time - was heavily disliked by everyone for being a huge bully and pathological liar). But given the fact that they were, indeed, a pathological liar and a massive attention whore, said mutual friend did not put much stock in it. Word kind of got around, and we all just figured the kid was making up stories for sympathy. This was a kid who would rather climb a tree and tell a lie than stand on the ground and tell the truth, so we all just figured they were being "outrageous" for attention. Years later, they actually had the surgery and went the whole nine yards, and supposedly they're much happier now. I've occasionally touched base with them once in a while, but they're still prone to being a huge liar so I mostly just leave them alone. Apparently breast implants didn't fix the mountain of other personality flaws they had and continue to have. At least they're living "their truth" now, so if they're happy then fine.

But point being, they didn't have their "revelation" until they were almost an adult. Now, is there a chance they might have had an inkling long before, and that in turn was why they acted out the way they did in their youth? Maybe, but I'd argue it still didn't justify or excuse it. They were never a bullied kid, always the bully, so they could never even claim that they were put down or treated bad, at least not by their peers (I'd heard their Dad was abusive though so that may have been a factor). It did reach a point where they had no friends, but again, that was because they treated everyone like sh*t over a dozen years to the point nobody wanted to be around them. I get that if you're "dealing with sh*t" it can make you act out, but I don't fully think that was the case. I frankly think they were just a general sociopath with a LOT of mental health issues, and that gender dysphoria was just the cherry on top. Plenty of us TRIED to be their friend, he (it was "he" when we knew him so that's what I'm going with) simply made it impossible. I actually stuck it out with them more than anyone else, until I found out he robbed me one time and that was the final straw.

I mean, if you're "confused", then fine, if your parent is abusive, fine... If you go out into the world and be an overt asshole, no matter what your issues are... I don't really feel sorry for you. It doesn't cost anything to be nice, or honest. I was abused, too, I was (and am) still nice to people 99% of the time. Using your "damage" to explain why you were a dick to people your whole life... It doesn't wash, with me.

Anyway, yeah, they definitely were not openly "struggling with their identity" in K-3. I was his "best friend" at that point, and aside from the constant lying all he wanted to talk about was Nintendo games and how Macho Man and Ultimate Warrior were so much cooler than Hulk Hogan. "Normal Kid Sh*t". Everything else came way later. I sincerely don't think having a teacher talk to him about being trans at THAT age would have made a difference. At 10 or 11 or 12, yeah, fine. Even if they did know they were "different" at age 5, I doubt they had the mental faculties to process any of it. And they were a smart kid, actually the highest-testing in our class. Graduated from high school two years early, even. Technically brilliant, just... A HUGE liar. But definitely not "a dumb kid".

But for all that brilliance, when we were 6 I'd still catch them eating boogers. So I doubt a whole curriculum on gay and trans stuff would have sunk in just yet, regardless of what came later.

I DO feel like there maybe should have been more help and resources available to them upon hitting puberty so that they would have struggled less - they made mention of feeling trans to one person in high school but didn't transition until they were around 30, so obviously it was a process with much uncertainty along the way - but that's a whole other story.

Considering all the times this same kid called me a "f*gg*t" when we were kids, it's clear they had some bad wiring in their head all along. But I'm not sure how much of it would have been alleviated by having "Okay To Be Gay" worksheets in Kindergarten.

Leo656

03-16-2022, 03:48 PM

As always, grown up imbeciles, who have inferior complex, project their issues on others and make life worse for everyone involved.

It is indeed sick and awful. And I find rather ironic, that back in the day, the whole idea of a modern childhood, was that kids should be, well, kids, doing kids stuff without burden of adult world.

But nowadays, bunch of mentally ill sexually bothered lunatics want to push their problems onto their heads and drag them in the world of adult problems or rather world of mentally ill freaks, who think that chopping off your body parts is a good answer for their ailment.
Pathetic.

I feel like there's truth to that.

As mentioned, my parents were very sexual. But my mother had a HUGE problem with me ever seeing my Dad's porn, which I did often because he left it laying around, or in the VCR, or whatever. To be fair, I was a bit of an "early bloomer", in that even though I had NO understanding of "sex" by age 4, I knew I liked naked women. I didn't understand why that was "bad", because again, I didn't understand "sex". I just knew I liked boobs.

My dad was fine with it; he had the typical father's relief of "at least he isn't gay". My mom, though, was adamant. "He's just a kid! He doesn't need to see that stuff! He's gonna turn out to be a huge sick pervert, like YOU!" They'd have huge fights about it. To her credit, I did, in fact, turn out to be a "huge sick pervert" so perhaps there was some wisdom in her words. And that's why I am kind of sensitive to the fact that what you present to very young kids may in fact "push" them one way or the other. As a kid, I was on my Dad's side - "So what? They're just boobs!" But as an adult, yeah, maybe 4 was too young to see Playboy. Maybe 7 was too young to see that very graphic video of the two chicks going down on each other that Dad left in the VCR. Like, I didn't turn into a rapist or anything, but I'd concede that there is a decent chance that being exposed to such things at such a young age caused me to both "blossom" early and also become AS perverted as I am. Like, I'll never say it had NO effect, y'know?

My mom was no prude. No way! She'd been to her share of orgies in her day, as I've heard it told (although that may be BS, too; I know of one incident but as I understood it she was drugged and raped. The rest may have been just vindictive people making up tales to slander her, for all I know. I do know that she had sex with a lot of people, regardless). She just didn't want her kid to turn out to be a huge pervert. It's a valid concern many parents share. And there is evidence that introducing certain things to kids before they're mentally equipped to process them can have lifelong effects.

Used to be common sense. Now? I don't know.

Andrew NDB

03-16-2022, 05:50 PM

ArOQF4kadHA

Leo656

03-16-2022, 05:59 PM

Don't work, fam.

Guess I could watch it on YouTube.

Sumac

03-17-2022, 04:28 AM

Andrew: Y e a h... Like, WHERE are they learning that stuff at that age?...
There are some studies, which link being trans to various stages of autism and other behavioral problems, like sociopathy.

ArOQF4kadHA
Ah, yes, chorus of Gay Men, singing how they gonna come to your children. At least three of them were convicted pedophiles and molesters.

Nice message, LGB+ community. I am sure, it is ensuring to all those who link Gays to pedophilia and rape, that you are safest people on Earth. :x
Otherwise known, how to make satire horribly wrong.

Leo656

03-18-2022, 12:32 AM

There are some studies, which link being trans to various stages of autism and other behavioral problems, like sociopathy.

I mean, I can definitely believe it in at least some cases but I also get why it's one of those "you can't say that out loud" kind of things.

I guess it's kinda like how "Not EVERY woman who does porn was molested as a child or raped as a teenager"... except for the fact that, y'know, yeah, they were. Every single one.

Did you know that one of the most-cited "Previous Careers" for many porn actresses was "Kindergarten Teacher"? I'm sure there's something else to be gleaned from that little nugget of information as well but I'll be damned I know exactly what it is.

Coola Yagami

03-18-2022, 12:38 AM

I mean, I can definitely believe it in at least some cases but I also get why it's one of those "you can't say that out loud" kind of things.

I guess it's kinda like how "Not EVERY woman who does porn was molested as a child or raped as a teenager"... except for the fact that, y'know, yeah, they were. Every single one.

Did you know that one of the most-cited "Previous Careers" for many porn actresses was "Kindergarten Teacher"? I'm sure there's something else to be gleaned from that little nugget of information as well but I'll be damned I know exactly what it is.

There's also this weird influx of mostly attractive teachers that bone their grade school students. I don't get why it's that way with women, you don't often heard of handsome male teachers doing that, it's always the ugly fat old creeper dudes doing it.

Or idk maybe it's darker than that. Maybe handsome teachers do bone the girls and they're just better at keeping it quiet unlike the male students that brag to everyone about ****ing the teacher that gets them caught a lot easier?

Leo656

03-18-2022, 12:54 AM

The only "handsome" male teacher at my high school who got caught f*cking a student, the girl had been telling her friends all year that she wasn't gonna stop trying until she got him to f*ck her. She put her plan into motion and eventually succeeded.

She got a couple of months suspension to let the heat die down and "protect her reputation" (what?). Basically they didn't want kids to pick on her for being a homewrecking slut.

Guy's wife left him, he lost his job, ended up working at some supermarket, then lost THAT job when kids from school kept showing up at work to harass him.

Kinda doesn't seem like everything was entirely fair and balanced in that situation.

Little slut was hot, though. She was a grade ahead of me. I had no idea who she was until she came back to school and everyone was whispering in the hallways. I'm like "THAT's the girl? .......Okay, I kinda get it." :lol:

Sumac

03-18-2022, 01:57 AM

I mean, I can definitely believe it in at least some cases but I also get why it's one of those "you can't say that out loud" kind of things.
Which pisses me off: instead of helping those people for real and solving their problems, politicians and activists just want everyone to pretend that problem is something else and "solve" it, preferably their way.
Hypocrisy of the highest order.

Leo656

03-18-2022, 02:22 AM

It probably doesn't do a lot to fix the real underlying issues, no. As I've mentioned, many doctors and therapists off-the-record supposedly claim that their concerns are that many trans people have deeper issues that aren't being fully addressed because the trans identity part gets all the focus.

I mean, I won't argue with anyone who says More Research Needed.

Andrew NDB

03-18-2022, 02:50 AM

Sumac

03-18-2022, 04:37 AM

There is no research, there is only the constant pointing to, "But they're gonna kill themselves in droves!"

Yet the data post-transition is, nope, they are definitely more likely to kill themselves then. Probably when their fantasy didn't meet the reality and they've already did their curtain reveal, and they had nobody giving them a reality check on expectations prior to that. Particularly with people pumping themselves with "opposite" hormones out of the blue because of a gut feeling.
Yup, I can't even imagine what its like, when trans activists and doctors on the net had convinced you that you will become a REAL woman post-op, but you end up looking in the mirror and still see a man, but with a mutilated body and no way back to a normal life.

At this point you either off yourself or double down on your insanity, trying to shut down everyone who point out disconnect between reality and your delusions. Which is why I feel that a lot of trans who prance around screaming that "they feel like real women" and "they are happy" are liars, since a lot of this looks too forced and more like very enthusiastic denial, since alternate - is just too admit that are a delusional fool who ruined your body for nothing.

Leo656

03-18-2022, 05:10 AM

Sumac

03-18-2022, 05:29 AM

Page's cute, but ****ing insane.
Or just attention seeking fool. First, she was a Lesbian, than when she realized it was not anything special anymore, she has became trans. I am sure, if SJW will come up with a new oppressed category to supersede trans, she will proclaim she is that thing.

For better or worse, superseding trans insanity will be hard, because, it so out there, that most people won't ever accept it, even with massive propaganda from media.

Coola Yagami

03-18-2022, 08:33 AM

Is there any consensus yet on whether or not it's weird to jerk off to older pictures of Ellen Page? As in specifically when they were "Ellen Page".

I guess it's kinda like jerking off to Jane Fonda in "Barbarella"; you're not looking at what they look like Now, you're looking at them Then and so it's okay. Still... I don't know, for some reason... kinda weird.

I'unno just curious what the temperature was on that one. :lol:

I mean, if I was on Twitter (which I know you're not, I'm just saying) it would pretty much be career suicide to admit you still jerk off to Ellen, but you might earn 'stunning and brave' points if you jerk it to Elliot.

Sumac

03-18-2022, 08:47 AM

I mean, if I was on Twitter (which I know you're not, I'm just saying) it would pretty much be career suicide to admit you still jerk off to Ellen, but you might earn 'stunning and brave' points if you jerk it to Elliot.
Basically like some SJW infested places - you can openly lust and discuss everything about men, including size of their dicks and the like, but if you try to say something about women - it is immediately counted as "objectification".
Of course, lusting after trans is even more "honorable" in SJW logic.

Bahamut810

03-18-2022, 11:19 AM

Is there any consensus yet on whether or not it's weird to jerk off to older pictures of Ellen Page? As in specifically when they were "Ellen Page".

I guess it's kinda like jerking off to Jane Fonda in "Barbarella"; you're not looking at what they look like Now, you're looking at them Then and so it's okay. Still... I don't know, for some reason... kinda weird.

I'unno just curious what the temperature was on that one. :lol:

You are not allowed to do that or find Paige attractive because that is trans-fetishism. However, If you dont find Paige attractive at any time it is transphobia.

Vegita-San

03-18-2022, 11:50 AM

ever changing rules :). and they wonder why no normal takes it seriously :).

Andrew NDB

03-18-2022, 12:13 PM

You are not allowed to do that or find Paige attractive because that is trans-fetishism. However, If you dont find Paige attractive at any time it is transphobia.

Sounds about right.

Vegita-San

03-18-2022, 12:13 PM

huh. even twitter is starting to turn against the alphabet crowd. going against a trans athlete.

you had a good thing going for a while, trans folks. but SJW's ruined it for you.

Andrew NDB

03-18-2022, 12:16 PM

At this point you either off yourself or double down on your insanity, trying to shut down everyone who point out disconnect between reality and your delusions. Which is why I feel that a lot of trans who prance around screaming that "they feel like real women" and "they are happy" are liars

Yeah, I see a lot of that. People that've transitioned posting 10 posts a day on Instagram or FB with lots of selfies about "#transandproud , #transwomenarewomen , #transtranstrans , #didimentionimtrans" kind of stuff. Even if they don't get a lot of likes they just keep doing it. At a certain point it's like, "Eh, who are you really trying to convince?"

Bahamut810

03-18-2022, 04:13 PM

huh. even twitter is starting to turn against the alphabet crowd. going against a trans athlete.

you had a good thing going for a while, trans folks. but SJW's ruined it for you.

I mean...they are trying to decide who on the progressive stack they need to support.

Coola Yagami

03-18-2022, 05:17 PM

Women are mad that trans-women are wiping the floor with them in sports but can't speak up cause they'll be called transphobes and get cancelled.

Vegita-San

03-18-2022, 05:29 PM

Women are mad that trans-women are wiping the floor with them in sports but can't speak up cause they'll be called transphobes and get cancelled.

yep, and they should be. this right here is going to defeat the whole 'trans' argument and 'break the illusion' that they are not real women or real men.

A small amount of 'unique' people should not b e able to shame people into being able to point out facts of science and nature.

Leo656

03-18-2022, 06:01 PM

Are we talking about the Lia Thomas situation?

Objectively, it is pretty suspect that they were ranked like four-hundred-and-something when they competed as a male but are Number 1 by a huge mile while competing as a female. I mean... it's not like they technically got any better, times-wise. Not THAT much. It's pretty damning, really. Like they were objectively "terrible" performance-wise before, and now they're the best in the world? Well... you need to isolate the variables when something like that happens. You have to. It's dishonest not to.

Not to be a dick but it's like that one South Park episode playing out in real life.

Vegita-San

03-18-2022, 06:04 PM

yep. thats the one.

Even if you completed the 'transition', your base is STILL a man. with YEARS of training and muscle memory. you won't get rid of that. It's REALLY not fair to the TRUE women in the sport who worked much harder to get there.

iif you really wanted to be fair, you'd give these very few trans people their OWN sports league. see how long that lasts...

Coola Yagami

03-18-2022, 06:14 PM

Are we talking about the Lia Thomas situation?

Yeeeeep.

Diez Caracteres.

Leo656

03-18-2022, 06:18 PM

I think Phelps had an interesting idea when he proposed an "Open" League. Like there'd be three leagues, Men, Women, and "Open". The first two for people competing as their biological whatever and the third group for anyone who wanted to participate, including trans people.

I'unno, that seems fair to me. I don't see why any trans person would have a problem with that, unless they admit out loud that "biological males would dominate" such a category, which would undermine the argument they're making in favor of Thomas by saying that isn't happening (when it clearly is happening).

Otherwise that seems like the only "fair" solution for all involved. Create a third category where all are welcome and let the chips fall where they may.

Coola Yagami

03-18-2022, 07:40 PM

Leo656

03-18-2022, 07:44 PM

Did he? It was a couple months ago when he did the interview saying that. I didn't hear much fallout.

Coola Yagami

03-18-2022, 08:05 PM

Did he? It was a couple months ago when he did the interview saying that. I didn't hear much fallout.

I'uno. Nowadays you say the wrong thing, even if you mean it as a positive towards these movements, and they come at you.

Sumac

03-19-2022, 10:36 AM

Women are mad that trans-women are wiping the floor with them in sports but can't speak up cause they'll be called transphobes and get cancelled.
Yep.

SJW logic is that apparently women should take a back seat for the sake of "poor and oppressed trans athletes who strived their whole oppressed lives to get to the place they are now", which completely ignores that women in sports do not spit in the ceiling, but train and sacrifice a lot to get where they are.

Even outside, "women should take back seat for the sake of men", demanding that athletes should, basically, give up their positions for the sake of someone else, just to not hurt their precious feelings is laughable and goes against any notion of fair play.

They basically outright say that women don't matter and only trans matter, because, they are oppressed, which is retarded and sexist.

Interestingly that no-one rises such concerns about men sports, probably, because, none of "trans men" threaten position of men sportsmen.

Coola Yagami

03-19-2022, 01:21 PM

Yep.

SJW logic is that apparently women should take a back seat for the sake of "poor and oppressed trans athletes who strived their whole oppressed lives to get to the place they are now", which completely ignores that women in sports do not spit in the ceiling, but train and sacrifice a lot to get where they are.

Even outside, "women should take back seat for the sake of men", demanding that athletes should, basically, give up their positions for the sake of someone else, just to not hurt their precious feelings is laughable and goes against any notion of fair play.

They basically outright say that women don't matter and only trans matter, because, they are oppressed, which is retarded and sexist.

Interestingly that no-one rises such concerns about men sports, probably, because, none of "trans men" threaten position of men sportsmen.

Are there any? I keep hearing news about transwomen 'invading' female sports but I never heard of any transmen in men sports?

Sumac

03-19-2022, 01:53 PM

Are there any? I keep hearing news about transwomen 'invading' female sports but I never heard of any transmen in men sports?
And it should tell you everything about nature of this conflict.

Andrew NDB

03-19-2022, 02:41 PM

I'uno. Nowadays you say the wrong thing, even if you mean it as a positive towards these movements, and they come at you.

Kind of surprising. The left loves people who will apologize so they can rake them under the coals some more. And a quick Google of "Phelps applogy" shows him publicly apologizing for a ton of things over the years. Maybe he's too old hat now?

Sumac

03-19-2022, 10:15 PM

Never apologize to SJW - they see it as a weakness and will exploit it. And some are so far gone, they will never accept your apology, even if you didn't said anything revolting in the first place.

Leo656

03-19-2022, 10:40 PM

Never apologize to SJW - they see it as a weakness and will exploit it. And some are so far gone, they will never accept your apology, even if you didn't said anything revolting in the first place.

That's why when plas used to PM me trying to scold and "educate" me on my opinions I'd just dig in deeper and tell her to take a leap. :lol:

That kind of sh*t is insufferable. First off, we were never even friends, so I'm not sure why she had this need for us to agree on anything. But again, those people are super-intolerant.

Like, maybe I am a "terrible person". That's between me and whatever God there might be, not between you and I. I don't care to be "saved" and I'm probably well past that point anyway. So I'll keep my "terrible opinions" as my own cross to bear and suffer whatever consequence that entails.

FredWolfLeonardo

03-19-2022, 11:10 PM

Its weird, I absolutely loathe and hate the positions that plastroncafe takes but I somewhat admire her being a clear-cut authoritarian about it, even if she denies it. The reason why plastron's brand of "SJW woke politics" is so widespread nowadays is because the movement has been spread through force and intimidation, its that simple.

I sometimes am curious whether she lurks here or not. I'm still here to talk, frenemy :lol:

Leo656

03-19-2022, 11:25 PM

FredWolfLeonardo

03-19-2022, 11:31 PM

"If you don't think someone should be able to be in a relationship with one person and still casually have sex with a bunch of other people outside the relationship, you're a terrible person."

^^^ Something a person with highly questionable morals and values who cares more about orgasms than peoples' feelings would say. Woe be to anyone who'd willingly be in a "relationship" with someone like that.

Anyone who takes a position like that should have an equally condescending reply:

"If you think someone should be able to cheat on their husband/wife without consequence, you're a terrible person".

People with that user's mentality were only able to spread because they were allowed to. I wish they weren't, and it was a bad judgement in American history to think that everyone's voice counts when reality clearly shows otherwise.

Leo656

03-19-2022, 11:40 PM

I think it's telling that people like that tend to pack up and leave this place for good when people refuse to defer to them. Rather than just agree to disagree and say "Okay, it's clear we'll never agree but we can still talk in general."

Some people NEED that echo chamber or they simply can't function. They think they're "taking a stand" by walking away - "I simply can't be around people who think such terrible things" - but all they're really doing is revealing how thin-skinned and intolerant they are if they're only interested in hearing people tell them "I agree, you're SO right", over and over again, forever, regardless of topic.

To them, we're the "bad guys" for wrongthink. To me, they're pussies. Which is even worse than the fact I can't stand their politics. I can respect a difference of opinion. I don't respect wimps.

Prowler

03-20-2022, 12:11 AM

Anyone who takes a position like that should have an equally condescending reply:

"If you think someone should be able to cheat on their husband/wife without consequence, you're a terrible person".

People with that user's mentality were only able to spread because they were allowed to. I wish they weren't, and it was a bad judgement in American history to think that everyone's voice counts when reality clearly shows otherwise.

You make an interesting point in your 2nd paragraph.

Freedom of expression is a person's right in any democratic nation... but sometimes I hear and read such stupid ****, especially nowadays with social media and everyone having a voice to reach the entire world in a few minutes, that it honestly makes me think if those people who defend the return of authoritian regimes don't have a point after all.

Seriously, in a democracy you gotta take both the good and bad opinions, but sometimes I wish some people could just be taken away for being too stupid.

Like Churchill said, Democracy is a bad form of government, but all the others are worse. He also said that the strongest argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with your average voter.

Sumac

03-20-2022, 01:18 AM

You make an interesting point in your 2nd paragraph.

Freedom of expression is a person's right in any democratic nation... but sometimes I hear and read such stupid ****, especially nowadays with social media and everyone having a voice to reach the entire world in a few minutes, that it honestly makes me think if those people who defend the return of authoritian regimes don't have a point after all.

Seriously, in a democracy you gotta take both the good and bad opinions, but sometimes I wish some people could just be taken away for being too stupid.

Like Churchill said, Democracy is a bad form of government, but all the others are worse. He also said that the strongest argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with your average voter.
I blame social networks for this.

Before, if you wanted your opinion to be heard, you needed at least some management skills, money and / or talent to publish newspaper or get article in one, appear on TV or radio, publish a book or something like that.

Most of SJW lunatics plaguing West won't be able to do that, since they are lazy and most of them can't manage anything except for video games. But with social networks anyone can say, whatever they want and anyone can gather cult in their own name. And its just few clicks away and costs nothing!

Leo656

03-23-2022, 09:20 PM

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/raven-symone-and-ravens-home-cast-walk-off-set-to-protest-dont-say-gay-bill-232312073.html

These people really... really... really... really... really... REALLY really really wanna talk to your 4-year old kids about Being Gay and/or Trans.

No. Shut up. You're insane.

Andrew NDB

03-24-2022, 12:01 AM

Some crazy stuff going on.

BWtGzJxiONU

Supreme Court pick can't define what a woman is when asked. It's one thing when random transsexuals on Dr. Phil can't do it... this is quite another.

Sumac

03-24-2022, 03:14 AM

And too think its all done to service mentally ill men. So much for "future is female" and Feminism.

At this point I am starting to think that some women just want to submit themselves to men, even at the cost of their safety, dignity and freedom. Otherwise I can't explain why they will appease crazies.

Coola Yagami

03-25-2022, 01:46 AM

Some crazy stuff going on.

BWtGzJxiONU

Supreme Court pick can't define what a woman is when asked. It's one thing when random transsexuals on Dr. Phil can't do it... this is quite another.

It's a cancel tactic. They know in this day and age you can't 'define a woman' without somehow including transfolk or you're canned.

That supreme court nominee wasn't stupid. She knew if she gave an honest answer she's not only lose her position but she'd probably never be able to find work in that town ever again. The cancel crowd would see to it.

Sumac

03-25-2022, 09:07 AM

That supreme court nominee wasn't stupid. She knew if she gave an honest answer she's not only lose her position but she'd probably never be able to find work in that town ever again. The cancel crowd would see to it.
It is a shame that mentally ill and grifters got so powerful they can manipulate lives of random people, even those who should "unreachable" by their ****

Coola Yagami

03-25-2022, 12:31 PM

It is a shame that mentally ill and grifters got so powerful they can manipulate lives of random people, even those who should "unreachable" by their ****

Yeah.... I'm all for respect and whatnot, but this is just pushing it too far. Nowadays it seems the needs of the few far outweigh the needs of the many.

We're gonna reach the point where the President (not necessarily Sleepy Joe, but whoever happens to be in office) will get a free pass for mass treason but will instantly get booted out of office and replaced if he misgenders someone.

sdp

03-26-2022, 05:36 PM

I'm glad we have this thread so we can discuss this topic which seems to trigger a lot of people but since we have so many experts on the topic here and this is a TMNT forum it's only right. I know I've mentioned it before but it just fits this topic better.

Rise of the TMNT Case Jones is transsexual and no matter where you stand on your views on trans people you need to accept it since it'll fit your views.

As we saw Casey Jones is a girl in Rise of the TMNT but Case Jones is a man as we all know but in reality he really is a man just as he should be in canon because he is trans.

If you think that trans people aren't the gender they say they are then this works for you because Casey Jones is a male trying to be female but in reality he'll never be a woman despite cutting his penis off, so he's still male just as Casey Jones should be.

If you think trans people are the gender they say they are then this works for you because Casey Jones is a female trying to be a male, and since in reality she really is the gender she say she is, then she is a he, even if he has a vagina and not a penis, he's still male just as Casey Jones should be.

Everyone can be happy and get along knowing no matter your views, Casey Jones is male in Rise of the TMNT because he's trans.

FredWolfLeonardo

03-26-2022, 06:20 PM

I love you, sdp. We should sit down for coffee in Tokio, Italy, which I'm sure is a nice place.

Sumac

03-27-2022, 01:17 AM

Oh, sdp and his low quality bait.

Leo656

03-29-2022, 07:28 PM

What the sh*t is this.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/florida-teacher-dont-want-hide-193803242.html

Gay teachers upset about the bill in Florida because they "Don't want to be barred from discussing their personal lives with their students."

Uh... what? Like, is this a new thing? Since when was this ever a thing?

When I was in school, discussions about "personal life" - i.e. anything not having to do with the worksheet in front of you - between students and teachers was completely out of bounds. Anything going on in YOUR life as a student regarding anything outside of school was strictly between you, the nurse, and/or the guidance counselor, nobody else. First or second day back from school they might do a "What I Did On My Summer Vacation" deal, but that's it. The staff only got involved in your home life if your Mom was on the PTA or there were signs of abuse, otherwise it was "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." "If someone is hitting you or touching you inappropriately, tell the nurse or the counselor. Otherwise, it's not appropriate to discuss what goes on at home with teachers. They're there to Teach, and you're there to Learn."

And that went double for teachers; one time, we had a teacher who got pregnant, and that was a big deal and a topic of discussion since it was like Second Grade and a lot of the kids had never even seen a pregnant woman before. But even then, after having a brief talk about it Once we really were not supposed to talk about it anymore, since it invited conversation about things 7-year olds "aren't supposed to be talking about yet". Past that, once in a great while a teacher got married or something, but again, you REALLY were not supposed to ask them about it, and they weren't supposed to talk about it. Rarely two teachers from the same school got married to each other, and naturally the students would be curious and try to ask about it, but the answer was ALWAYS a very curt and firm, "We do not talk about our personal lives at school, we are here to teach you lessons not talk about what we do at home. It simply is not appropriate."

That's how it always was. And frankly, how it should probably be. Even at the high school level, "We don't talk about what we do when we go home, that's none of your business." If you saw a teacher outside of school on the weekend or whatever, be it at the grocery store or god forbid coming out of a bar, you might say a quick "Hello" and/or "See you Monday" but that was it. Even a few of the teachers I had a good relationship would pretend they didn't see me and walk away if I saw them out in public, it was just too awkward to interact in a social setting. The boundaries between Student and Teacher were well understood.

So now suddenly it's a thing where teachers and students "bond" over "sharing their personal lives and experiences"? Is this more of the "I'd rather be a Friend and not an authority figure" nonsense?

Really can't wrap my head around this. "I'm sad because now I can't tell my students I'm gay and I can't regale them with tales of all the Jolly Gay Adventures I have with my partner when we're not in school." News Flash: Straight or Gay, married or single, you shouldn't be talking about stuff like that with your students because that's not what they're in school for ya numbnuts.

I used to think home-schoolers were crazy and their kids were all maladjusted little misfits. I'm sure a ton of them are, but nowadays it seems like actually sending your kid off to school is the "crazier" option. Priorities are f*cking shot across the board. It's lunacy.

Leo656

03-29-2022, 08:38 PM

They are absolutely, 100% not interested in indoctrinating your kids, though.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/disney-executive-producer-admits-gay-224509498.html

Disney Executive Producer Admits to ‘Gay Agenda,’ ‘Adding Queerness’ Wherever She Could

During a staff meeting on Florida’s recent enactment of the Parental Rights in Education bill, an executive producer at Disney said she was advancing a “not-at-all-secret gay agenda” to insert queerness into children’s animation.

Hmmmm. Hm.

in·doc·tri·na·tion
noun
the process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically.

......Huh. Well whattya know about that.

Sumac

03-30-2022, 03:40 AM

It was fairly normal here to teacher talk about their lives, but it never went into realm of personal and intimate details, like who were they dating or something.

Being outraged that you can not talk about your personal life, with your students, pretending that it hurts Gays somehow, is dumb as ****. Seems another attempt at indoctrination to me, i.e. demonstrating through teachers that being LGB is normal, something that really shouldn't be concern of the school.

Also, **** that executive producer. If she want to make a Gay show, she should be doing shows for adults. Trying to "insert Gay agenda" into kids show is ****ed and shows that those people seriously ****ed in their heads.

Andrew NDB

03-30-2022, 12:34 PM

It is really sick and twisted adults that need their alternative lifestyles validated by small children.

Sumac

03-30-2022, 12:43 PM

It is really sick and twisted adults that need their alternative lifestyles validated by small children.
Well, those are the same people who want their life choices to be validated by fictional characters. I dunno, what it's to be so pathetic and stupid.

Vegita-San

04-06-2022, 05:25 PM

The Ezra miller story seems to lend credence to the 'mental instability' of trans people.

Leo656

04-06-2022, 05:33 PM

I thought Ezra was just really, really, REALLY gay?

Andrew NDB

04-06-2022, 05:36 PM

https://media1.giphy.com/media/3o7aTyBlpBq9MUkA9y/200.gif

Vegita-San

04-06-2022, 05:47 PM

I thought Ezra was just really, really, REALLY gay?

do really really really gay people want to wear makeup like a woman?

Leo656

04-06-2022, 06:07 PM

Some of them apparently do, yes!

Andrew NDB

04-06-2022, 06:09 PM

Some of them apparently do, yes!

Pretty much! There's gay and then if they level up a bit there's like... Liberace Gay, up the ladder. Which is where you start seeing that.

Leo656

04-13-2022, 03:34 PM

Goodness gracious.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/washington-state-oregon-teach-kindergartners-171256345.html

Washington state, Oregon teach kindergartners 'there are many ways to express gender'

Jessica Chasmar
Tue, April 12, 2022, 1:12 PM
Public schools in Washington state and Oregon are teaching topics related to gender identity to children as young as 5.

The Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI), which oversees K-12 education in the state, defines "gender" as "a social construct based on emotional, behavioral and cultural characteristics attached to a person’s assigned biological sex." The OSPI set health education standards for all public schools in 2016, requiring children in kindergarten and first grade to learn that "there are many ways to express gender," while children in second and third grade are taught that "there is a range of gender roles and expression."

A nation of illiterate high school graduates and an economy that's almost 100% dependent on foreign countries' imports. But sure, yeah, this is really giving kids a head start on the important stuff.

Sumac

04-13-2022, 11:54 PM

I agree with the sentiment that gender is a social construct and that it is not necessary to stick to "gender stereotypes".

However, I am fairly sure that it has nothing to do with freedom from stereotypes and everything to do with peddling trans ideology and serving as "preparation" to brainwash kids into supporting trans freakery.

Which is not something, which should be pushed neither on kids, nor on adults, because, its nothing, but mental illness turned religion and brings nothing, but more pain and grief for everyone involved.

FredWolfLeonardo

04-14-2022, 01:00 AM

Andrew NDB

04-14-2022, 01:01 AM

Doesn't belong in the classroom. Period.

Coola Yagami

04-14-2022, 02:06 AM

It's hard to know for a fact because people on Twitter are different once the computer is off, or at least I would hope, but a lot of these people seem to have no personality other than their gender and sexuality. Like if they introduce themselves to you they just can't wait to blurt out that they're transgender, pansexual, polyamorous, and go by xhir pronouns and whatever else. It's like their entire identity is about that. I feel part of the reason some of them are even legit crying and breaking down at the fact they won't be able to bring that up in the classroom is because that is legit all they think about, all they are. That might be the reason why they're so bad at writing gay characters and whatnot in fiction, because gay becomes their entire personality.

IMO it kinda sounds like they themselves are bored with teaching kids about whatever subject they're supposed to work on (a math teacher teaching math, a English teacher teaching how to read and whatnot) and just can't wait to tell kids (or anyone that will listen) just how amazing it is to be this, that and the other.

Of course, they don't see anything wrong with it cause 'they're the good guys', 'right side of history' and all that ********.

Andrew NDB

04-14-2022, 02:27 AM

It's hard to know for a fact because people on Twitter are different once the computer is off, or at least I would hope, but a lot of these people seem to have no personality other than their gender and sexuality. Like if they introduce themselves to you they just can't wait to blurt out that they're transgender, pansexual, polyamorous, and go by xhir pronouns and whatever else. It's like their entire identity is about that.

Very much so. And this bleeds over into the arts, the LGBTQ characters they create or revamp. And if you notice they'll just fake giggle and go, "Why are you so worried about it?" (hint: they are the ones worried about you noticing it)

A very bizarre thing to be prideful about. Used to be you could have dinner or hang out with just about anyone and "let me tell you what sort of people I like to put my genitals in" would be like the last thing imaginable that would come up by any party there. Now it's one of the first, with the weirdos.

Bizarre, on its face, from any objective standpoint.

Sumac

04-14-2022, 05:43 AM

Just curious, if you had your way in the world with all the power to spare, would you have anything done in order to stop the spread of trans ideology? I know I certainly would.
A very detailed and objective study to prove that trans is just a mental illness. With results and analysis available to everyone for free.

As well, as set of laws to punish "parents" who feed their underage kids hormones or castrate them.

If any freakshow opens their mouth and say that, say, "at the age of 5 kid can say that they want to eat hormones to become a different sex" this person should face consequences for proposing child abuse.

It's hard to know for a fact because people on Twitter are different once the computer is off, or at least I would hope, but a lot of these people seem to have no personality other than their gender and sexuality. Like if they introduce themselves to you they just can't wait to blurt out that they're transgender, pansexual, polyamorous, and go by xhir pronouns and whatever else. It's like their entire identity is about that. I feel part of the reason some of them are even legit crying and breaking down at the fact they won't be able to bring that up in the classroom is because that is legit all they think about, all they are. That might be the reason why they're so bad at writing gay characters and whatnot in fiction, because gay becomes their entire personality.
"Sexuality and race" had replaced subcultures like Goths, Punks, Emos and the like. Its just being Punk or Goth doesn't require specific pronounce or genital mutilation and doesn't have long-term effects on one's psyche.

But like subcultures of the past, this whole LGBBQ* shebang is all about giving normal and boring people a chance to become colorful retards, just to feel themselves special and above the crowd.

The discussion about it has become much more toxic, because, it deals with much more sensitive materials like race and sex and those SJW freaks and their handmaidens don't understand that a lot of people do not like, when bunch of pretentious self-important idiotic parrots are trying to dictate them who they want to be. Or who their kids should be.

A very bizarre thing to be prideful about. Used to be you could have dinner or hang out with just about anyone and "let me tell you what sort of people I like to put my genitals in" would be like the last thing imaginable that would come up by any party there. Now it's one of the first, with the weirdos.
- How do you know your friend is a Vegan?
- Its the first thing he says anywhere he go.

It boils down to arrogance and self-importance. Like I said above, BKMLGBPPP/ is a replacement for subcultures and it replicates them to a T, including arrogance of its members who think they are "above stupid plebs". Which where "right side of history" comes from.

It is significantly worse, though since, those people get into politics and try to reshape world into their own ****ed degenerate image.

Coola Yagami

04-14-2022, 06:09 PM

I never thought of it that way, but I guess the whole multi-gender, any sexuality that isn't straight, feminism, being vegan and all the other things have become the modern day 'I'm goth/scene/grunge' etc, except now it's taking things to the extreme where now you have to actually suck a dick or lose yours to be 'one of the cool kids'.

Andrew NDB

04-14-2022, 06:13 PM

I never thought of it that way, but I guess the whole multi-gender, any sexuality that isn't straight, feminism, being vegan and all the other things have become the modern day 'I'm goth/scene/grunge' etc,

I've been saying that here for years. It's replaced the cliques entirely. It's no longer, "Are you a goth, a geek, a jock, a skater, or a gangsta?" Now it's, "What is your gender identity and how do you feel inside?"

Coola Yagami

04-14-2022, 06:19 PM

It wouldn't be so bad if straight folks weren't demonized as a result. Like back in the day, if you're not goth, well... you're not getting threatened or whatever just because you won't be one, nor will people call you this or that if you choose to not date or sleep with a goth.

The key issue is for all the tolerance they want, they really don't know how to 'live and let live'.

I like how the phrase 'it's ok to be white' once caused a lot of backlash, but eventually we're gonna get just as much backlash for 'it's ok to be straight' or currently 'it's ok to be a woman'.

Sumac

04-15-2022, 04:47 AM

Yeah, that part surprises and saddens me as well.
Not only it goes against notion of equality and empathy (even though most of those special snowflakes are into this toxic ideology, not because of them), but it is also ludicrous.

Like why being a straight angers those freaks, much less saying that you are a normal woman? Not only those trashbrains act like people their demonize, but it doesn't give any incentive to take them seriously or treat them as if they had any ground to talk.

Leo656

04-22-2022, 11:47 PM

https://www.cbr.com/florida-governor-repeals-disneys-special-district-status/

So Disney loses its "sovereign nation" status, is gonna end up paying a ton more in state taxes, and might end up leaving Florida altogether in search of a more accommodating place to set up shop. Which in turn will completely cripple the state economy of Florida.

To think. All That could have been avoided if they didn't buckle to a handful of pink hairs who think it's SO F*CKING IMPORTANT to talk about gay/trans stuff with 5 year old kids that they're ready to go to war over it.

Disney had the right idea initially. Just Say Nothing. A billion-dollar corporation with global reach has nothing to gain by "taking a stand" on sensitive political issues, no matter how much a minority of people scream about it. All those lunatics screaming about how Disney "Needs to do the right thing!" The "right thing" was to say nothing at all. Now they're f*cked, and likely all of Florida is too, if they pack up shop and leave. Oops.

All because some gay/trans people are SO f*cking insecure they think it's appropriate to start indoctrinating Kindergarten-aged children into their worldview. Which is flat-out wrong to do on any level, and anyone who says/thinks otherwise is also f*cking wrong. There's nothing wrong with people being gay, but these aren't topics that belong in a f*cking Kindergarten classroom under any circumstances. It simply isn't appropriate. You shouldn't be talking about "regular" sex with kids that young either, for the record. It should not be part of school curriculum for that age group. End of f*cking story. If you think otherwise, you shouldn't be allowed around kids.

When kids start hitting puberty, there's a ton of age-appropriate movies and TV shows out there that can "send the message" that it's OK to be Gay. That's good, that's fine. 10-13 year old kids, different story altogether. SO many parents have always felt like, "Well, I can't trust anything in the world to be wholesome entertainment for my 5-year old, but I can always trust Disney." Now they can't even say that. I empathize. Some of my friends who are parents, that's all they'd let their under-10 kids watch is Disney stuff, because it was "safe". I don't know what they're gonna do now.

So much ballyhoo about something that shouldn't even be a conversation. No "sex ed" for 5 year olds. Period. Disagree, and You Might Be A Pedo, or at the very least you have an unhealthy preoccupation with kids' acceptance of Adult Sexual Behavior and that's also suspect as hell.

This right here is exactly why so many people look at LGBTQ+ people as "deviants". Now, *I* don't think that. But the fact they're fighting so hard on this kind of thing does them no favors at all.

Tough times ahead for The Mouse. But it's their own fault for bending over for a group that makes up less than 5% of the global population.

Andrew NDB

04-23-2022, 03:23 AM

Leo656

04-23-2022, 03:53 AM

Disney isn't leaving Florida. Can you imagine the cost for Disney to up and abandon Disneyworld and what, rebuild it from scratch somewhere else? Somewhere less desirable, even?

The trouble with this is that it should have been something to hold over Disney. Like, "you better knock this sh** off, or we'll do X." Not even giving the threat and just doing X doesn't accomplish much and doesn't give Disney any incentive to not just continue business as usual, because they no longer have anything they can lose.

I admit, it's unlikely, but people and corporations have a way of going to extreme lengths to avoid the taxman.

Perhaps the biggest takeaway from all this SHOULD be, "A corporation has been operating for decades as its own autonomous entity on U.S. soil, exempt from regular laws and guidelines."

Like... is that in ANY way excusable? That a company (or more accurately, said company's theme park) can in essence be its own "Sovereign nation", simply because the parent corporation is that huge and influential? There's just so much wrong with that, to me. It's a theme park, operating as its own country. That's... insane.

I think they're too entrenched in Florida to leave as well, for one thing they specifically chose to build their theme parks in Florida and California because they're the two most popular tourist/vacation states in the U.S. So they're kinda stuck, even if they wanted to leave, there's no place to realistically accommodate them in either space or tourist dollars. But in any case the governor has already promised that they're gonna be on the hook for a lot more tax money going forward, no more "breaks". You already hear a lot about Disney treating their theme park employees like sh*t so you can expect things to get worse, not better, across the board. This will not be a good situation for anyone.

And all because Disney just HAD to appease the pink hairs. They had the right idea in the first place, just keep quiet and weather the storm. Oh, they got caught giving donations to Republicans? You don't even need to explain that, but if you feel forced, you say "Yeah, we do give money to Republicans and Democrats too, just like Nike and Marlboro and Viacom and Budweiser. We give money to ALL the politicians because that way, we get to do whatever we want no matter who's in charge. What, you idiots didn't know that? That's how it works, dummies."

The LGBTQ crowd acts like because Disney gave money to a political party, they're openly in support of every bit of legislation they enact. That's not how it works. They give money to Republicans because Florida is a Republican state, Disney operates in that state, and they'd like for things to go their way more often than not. It's just common sense.

Now, they went and sh*t where they eat and they're dealing with the consequences. And it's all needless.

All because SOME people really, really, REALLY think it's Disney's responsibility to tell your 5-year old, "If you wanna suck a dick and wear a dress, Timmy, by all means, go ahead." :roll: No, it's not their responsibility.

Nor is it the responsibility of ANY schoolteacher in the state of Florida, which is what all of this is REALLY all about.

I'm guessing that the LGBTQ community chose to derisively call the bill the "Don't Say Gay" law because calling it the "Don't Talk About Sex With My 5-Year Old You F*cking Pervert" Bill wouldn't garner the "correct" emotional response from people who only read the headlines. But it WOULD be a much more apt descriptor. But then, we know how well Liberals and Facts get along on a good day.

Sumac

04-23-2022, 04:12 AM

The more **** goes the more all those LGBBBQ+folks are losing my respect.

They got everything they wanted. But now they want more and more. Ultimate outcome of this behavior - they will be slapped over their collective bluehaired dumb**** heads and go back to pound sand and more and more people will hate them. Basically their effort will lead to resurgence of Homophobia and intolerance, just what could have been observed after BLM thugs riots.

Power indeed corrupts.

And, of course, any freakshow, whatever they think they are, which wants to talk with little kids about sexuality and sex and sexual reassignment, can rot in the deepest pile of trash. It is not even a question, whether they are pedo or not. Only mentally ill freak would want to do that.

Leo656

04-23-2022, 04:36 AM

Basically their effort will lead to resurgence of Homophobia and intolerance, just what could have been observed after BLM thugs riots.

I mean, yeah, basically. Push too hard, people push back. And you don't need to have ANY problem with gay people whatsoever, to think that Sex Ed is not appropriate for Grades K-3. It's NOT appropriate in that context.

A lesbian friend of mine once went on a rant about the people she called "The Freaks and Weirdos" (her words). We were having a conversation via text and she dropped the bomb that "I f*cking hate gay people." Which, as you might guess, kind of threw me for a loop, seeing as she was, y'know... a gay person. So I asked her to kindly clarify, which she was happy to do.

To paraphrase: "I might be gay but don't EVER lump me in with those f*cking people, with their rainbow hair and 87 made-up genders and needing to make who they're f*cking the main topic of every f*cking conversation even if nobody asked. Those people make it SO much harder for people like me just to exist, because if people find out I'm gay they automatically assume I'm some kind of freak who wants to put their son in a dress and take him to a PRIDE parade. That sh*t makes me sick, they're ruining sh*t for the rest of us. Just be f*cking NORMAL for God's sake. Pretty sure people don't 'hate them for being gay' so much as they hate them for being f*cking lunatics. Be nice if I could 'just' be a lesbian without everyone automatically assuming I'm some kind of pedo or a fetish weirdo. But that's what they see on TV so that's what they assume. Those people don't speak for me, I can't f*cking stand them."

She's blunt to a fault, but I completely understand her point. When you're part of a larger group, even if you don't share all traits of the other members of said group, their general behavior is going to mark you as One Of Them, for good or ill. I have a ton of not-straight friends, and by and large, the "normal" ones (i.e., the ones who are completely "out" but you probably wouldn't know they were gay unless you asked because they don't make a gigantic spectacle of themselves at every opportunity) have a huge problem with the more ostentatious ones. "They make us all look like we're insane" is a refrain I hear a lot.

So yeah, I can see a rise in aggression and pushback towards the LGBTQ community being a reaction to some of these recent events, sure. When they're having to make it an actual law to state, "Teachers can't talk to 5 year olds about gay buttsex or hormone therapy"... let's face it, things are off the rails. Naturally parents are upset. Even a lot of gay ones. "It's just too young, for f*ck's sake." Why is that even in dispute? It shouldn't be.

And sadly, as we've seen historically when things go too far offsides, people on the opposing side have a way of unfortunately pushing back. Which would be regrettable, don't get me wrong. It's just... the LGBTQ community invites that kind of reaction once they start making "Let's talk about Gay Stuff with Very Young Kids" as the hill they want to die on.

FredWolfLeonardo

04-23-2022, 04:39 AM

I hope all of this results in Homosexuality being outlawed in all forms once more.

Andrew NDB

04-23-2022, 04:47 AM

I hope all of this results in Homosexuality being outlawed in all forms once more.

Not at all. It's ridiculously simple. Keep that crap out of the classrooms (if mom and dad want to tell their kids about it, great, it's not on teachers) and keep it out of kids shows. That's it.

Wow, so horrible. This is literally stuff that even Obama was saying was out of the question even just a few years ago. Now their stance is suddenly, either you're all in for it or you're probably a nazi.

Leo656

04-23-2022, 05:53 AM

Yeah, I think it's pretty weird to have a problem with gay people in this day and age. That comes off as pretty Amish. There's nothing inherently wrong with it; in theory, if everyone were gay the human race would go extinct, sure, but that's not in any realistic danger of happening. If someone thinks it's "gross" they can just not pay attention to it. The next time one of my gay friends asks me to come over and watch them do their gay business will be the Very First Time that happens.

I dare say MOST of them don't make a scene, most of them don't hurt anybody, most of them you'd never even know they were gay until you asked. The ones who march and picket aren't the majority, they're just loud. At least, that's my experience.

I don't understand "actual" homophobia. Legit. I've f*cked girls in the ass; it feels good. I've never f*cked a guy in the ass but one would assume the sensation wouldn't be all that different on the "pitching" side. As for the receiving end, I've had people tell me it feels amazing and also people who say it does not but they go along with it for reasons. So who knows. Just saying, it's probably fun in general, so if everyone is a consenting adult, go nuts. I don't have to be gay to understand the general mechanics or why that would appeal to some people.

I do at least superficially respect the people who say, "I just think it's gross", because at least they're honest. What I find, though, is that anecdotally, most of them are okay with the idea of guy-on-girl buttsex, but guy-on-guy buttsex is a bridge too far, for them. Which gets me back to, "Well, if nobody's making you watch, who even cares?"

But I can respect honesty, at the very least. So I respect the people who will say, "I just don't like it because it makes me feel icky just thinking about it" (although my advice to those people would be, "Just don't think about it, then, ya goof").

What I don't respect are people who hide behind "God" and use that to support their position. I don't respect that about anything, frankly, because without being an edgelord I do think God and Santa have a ton in common so what either of them has to say on any subject probably shouldn't matter very much at all. MOST people who say, "I am against homosexuality because it's against God's will" can't even quote a Bible verse, and that's a fact. Some can, most can't. What they're doing is passing the buck so they don't have to own their opinion on the subject. "It ain't ME, bruh! It's just, y'know... GOD says it's wrong, so I'm outvoted." Spare me. God could care less, if he were real, about where people stick their junk. The whole planet's on fire, if he cares about Gay People that much then his priorities are terrible.

"Thankfully"... he probably isn't real. If only we knew that for sure, then these people would actually have to come right out and admit, "I just personally think it's gross." Which is still silly. But at least it's honest.

I've heard some people cite some cockamamie nonsense about how "It's wrong because the only acceptable form of sex is for making babies," but holy sh*t, if we're still teaching people THAT in any part of the world in 2022 then we're in more trouble than we thought. For one thing, baby-making is probably only 1% of the reason anybody ever has sex to begin with, but for another thing... having kids is incredibly irresponsible in this day and age and so I side-eye the hell out of anyone who does so on purpose. I have a much bigger problem with people who purposely have kids than I do with gay people, just putting it out there. The latter does no harm to anyone, the former throws millions more unwitting lost souls into the human zoo where they're ensured to do naught but toil endlessly for slave wages until they croak. Most people are f*cking miserable, depression and suicide are skyrocketing, but oh, sure, let's just all keep breeding, I'm sure it'll turn around if we just keep at it. Madness. Lunacy, even.

I'unno, man. I can't see any validity in homophobia in this day and age. Other than, SOME of them can be very annoying and overbearing with how ostentatious they are and their need to make their sexual identity their entire center of being. But that's not most of them.

I know I've been ACCUSED of being homophobic plenty of times on this very forum by various ignorant people, but I can assure you I am in fact one of the most tolerant people here when it comes to stuff like that. I simply resent anyone who makes an unwarranted spectacle of themselves while simultaneously claiming they hate attention or just want to be left alone, because it's disingenuous.

But like Andrew said, what's a bridge too far for me is that they want to make Gay and Trans Education part of the state-funded curriculum for very young children. Which is literally the textbook definition of "indoctrination", aka, "The Thing They SWEAR They Are Not Interested In Doing." And yes, I think "regular" Sex Ed should automatically be out of bounds for kids that young, too. It shouldn't even be a conversation.

I am not nor ever will be a parent, but if I was, and I paid taxes into the school system, and my kid can barely read or do basic math BUT you wanna take an hour out of every day to teach them about boys in dresses or hormone therapy... you better believe I'd want to raise hell because it demonstrates a complete lack of priority, and also sanity, on the part of the school system.

These things shouldn't be between anyone but the kid and their parents, at that age. The parents hate gay people? Unfortunate, but the truth is, those kids will find no shortage of "acceptance" outside of the home as they get older, and then when they're 18 they can move out and do whatever they want. That's how it has always worked. No, ideally, it should not "have" to be that way, but you will never, ever, EVER "reeducate" a father to completely accept that their son is gay, it just isn't going to happen because some things are hardwired. So on some level, you just have to accept a level of "go along to get along" until you're of age and on your own, at which point you can do whatever you want.

Which sounds a lot like "Just stay in the closet until you're out of school," I admit, and yeah, that's a bummer that some people have no choice but to do that, but... I got news for them, there's a LOT of stuff kids can't talk to their parents about without catching hell, not just sexuality. If your Dad played football, try telling them you'd rather paint. If your Mom loves the piano, try telling her you don't like music. And so on and so forth. Kids inevitably have to keep some things about themselves "in the closet" until they're on their own, if they don't want to be hassled; that's just life. If they choose to "come out" and they know that their own parents are intolerant, well... I'd say that they did a poor job in picking their battles. Sounds harsh, but then so is Reality.

But again, the crux of the issue at hand is, "Is it acceptable for gay/trans stuff to be part of taxpayer-funded curriculum for children aged 5 through 8 years old?"

The only answer should be, "Of course not, you f*cking weirdo. They can get that in 6th Grade with the rest of the Sex Ed stuff." By then, it's a lot more likely to be an issue that actually affects them in any significant way. Which, let's be honest, it realistically will not be at Age 5.

Andrew NDB

04-23-2022, 06:28 AM

The biggest point in all of this, to me, is that the largest proponents of all of this "needs to be in schools or naziism!"... these people aren't even parents. You're a gay parent? Cool. You get a vote. Everyone who is hanging out on the sidelines with, permanently single or asexual or something? Yeah. You should get no vote.

Leo656

04-23-2022, 06:55 AM

Even that might be conditional, in my opinion.

I've seen some gay parents online - who I would hope were just being cheeky - claim that they'd "Never want a straight child", would be "so disappointed" if their kid turned out straight, and were "subtly encouraging them" from a very young age that "it's better to be gay".

On one hand, sure, all of that is basically the inverse of how a lot of straight parents are when raising their kids and teaching them that "Straight Is The Default" whether overtly or implicitly. So in theory, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, I guess.

But at the same time, if those people are serious then they're exactly the same as the people they rail against. I *think* they're mostly-kidding but sometimes it's hard to tell.

If you honestly don't care or mind that your kid might be gay, and your main priority is simply to raise them to be a good and well-adjusted human being, that's awesome, you get a vote.

If you're a person who claims "I'd be so disappointed if my kid were straight and so I'm doing my best to ensure that doesn't happen"... not only are you just as bad as the so-called bigots, but your skewed priorities mean that I'm not really comfortable with you having much input into things.

But yeah, a lot of the ones making the most noise? Not even parents, that's true. They're simply gay people who find oppression everywhere they turn and thus see fit to "fight back". As if some other 5 year old kid learning that it's okay to suck a c*ck will give this other gay person their childhood back because THEY were teased as a kid, that's what a lot of it comes down to if you let them talk for long enough. "If only there was this kind of thing when *I* was a kid, my whole life would be different now!" Eh. Maybe in theory; in reality, you probably had other priorities at that age, like remembering not to sh*t your pants or get caught eating your boogers.

And the whole "Kids Will Die" hyperbole, from the advocates and the politicians. Like, what? Is there some unspoken mass surge in kids aged 5-though-8 killing themselves en masse because nobody talked to them about gay or trans issues? I am 99.9% sure that does not happen, has not happened, and most likely will not happen.

I've read over the years about some teenagers committing suicide because they were gay and felt unaccepted and bullied and belittled by their peers... but again, that's teenagers. The bill in Florida, the one where people hyperbolically claim "kids will die" over it, explicitly deals with Grades K through 3. To my knowledge, there are no dead gay kids that young. If it happens twice per year among kids in that age bracket, I'll be shocked it's even that many. Pretty sure it's closer to 0, though.

But again... Liberals and Facts don't really get along all that well. The former trades in hyperbole and fear-mongering as a matter of course and the latter has no time for it.

Sumac

04-23-2022, 07:40 AM

I hope all of this results in Homosexuality being outlawed in all forms once more.
In this case you are no less retarded than SJWs.

Leo656

04-23-2022, 07:55 AM

For one thing, I absolutely refuse to give up lesbians. No f*cking WAY, pal. :lol:

I can kinda understand being icked about guys doing butt stuff but if seeing a couple hot chicks bang beavers together doesn't make you smile then I'm pretty sure you're dead inside.

FredWolfLeonardo

04-23-2022, 08:15 AM

In this case you are no less retarded than SJWs.

Mr. Sumac, the great democratic champion, using his spell binding and eloquent mastery of the spoken word to destroy all the totalitarians, both in the East and the West. You are truly a great warrior of utmost spirit, and your legacy will leave its mark on history, to be remembered and loved for all time.

Leo656

04-23-2022, 09:34 AM

Sumac

04-23-2022, 10:01 AM

Mr. Sumac, the great democratic champion, using his spell binding and eloquent mastery of the spoken word to destroy all the totalitarians, both in the East and the West. You are truly a great warrior of utmost spirit, and your legacy will leave its mark on history, to be remembered and loved for all time.
My answer was equal to your statement. Nothing else.

Given your previous statements about "totalitarianism", I am willing to revoke what remains of my good faith regarding your person and treat you like I treat any uneducated ignorant totalitarian zealot.

FredWolfLeonardo

04-23-2022, 04:47 PM

I mean, it was a harsh reply. But at the same time, if a person in 2022 says out loud "I wish there were no more gay people"... you can't really be shocked if that's the reply you get.

Self-awareness is a virtue, and all'a that. It's very clear by now that you don't like or approve of gay people, and I'm sure that to you the reasons for that make sense. But surely you have to know that that's not a majority opinion anymore. In fact, in some places, it can get you punched in the face and nobody would bat an eye or raise a hand in your defense. They'd just say, "Well, that's what he gets."

He definitely could've made a kinder reply, but c'mon... you knew SOMEone was gonna go there. It wasn't a statement all that far removed from "I wish black people would know their place and go back to the rear of the bus." Even if you mean it, most people don't agree and they're not gonna be nice in saying so. That's just the way it is.

I'm not shocked in the least bit by his reply or expecting anything else from him. I am well aware of the Western mindset regarding LGBT rights that has spread so far and wide, even in Russia where Sumac is, and is the majority opinion in America where most forum members are.

However, there are billions of other people throughout the world who still despise this practice, and they'd make up more than a majority of the global population (China, South Asia, Africa, the Middle East etc). The supporters of Gay rights should be worried because many of the racial and/or religious groups which oppose everything LGBT related are rapidly becoming more powerful by the day by spreading their influence or increasing their population.

So people can give me the most harsh replies possible or I could even be prosecuted where I currently live (not my home country) for speaking out against Homosexuality. Just know that my side is hard at work, and we will be the victors who take control of the world and write history one day.

CyberCubed

04-23-2022, 05:35 PM

I have no issues with homosexuals, and lesbians (at least the hot ones) are always good. As said above, most of the time I didn't even know someone was gay until they said anything. One guy at my job has been there since 2019, and he was just a normal guy so I never thought anything.

One day he said, "I enjoy watching this movie with my husband," out of the blue to the people at my job and I was surprised. Nobody said anything, because the guy never gave off any gay vibes at all so everyone assumed he was straight. And after that everyone treated him the same as always since he's a nice guy and gets along with everyone.

In the real world I obviously don't care who random people love as long as it's of legal age...so what does it matter to me? It feels like 30+ years ago people would make a big deal out of a black man dating a white woman, now nobody cares.

Sumac

04-23-2022, 06:01 PM

I'm not shocked in the least bit by his reply or expecting anything else from him. I am well aware of the Western mindset regarding LGBT rights that has spread so far and wide, even in Russia where Sumac is, and is the majority opinion in America where most forum members are.
In Russia most people are either indifferent or against Homosexuality. Shows just how much you know.

However, there are billions of other people throughout the world who still despise this practice, and they'd make up more than a majority of the global population (China, South Asia, Africa, the Middle East etc). The supporters of Gay rights should be worried because many of the racial and/or religious groups which oppose everything LGBT related are rapidly becoming more powerful by the day by spreading their influence or increasing their population.
I take you don't see a pattern in that all listed countries / regions are mostly backwards totalitarian shitholes? And in them LGB rights are not even the main issue, but general freedoms you take for granted.
And in case those religious groups won, they will strip YOUR rights as well. But something tells me you don't think about it, as any ignorant buffoon, who thinks that in case of revolution, he somehow will be on top.

So people can give me the most harsh replies possible or I could even be prosecuted where I currently live (not my home country) for speaking out against Homosexuality. Just know that my side is hard at work, and we will be the victors who take control of the world and write history one day.
Empty posturing, which sounds like an incoherent religious rambling of a maniac step away from being incarcerated. I'd seek doctor, if I were you. You carry to much hatred and too little brain.

FredWolfLeonardo

04-23-2022, 06:05 PM

In Russia most people are either indifferent or against Homosexuality. Shows just how much you know.

What I meant was that despite Russia discriminating against Homosexuality, there are still supporters like you there. It means that the pro-LGBT propagandists are doing something right to spread their ideology, even into the Motherland.

I despise the ideology, but I admire their international propaganda machine being so successful. A worthy opponent.

Leo656

04-24-2022, 12:14 AM

I take you don't see a pattern in that all listed countries / regions are mostly backwards totalitarian shitholes? And in them LGB rights are not even the main issue, but general freedoms you take for granted.
And in case those religious groups won, they will strip YOUR rights as well. But something tells me you don't think about it, as any ignorant buffoon, who thinks that in case of revolution, he somehow will be on top.

Exactly. "More and more ass-backwards sh*tholes where nobody would ever live unless they were born there and therefore stuck are embracing extremist views as a way to keep people distracted from how sh*tty their lives are." Shocking! This is something to celebrate? :lol: Not at all.

And it also just goes to show you, the only places where people still cling to religion and fervently believe in God, are places where the general population is so goddamn ignorant - or in some cases, not even "ignorant", but full-blown stupid - that they think things like air conditioning, plumbing and toilet paper are a novelty or a luxury.

Seriously, go to ANY place in the world where people are dirt-poor, painfully uneducated, and stuck centuries in the past, and sure enough, you'll find a large and passionate religious cult, sometimes in the millions. And that should really say it all. It's nothing to be proud of. "I believe in God and I follow His word" is just a self-righteous way of outing oneself as an unrepentant moron. "I'm one of the REALLY dumb people!" Don't say that sh*t out loud and expect anyone to take anything you say seriously.

As I said, bigots should at least be brave enough to own their sh*t. Just Be Honest. "I hate gay people because the thought of it is gross to me. I hate anyone of a different ethnicity because I just plain do. I hate women because they aggravate me and I feel superior to them as a man." And so on. Just admit to being intolerant instead of hiding behind fairy-tales and make-believe. "I feel like this because God said so" is f*cking ridiculous. There IS NO GOD. I can't stress this enough. So citing what some book of fables said to think, once again only proves a person is supremely ignorant.

There's just no way I can be nice about it. I can almost respect people who have faith since I know that life is generally hopeless without it and some people are desperate to keep going, and some people who believe are actually nice people - although it's always in SPITE of their faith, never BECAUSE of it. What I can't respect are people who in turn use their "faith" to espouse bigotry, because those people are cowards.

Might as well say "I hate gay people because Mother Goose said so." It's the same goddamn thing.

Just know that my side is hard at work, and we will be the victors who take control of the world and write history one day.

Again, that's not going to happen. Because as mentioned, only the SUPER dumb people are religious zealots and everyone knows they're super dumb. And when "Kill everyone who disagrees with you" is a fundamental tenet of one's belief structure, you're not going to win over many friends outside of your bubble. "Your side" couldn't "take control" of a damn bowl of Jell-O. Not without torturing it into agreeing with you, first.

People are more enlightened now. Once people discover electricity and indoor plumbing, it's VERY hard to go back to embracing "The God Delusion". When people discover what it feels like to stand up, they generally refuse to go back to living on one's knees. As it should be.

As Sumac alluded to, one should take note that the places that share your most fanatical beliefs are places where nobody would be caught dead if they could help it. That's not a good endorsement. Everybody else knows better.

I kept hoping you'd at least be brave enough to just say you have a personal distaste for homosexuals. I wouldn't like it but I'd respect the honesty. Instead, you doubled- and tripled-down on the religious stuff. Very disappointing. Grown adults are supposed to know better, it isn't the Dark Ages anymore. At least not on this side of the globe.

I'll continue to wish for you to one day find true enlightenment.

The bad part is, "finding true enlightenment" typically involves enough bad sh*t happening that a person finally accepts that there simply is no God, or that if there is, they don't care about you.

But it's worth it in the end, you're just gonna have to take my word on that. If nothing else, you won't feel like a dummy when you die and find out there's Nothing There. I can't imagine how that feels to people who wasted their entire lives clinging to some book of fairy tales, and worse, chose to mold every belief they ever had based on said fairy tales. Talk about being a mark.

I imagine when people finally realize there's no God, right before they die, it's kinda like catching the Mall Santa smoking crack in the parking lot, but exponentially worse. :lol:

FredWolfLeonardo

04-24-2022, 12:38 AM

If nothing else, you won't feel like a dummy when you die and find out there's Nothing There.

I understood what you meant by the rest of your post, but not this part. Generally, don't Atheists reject any sort of God, supernatural existence of the soul, and afterlife whatsoever?

If so, how will atheists know that nothing was there after dying, if the dead person and their consciousness doesn't exist anymore?

Other than that, all I can say in response to the rest of your post is: Thank you for wishing me well, but I am still not convinced by your arguments at all, and you saying that my side will get nothing done only motivates me further. Challenge accepted with utmost indignation.

Leo656

04-24-2022, 01:12 AM

I obviously wouldn't know, but I assume there's some kind of split-second moment of clarity right before the end where you realize that "light at the end of the tunnel" is just your synapses misfiring, and that you really are headed for oblivion. But you probably only have less than a second to notice or comprehend it.

Again, we'll probably never know for sure since once you're dead it's too late to let anyone know what you "discover" just before the lights go out. I'm just reasonably certain there's no afterlife, and I wish there was a way to prove that conclusively so people could be freed of their fanatical delusions. "Faith" cripples people and it stunts humanity's progress. There's simply no room for it in the modern world. It literally keeps people thinking and behaving like it's still the Dark Ages, and that simply is not acceptable.

It's as I said... go anywhere in the world where most people are poor, sick, crippled, ignorant, and living in filth, and there, you'll find Religion and people of Devout Faith. Conversely, go anywhere in the world where people actually live like human beings, and you'll notice they accept that there's (probably) no God. It seems pretty cut-and-dry. It's an opiate for the poor, the foolish, and the weak, a way for them to ascribe some meaning to a life that's devoid of it, because they can't accept that life is ultimately meaningless at best, hopeless at worst.

And I always stop short of labeling myself an "atheist" outright, since for one thing, I don't like labels in general, and secondly, for as certain as I am I don't actually "know" there's no God, it's still just a highly educated guess. There's always the possibility. If there is, I wouldn't be shocked if it was, like, Azathoth or Cthulhu or something. Some unfeeling, uncaring Lovecraftian monstrosity. That would make a ton of sense.

What I am quite certain of, however, is that the mythical "merciful God" in the fairy tale books absolutely isn't real. Can I prove it? No. There's no "proof", just an overwhelming mountain of evidence, enough that were it a court case the judge would be forced to rule against his existence. For example, every day a million babies are born only to die of starvation within minutes. They were born only to suffer and die in agony, and never had any choice or chance of life. No God with any mercy or the power to change that would allow such things to happen. So if there is a God, he's clearly a real asshole and not worthy of worship or praise.

So no, I don't know there's NO God. I just know the guy people drop to their knees and pray to is at best more like the Wizard of Oz, an impotent sham, and at worst, he actively hates us all. There's a LOT of evidence of that. But there is NO evidence whatsoever that there's any sort of God who loves us and wants what's best for us. That's delusion. To believe it, a person has to actively ignore every single thing going on in the world at any given time.

If he's real, we are not and never will be friends, and I am definitely not on his side. I'd honestly rather get my hands around his neck.

BUT, he's not real, most likely, so it's moot.

But that's why I can't abide people who cite "their faith" as a foundation of their general beliefs. Even if he were real, he wouldn't be worthy of worship because he either forces or allows untold amounts of needless suffering in the world, despite allegedly having the power to grant mercy. Yet he never does.

So if a person says with full sincerity, "I believe _______ because God says so".... they're either delusional OR just plain A Bad Person, there really is no middle ground to it.

Sumac

04-24-2022, 06:42 AM

What I meant was that despite Russia discriminating against Homosexuality, there are still supporters like you there. It means that the pro-LGBT propagandists are doing something right to spread their ideology, even into the Motherland.

I despise the ideology, but I admire their international propaganda machine being so successful. A worthy opponent.
Or they support LGB not, because, of propaganda, but, because, they understand that demonizing the whole group of population depending on their sexual preferences is retarded. It is something you don't need propaganda to understand.

Leo656

04-24-2022, 07:22 AM

Like why should anyone even care if anyone else is gay unless they're having gay buttsex on your front lawn? It makes no f*cking sense. It's one of the all-time dumbest reasons to hate a person, or group of people.

Meanwhile, some of those countries that are the most anti-gay in the world seemingly have little problem with the idea of f*cking little girls and calling it "culture" but I guess we're just not supposed to mention that? I'd like a little clarity on that one, if anyone can grant it. Gay Sex = Evil and Immoral, F*cking Little Girls = Cultural Differences. Mkay. Doesn't wash.

There's a million perfectly valid reasons to hate a person. I just don't get why being gay should be one of them.

Of course, some people swear they DON'T "hate" them. But that's bullsh*t. They clearly do. They just use fancy language like "I love the sinner, not the sin" to tap dance around the fact that they find them "gross". But that's just as disingenuous as when people in the South say "Bless Your Heart!" which is really code for "You really are a special kind of moron." You know what they really mean.

superstaff

04-24-2022, 07:56 AM

Meanwhile, some of those countries that are the most anti-gay in the world seemingly have little problem with the idea of f*cking little girls and calling it "culture" but I guess we're just not supposed to mention that? I'd like a little clarity on that one, if anyone can grant it. Gay Sex = Evil and Immoral, F*cking Little Girls = Cultural Differences. Mkay. Doesn't wash.

There's a million perfectly valid reasons to hate a person. I just don't get why being gay should be one of them.

I used to think about this a lot when I was younger.

But over time, I realized the answer to this.

People are stupid, and are hypocrites. Yeah, it's really that simple.

Leo656

04-24-2022, 08:05 AM

Indeed. Indeed. In most cases, on most subjects, it really is Just That Simple.

Coola Yagami

04-24-2022, 11:16 AM

I know some people don't believe in God but I still hold my faith. However I don't believe God would be so petty, that's a human emotion and He's supposed to transcend humanity. I honestly don't believe you can live as life being as good of a person as possible and still go to hell cause gay. That just doesn't make sense.

Plus all these so-called non-sinners forget that flat out having sex out of wedlock is a sin. Yes, heterosexuality is also a sin unless you're married and intend to impregnate her. That's what makes being a whore' sinful, you're ****ing her out of wedlock AND to fullfil your own selfish lustful desires. Big no-no in the Bible. Yet people are so quick to say 'i don't like the gays cause it's a sin' and then go home to plow their girlfriend in sin.

Hypocrites.

Sumac

04-24-2022, 11:43 AM

There are very few people who follow religions to a "T", which makes most followers hypocrites to one degree or the other.

Ironically those who follow them to "T" are even worse, since they are trying to enforce antiquated attitudes created before medieval age on a modern society.

Leo656

04-29-2022, 01:14 PM

Shifting gears away from gay/trans stuff in schools and into Sh*t Dumb People Say:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/pregnancy-rape-opportunity-women-says-185005884.html

Schmidt, a former U.S. congresswoman who once infamously discussed abortion with a class of elementary school students, defended her decision to not include these exceptions during committee debate. She argued that a pregnancy from rape is actually a chance for a woman to raise a child, send them to live with a family member or put them up for adoption. That hypothetical child, she argued, could someday cure cancer.

“Rape is a difficult issue and it emotionally scars the individual, all or in part, for the rest of their life ? just as child abuse does. But if a baby is created, it is a human life and whether that mother ends that pregnancy or not the scars will not go away, period,” said Schmidt.

“It is a shame that it happens, but there’s an opportunity for that woman – no matter how young or old she is ? to make a determination about what she’s going to do to help that life be a productive human being. … That child can grow up and be something magnificent, a wonderful family person, cure cancer, etc.,” she continued. “This is not about keeping abortion alive, this is about keeping the mother alive, and just because you have emotional scars doesn’t give you the right to take a life.”

No, you dumb f*ck. That hypothetical rape baby is NOT going to grow up and "cure cancer". What's gonna happen is, that kid is going to grow up without a father, because nobody is going to be saintly enough to marry a rape victim and raise their bastard, nobody's generally that decent. The kid is going to grow up poor and neglected in a single-parent household, be resented at best and abused/ignored at worst by the mother, because that kid represents The Single Worst Thing To Ever Happen In Her Life and exists as a daily reminder of something they'd rather die than remember. They're in turn going to be a self-loathing wreck of neuroses before they even get to high school, they're going to turn to drugs and alcohol to cope, they probably won't even finish school let alone go to college and learn how to "cure cancer", and then they'll either become a career criminal or kill themselves.

THAT is how the "rape baby" story ends. You're forcing kids to be born to parents who don't want them, and in turn damning them to a life of misery and suffering. You're not "giving them an opportunity"; they will NEVER have a normal life or a happy ending. Stop it.

I cannot f*cking STAND people who are against abortion. They have no idea or concern about what it's like growing up being raised by people who don't want you or can't take care of you. Plus, a rapist is only going to pass on their own defective mentally-ill genes on and the kid is going to have to grow up with THAT inside of them, too. Awesome. But these idiots don't care about that kinda sh*t. It's all just "human life blah blah sacred blah blah Some Church-y Bullsh*t."

A blood clot isn't a person and life isn't sacred. It's just A Thing That Happens. It might be wondrous, awe-inspiring, all that stuff... but it damn sure isn't "sacred". These people should be committed.

Every time a hospital plays host to a successful birth, they should give the parents a voucher for One Free Abortion. Every single time. And these "No abortions, ever" people are too dangerous to be out walking around setting policy for actual human beings. They're delusional.

FredWolfLeonardo

04-29-2022, 01:37 PM

And these "No abortions, ever" people are too dangerous to be out walking around setting policy for actual human beings. They're delusional.

How do you intend to deal with these people? I'd be curious to hear your plan.

Leo656

04-29-2022, 01:49 PM

I don't have any actual power but if nothing else they should be forced to actually live among people with Real Problems so they can learn a little f*cking empathy.

Worst-case, maybe a few of these women who are so vehemently against abortion even in cases of rape ought'a find out what it feels like to suffer through such an ordeal. See how they like it.

It's kinda like an oft-proposed hypothetical. So many hardcore Christian conservatives are vehemently opposed to abortion on supposed religious grounds. Well, let's see how fast they change their tune when someone pops a black baby into their pretty little blonde-haired blue-eyed daughters. They have a habit of changing their attitude REAL fast whenever that sh*t happens. Which it does, and often. They usually say they "had to unexpectedly visit a sick relative out of state" but most people who aren't retarded know what that's "code" for. They had to go far away where nobody knows them so they can get their little "problem" taken care of.

If these privileged f*cks had any idea how Real People live, all of their preachy sanctimonious bullsh*t would be beaten out of them by life within a week.

FredWolfLeonardo

04-29-2022, 02:00 PM

I don't have any actual power

Its always fun to imagine. Thats not to say that we can't ever be in positions of power.

All it takes is to be remembered by people, and live on in their collective consciousness. Some of history's most powerful people were once the biggest nobodies who were ignored on the sidewalk.

Doesn't it make you ever wonder of the possibilities that await you? I know that it gets me dreaming, and working to bring those dreams into the flesh.

Leo656

04-29-2022, 02:14 PM

No, I don't think about it at all, because I'm not rich and never will be. Only rich people ever obtain the power to "change the world" or endure in anyone's memory past a generation.

Everyone else gets forgotten within less than 100 years of their death as if they never even existed. Usually far less.

Nothing I do matters or ever will. I'm perfectly okay with that. That's true of most people who ever have or ever will exist. I'm not narcissistic enough to pretend I'm anyone of actual importance or exist outside of "the rules".

If you died tomorrow, in 30 or 40 years nobody would even remember your name. That's how it works. If you're born into a rich family, you can leverage that into some influence that can leave a bit more of a lasting impression. But that is not true for more than a fraction of a percent of human beings.

I can't imagine the ego of people who think anything they do Actually Matters or will be remembered for long after they're gone. Again... delusion. Narcissism.

As I've said before, I don't live in Make-Believe Fairy Tale Land. So no, I don't engage in such thinking. It's pointless. I don't waste a second's thought, ever, on things that can't ever and will never happen. More people ought to be so grounded.

The most I'll ever be remembered is that one day after I'm dead someone might click on my YouTube channel and have a laugh. "God, look at THIS idiot, he must've been something else." And then when something else replaces what we know as the internet and even that stuff gets erased, that's it. I'll disappear "officially", forever.

Okay. I'll be dead, so I won't be inclined to care that nobody remembers me.

This is called "Being A Realist" and if more people were then the world would be a better place. People need to keep their feet on the ground instead of walking around with their head in the clouds. All that foolishness does is set them up for soul-crushing disappointment later on. Which is why depression and suicide rates go up and up every year. Too many people thinking they're going to "be somebody", when the truth is No, they never will be.

My "possibilities" for the future are: Work a sh*t job until I drop dead at a young-ish age of some ailment that a rich person could afford to have fixed. That was made very clear to me at a very young age and I've never wasted a moment's time since imagining otherwise. Life's too short to waste it on hypotheticals.

Vegita-San

05-06-2022, 09:20 AM

superstaff

05-06-2022, 09:52 AM

I personally think if you detect it early enough, before we would consider it 'a life' or 'socially aware' as it where, there should be no real harm. but after a certain point, it DOES feel like murder. There are literally HUNDREDS of people out there that would love any baby to adopt. don't tell the kid of how he came into the world, and you think they would grow up rather normally.

Do research on adoption, bro. Go to a forum for adoptees or /r/adoption on Reddit. There's lots of horror stories out there, and lots of adoptees who resent their adoptive parents (even the ones who were not abusive and did nothing wrong). The overall sentiment seems to be that many adoptees hate the fact they're adopted, hate their adoptive families, feel 'displaced', etc. Many of them even claim they wish they had been aborted rather than being abandoned (they say they feel that way, even in cases where they had awful biological families).

Another problem is that many of these adoptees seek out their biological parents once they reach adulthood. This means many parents who wanted nothing to do with their kids that they put up for adoption get harassed by these 'kids' who want a 'real' family.

Really. Go do a deep dive into adoption, and adoption culture. It's a real (and depressing) eye opener.

To be honest, I think many of those adoptees are messed up, and shouldn't yearn to be with their abusive, drug addicted parents who sold them for an ounce of cocaine...but that's the sad truth. Not everyone is Clark Kent, who loved and appreciated his adoptive family, and became Superman due to his upbringing and respect/love for the Kents.

Coola Yagami

05-06-2022, 12:27 PM

FredWolfLeonardo

05-06-2022, 12:56 PM

Another problem is that many of these adoptees seek out their biological parents once they reach adulthood. This means many parents who wanted nothing to do with their kids that they put up for adoption get harassed by these 'kids' who want a 'real' family.

Indeed, many adopted people will seek out their Biological Parents. The ties of blood and race are just that strong.

superstaff

05-06-2022, 12:59 PM

I mean, at least they're alive. Parents aside, they probably have had friends or people they grew fond of and a bunch of positive experiences and whatnot throughout their lives.

All these people that complain about wishing they actually were aborted, I mean.... they can self-delete if they really honestly meant that.

I've seen pics of people protesting with signs like 'I wish I was aborted' yet I bet you they will be the first ones to run if someone in the crowd whipped out a gun.

I'm just saying that adoption isn't this flowery, perfect solution either. A lot of people against abortion seem to think unwanted babies will automatically have better, happier, fulfilling lives with adoptive families, and that just isn't always the case. The adoption/foster care system is really messed up due to corruption and neglect from social workers and adoption agencies. Many adoptees seem to really hate themselves and their adoptive families. I've seen adoptees tear down people interested in adopting/fostering kids, demanding they not 'get in the way' of the biological families, even abusive, dysfunctional ones. As I said above, social workers and agencies aren't much better, and do things like 'lose track of kids', allow them to remain in abusive homes, returning kids to horrible homes where they then die, etc.

Maybe it's just me, but quality of life matters to me just as much as taking actual breaths. Not to get too personal, though my life has been...horrible, largely in part due to abusive parents (that the system refused to deal with). If I had a better life, I think I could have been much happier and satisfied, and less.................uh, stuck where I am now, which has been miserable. I'm not one of those 'I wish I was aborted' types. However, I am pretty resentful of how my life went, and at how the system completely failed me.

Indeed, many adopted people will seek out their Biological Parents. The ties of blood and race are just that strong.

Personally, I think sticking with bad people due to blood and race is shortsighted and destructive. Unfortunately, many people would tell me I am wrong to think that way.

FredWolfLeonardo

05-06-2022, 01:10 PM

Oh yes, I definetly agree with you that sticking with bad people of the same race can be destructive if they are bad people. I just think that its important for society to undertake greater efforts to respect the natural feelings of humans to want to be with their own race and blood.

For example, I live in a country of whites but outside of business and giving public speeches, my socialisation with whites is non-existent. I am naturally drawn to my own racial community, and you will see this pattern throughout even the most multicultural of societies.

Whites will stick whites, black will stick with blacks and Arabs will stick with Arabs due to the human tendency to stick with their own blood tribe. Pride in one's own race does not imply contempt for other races.

Adoption is noble, but I would like to see greater governmental effort to ensure that children are raised with their biological parents, and there should be an extensive network monitoring the situation at home (government officals, family members, people of the same race) to cross-check and ensure that the household is not abusive.

superstaff

05-06-2022, 01:13 PM

Oh yes, I definetly agree with you that sticking with bad people of the same race can be destructive since they are bad people. I just think that its important for society to undertake greater efforts to respect the natural feelings of humans to want to be with their own race and blood.

I can't relate to that sentiment, sorry. My only criteria is that the people I hang out with be cool, fun, and respect me. That's it. I'd rather be with someone of a different race who treats me well than someone of my own race who doesn't. I've always been...'colorblind', so to speak. And honestly, this has gotten me into hot water, and I've been ostracized for it. I recognize that I am an outlier compared to most in that respect (and many others), and it's pretty depressing.

Andrew NDB

05-06-2022, 01:14 PM

I can't relate to that sentiment, sorry. My only criteria is that the people I hang out with be cool, fun, and respect me. That's it. I'd rather be with someone of a different race who treats me well than someone of my own race who doesn't. I've always been...'colorblind', so to speak. And honestly, this has gotten me into hot water, and I've been ostracized for it. I recognize that I am an outlier compared to most in that respect (and many others), and it's pretty depressing.

What are you, a white lady, or what?

superstaff

05-06-2022, 01:15 PM

What are you, a white lady, or what?

Why do you ask exactly?

FredWolfLeonardo

05-06-2022, 01:15 PM

I don't know about your race, but have you never seen anyone of the same race and said "I want to know that person, I like how we look alike"?

Just curious.

superstaff

05-06-2022, 01:18 PM

I don't know about your race, but have you never seen anyone of the same race and said "I want to know that person, I like how we look alike"?

Just curious.

No, not really.

What makes me interested in getting to know other people is common interests like if I see someone with a TMNT t-shirt, or they're reading a comic I like, or playing a game on their Switch, or something like that. I don't just...want to be friends with someone just due to their race, no.

Andrew NDB

05-06-2022, 01:19 PM

Why do you ask exactly?

Purely curiosity. No underlying agenda.

superstaff

05-06-2022, 01:20 PM

Purely curiosity. No underlying agenda.

K.

I'm hispanic.

Leo656

05-06-2022, 01:22 PM

I mean, at least they're alive.

Only a "blessing" if you're rich.

I love how many people refuse to accept the fact that millions of people simply don't want to be here and only still exist because they're cowards.

It's great that some people were fortunate enough to have good or easy lives. Those People shouldn't project their experiences onto people who've never had a single good day.

Suicide rates go up every year. Some of us just wanna get the f*ck outta here. And nobody has the right to invalidate them. It's vulgar.

Likewise, when you remove a "potential person" from ever being born into a terrible life, you're actually doing them a favor. You've now ensured that the chances of them growing up abused, depressed and suicidal are 0%.

That's a gift.

Andrew NDB

05-06-2022, 01:24 PM

K.

I'm hispanic.

Oh hey, cool. Me, too.

Likewise, when you remove a "potential person" from ever being born into a terrible life, you're actually doing them a favor. You've now ensured that the chances of them growing up abused, depressed and suicidal are 0%.

That's a gift.

s7vG7kyokfM

superstaff

05-06-2022, 01:27 PM

Only a "blessing" if you're rich.

I love how many people refuse to accept the fact that millions of people simply don't want to be here and only still exist because they're cowards.

It's great that some people were fortunate enough to have good or easy lives. Those People shouldn't project their experiences onto people who've never had a single good day.

Suicide rates go up every year. Some of us just wanna get the f*ck outta here. And nobody has the right to invalidate them. It's vulgar.

That's the thing, man.

And honestly, what keeps me tethered to this Earth is my husband, some of my hobbies, writing my stories, and moments of happiness (that tend to come from the stuff I mentioned). I think for some it's cowardice, and people like me, it's having something that keeps them from wanting to jump off a bridge.

Like I said before, quality of life matters a lot. I think many would disagree with me on that, and that's fine. It's your POV. I think mine differs from many because my life was...not picture perfect, so my perspective is kinda different on matters like that.

Oh hey, cool. Me, too.

See, for me, I don't care too much that you are. For one thing, there's many sub-groups for us hispanics, and thus, many different cultures and mannerisms and whatnot. But even then, I care more that you hate Star Trek Picard and nuTrek rather than we share the same race. :lol:

Leo656

05-06-2022, 01:40 PM

Like I said before, quality of life matters a lot.

It does, or should, but most people - especially if theirs is generally great - don't care about the quality of life of others, they just figure "Well I'm having a good time so I assume everyone else can if they just put a little more work in."

A lot of people reach a point where it become perfectly clear, "It just doesn't get any better than this! No, really... it doesn't." And then they look back over everything from Day One and it's like, "Wow, I really was only born to get kicked around, this sucks."

Most people are just ballast and debris. They weren't born for any "special purpose", and it's naive to assume that most of them would ever amount to anything. And if you gave those people a choice, they'd hit the Reset button on themselves.

Knowing all that, forcing people to sh*t out more babies so they can have terrible lives and grow up wishing they were never born just seems incredibly cruel. Just remove the possibility entirely, says I.

Coola Yagami

05-06-2022, 06:41 PM

Honestly, race never bothered me. I guess I act more 'white' than anything besides not being white myself. Thanks to a bunch of green guys, part of my language will always be tied to 'dude' 'awesome' 'epic' and in very very rare occasions, bodacious might slip out. Like, totally gnarly, brah.

Idk I mostly adapt who whatever group of people I usually get lumped in with, even though I'll always be the silly and geeky one.

superstaff

05-06-2022, 07:06 PM

Vegita-San

05-12-2022, 08:54 AM

superstaff

05-12-2022, 01:13 PM

when you try to explain to someone who says 'Long live diversity...I hope no more cis white men get to be doctor who!'

....why CIS is considered an insult to some, and they go on an insane rant saying 'non binary pansexual is just as normal as you, bud'....

yeah, it was pointless from the start, but I Hate racism of any kind.

My experience with both sides goes, as follows:

Extreme Left: I want to drink your salty straight, cis, white male tears, you goddamn bigot. Go kill yourself while you're at it!

Extreme Right: How about you go kill yourself, you sick child diddlying pedo fvck!

Me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJxo6HYvOdw

Vegita-San

05-12-2022, 01:18 PM

II try to stay on the conservative middle. no good comes from either of those sides.

superstaff

05-12-2022, 01:26 PM

II try to stay on the conservative middle. no good comes from either of those sides.

I'm center-whateverIfeellikeatthemoment, I guess. I have my opinions, and I don't compromise them just to 'fit in' with either side. That's why they both tend to despise me. :oops: I also hate politicians, so that doesn't help either, I suppose (people on both sides claim this, but they always act like their 'guys' would never be corrupt or actively harm the populace).

CyberCubed

05-13-2022, 05:52 PM

I think the standard on forums or online is to assume everyone is white and straight until they say otherwise. It's kind of funny how the default is to assume someone is white if you don't know what they look like.

I'm probably one of the few white boys on this entire forum.

superstaff

05-13-2022, 05:54 PM

CyberCubed

05-13-2022, 06:14 PM

superstaff

05-13-2022, 06:18 PM

It also depends what avatar/icon you use. On IGN I had an avatar of Samus without her suit on with long hair and people thought I was a girl for years, lol.

On forums people usually don't post pictures of themselves unlike social media, so you can interact with people on forums for years and have no clue what people look like.

99% of the time, I use girls like myself. :lol: Remember, I tended to have May as mine at Serebii. I have Oyuki here. And I don't use pics of myself online, even on social media. I just don't like to, and I'm not photogenic anyhow. Though that doesn't seem to help, people just assume I'm a dude who likes female characters.

Coola Yagami

05-13-2022, 07:05 PM

99% of the time, I use girls like myself. :lol: Remember, I tended to have May as mine at Serebii. I have Oyuki here. And I don't use pics of myself online, even on social media. I just don't like to, and I'm not photogenic anyhow. Though that doesn't seem to help, people just assume I'm a dude who likes female characters.

Don't be modest. We all know you wanna get into that sweet sweet Oyuki booty.

superstaff

05-13-2022, 07:09 PM

Don't be modest. We all know you wanna get into that sweet sweet Oyuki booty.

April's more my type in TMNT Adventures. :tgrin:

Sumac

05-14-2022, 04:13 AM

You needed more proof that corporations look at diversity as something of a marketing thing? Well, here it is: Activision-Blizzard presented a new tool, which calculates "character diversity". (https://www.activisionblizzard.com/newsroom/2022/05/king-diversity-space-tool)
Gladly a lot of people went angry about it, justifiably comparing "scoring system based on race, culture and sexual orientation" not different than Nazi practices of race measuring.

superstaff

05-14-2022, 05:52 AM

Sumac

05-14-2022, 10:46 AM

Ah, yes. A 'social credits system' based on a racial/orientation/religious hierarchy. What could possibly go wrong? :P
But SJW told me many times over, that "Oppression Olympics" and rewarding people for their supposedly oppressed status is not a real thing!! :lol:

superstaff

05-14-2022, 11:18 AM

But SJW told me many times over, that "Oppression Olympics" and rewarding people for their supposedly oppressed status is not a real thing!! :lol:

It's this desire to try to appear to be the most upstanding, moral people to ever walk the Earth. This is why they claim the Oppression Olympics don't exist, yet they still partake in the very behavior. They don't want to admit that this is what they do because then they will look bad to the 'right people'.

Britta from the show, Community, deconstructed the psychology of such a person very well (and I honestly really liked her as well, she's hilarious).

Vegita-San

05-25-2022, 06:59 PM

Coola Yagami

05-26-2022, 07:05 AM

If you're referring to the recent shooting, no one is really willing to talk about the real issues.

No one is ready to bring back the nuclear family, to actually raise their kids, to actually treat mental illness, to stop bullying, abuse in the home, etc. Treat these sociopaths before they lash out or snap.

superstaff

05-26-2022, 07:15 AM

Treat these sociopaths before they lash out or snap.

You can't treat sociopaths or psychopaths. That's the thing. There's no way to change them. No amount of medication or therapy can change their 'brain chemistry', that's the problem. Monsters just exist in our world, and it's something humans need to accept. Same with death. Same with bad things happening.

There's really no easy answer to solve any of these problems, short of actually mind controlling the masses. Humanity is...a messed up species, largely due to our free will and intelligence. Thus violence is going to always happen.

Yesterday, I was thinking about this exchange from the Watchmen film:

Adrian Veidt: It doesn't take a genius to see that the world has problems.

Edward Blake: No, but it takes a room full of morons to think they're small enough for you to handle.

I think this applies more than ever before.

Leo656

05-26-2022, 08:01 AM

Good Lord do I love Watchmen. Book, movie... I just love it so, so much.

But yeah, your analysis is why I cannot stand the recent trope in media and fiction that "nobody's really a 'bad guy', nobody's actually a 'villain'... there are no bad people, only misunderstood people who need some compassion and understanding."

That's insane to even put forth as a hypothetical, because Sociopathy and Psychopathy exist. You can't cure a mental disorder, especially a violent one, with "compassion and understanding". Stick your neck out like that to THOSE people, it'll get sliced wide open.

"Everyone just needs a hug" is a nice idea. Doesn't actually work in practice.

superstaff

05-26-2022, 08:13 AM

I think some people are misunderstood, and a product of abuse/bad environment though good deep down. It's also something I don't mind explored in fiction. Though maybe not in the "everyone is good, everyone is misunderstood" mindset we have a lot of nowadays.

But...yeah. Not everyone is that. There are evil people out there. Like, very evil. Some of them don't even kill, but are still horrible people that enjoy tormenting their victims. And yes, being kind to those types will get your neck sliced wide open, figuratively and also literally. I should know, I've had run-ins with them that have not ended well for me. Luckily, I'm alive at least, but I have been screwed over by bad people. Thus why I am a cynical, guarded mess.

And yes, I also love Watchmen, comic and movie alike. Watchmen is probably Snyder's best movie (I run very hot/cold on his movies, I tend to love or hate). When I think about Watchmen, I usually think of the movie ever since that came out. It feels more vivid to me, maybe because the casting was just so perfect.

Coola Yagami

05-26-2022, 08:21 AM

So what do we do with these violent kids? Lock em up as soon as they're diagnosed? End them?

superstaff

05-26-2022, 08:22 AM

So what do we do with these violent kids? Lock em up as soon as they're diagnosed? End them?

There's no easy answer to this. There really isn't.

Leo656

05-26-2022, 09:10 AM

And yes, I also love Watchmen, comic and movie alike. Watchmen is probably Snyder's best movie (I run very hot/cold on his movies, I tend to love or hate).

I get accused of being a stan but I haven't even seen everything he's done. Like, to borrow a phrase from you, "I am a bad nerd" because I still haven't seen 300 or his zombie stuff. Just not as strong of an interest in the material. But I will watch them. I own 300 on Blu-ray and I hate myself for not watching it since that was his "big break"... I just get busy and forget.

It's sincerely not my fault that I've honestly loved all the stuff of his I've seen, though. I don't "stan" for directors. Everybody has good stuff and bad stuff. But I've only liked everything I've seen of Zack's, and I can't help that. I will say I make it a point to only acknowledge his Director's Cuts, as the theatrical versions of his movies are always inferior and remove many critical elements that can fundamentally change the entire movie. I know people are like, "10-30 more minutes can't change anything but make it longer", but... that's an oversimplification. Sometimes it changes a lot.

Watchmen isn't a bad example. Some of it is "just more", but some of the extended cut is also context, and putting some of the important bits of the book back in. Which to any fan of the book would be huge. Neophytes might not care, but why would a neophyte even watch Watchmen in the first place? Book or film, it simply isn't a "populist" piece of fiction.

I'm sure one day I'll run across a movie of his I didn't love, but so far he's way ahead with me.

"Owls of F*cking Ga'Hoole", man. Zack Snyder made an animated kids' movie about f*cking owls and it's one of the coolest f*cking things I've ever seen in my life. :lol: Don't ask me to explain this sh*t, I can't. I just go where my heart tells me to go.

Note to Self: Time to re-watch "Owls of Ga'Hoole". It's been a while.

Leo656

05-26-2022, 09:10 AM

So what do we do with these violent kids? Lock em up as soon as they're diagnosed? End them?

Back in my day we'd stick 'em in the Army and make 'em play the bugle. :trazz:

superstaff

05-26-2022, 09:17 AM

I get accused of being a stan but I haven't even seen everything he's done. Like, to borrow a phrase from you, "I am a bad nerd" because I still haven't seen 300 or his zombie stuff. Just not as strong of an interest in the material.

Hm. For me, 300 no era bueno, and the 'zombie stuff' (Dawn of the Dead) era muy bueno, in my opinion. :lol:

Ironically, what I haven't watched is the Owls of Ga'Hoole. I worked at a movie theater at the exact time that movie came out, and the trailer would play on the little TVs we had in the lobby. I'd look up at it, and be like, "Huh...Owls...Zack Snyder??? WHAT?" Never saw it, unfortunately. I think I have it too, included in a 'Family Favorites' DVD thing.

Coola Yagami

05-26-2022, 09:21 AM

I think the Ukraine is a good example why we shouldn't get rid of guns. They probably wish they had theirs right about now.

Leo656

05-26-2022, 09:29 AM

Hm. For me, 300 no era bueno, and the 'zombie stuff' (Dawn of the Dead) era muy bueno, in my opinion. :lol:

Ironically, what I haven't watched is the Owls of Ga'Hoole. I worked at a movie theater at the exact time that movie came out, and the trailer would play on the little TVs we had in the lobby. I'd look up at it, and be like, "Huh...Owls...Zack Snyder??? WHAT?" Never saw it, unfortunately. I think I have it too, included in a 'Family Favorites' DVD thing.

Please don't make me use Google f*cking Translate, we're just goofing around, it shouldn't be work. :lol: Have pity on us poor gringos, my Mom was from f*cking Queens. I say "yesterday" as "Yes-tiday" for f*ck's sake. Have a heart.

And I was not ready for Owls of Ga'Hoole. I barely even like kids movies, I never read the books, and if owls were real, holy sh*t we'd all be f*cked.

But I loved that movie. Here's something that may shock you: A "kids' movie" directed by Zack Snyder is a bit darker than your typical kids' movie. :trazz: I really liked it though, it was "family-friendly" without being fluffy toothless vomit. Not "inappropriate" at all, just has some teeth to it. And it's funnier than one would expect, too. Like, it is actually very funny. I had a great time with it.

1987

05-26-2022, 11:56 AM

So, I used to consider myself a conservative democrat. I knew they tended to be more neutral, while the republicans where big bad rich business men. And maybe that was true for a time.

But now? the Dems claim this, and 'oh, we're the good guys'...and that, but the NRA is still there. No other country has them, and no other country has this gun issue. THE PUBLIC SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO OWN SEMI OR FULL AUTOMATIC WEAPONS. Our For fathers never envisioned such things, let alone being easily available.

The NRA relies on donations to get laws past. Why can't we simply find out which democratic AND republican senators accept such things and sanction them to hell..so they not only can't afford to accept them anymore, but no one else will either.

I also feel the amendment also needs updating to reflect the technology of the times.

The founding fathers gave us a republic if we can keep it and a second amendment to defend it. Law abiding citizens cannot lose fundamental rights because of the acts of criminals.

Shall not be infringed.

If you want stricter gun control laws because of the recent mass shootings, the media has brainwashed you into voting for your oppressor. It will only lead to full on democrat fascism.

1987

05-26-2022, 12:06 PM

There sure have been alot of mass shootings lately, it’s also a midterm election year.

If the shooter happens to be white, then the issue is white supremacy. If the shooter is another race, the issue becomes gun control. Every tragedy is just another opportunity for Democrats to steal away our rights and freedoms.

Democrats have been working very hard to usher in the New World Order.

Some Republicans are in on it too, the “RINO”’s (republican in name only), but mostly dems.

It’s guys like Trump who were a real threat to the corrupt establishment, that’s why they wanted him out so bad, used mainstream media to demonize “MAGA”, and stopped at nothing to install Xiden.

Vegita-San

05-26-2022, 12:06 PM

The founding fathers gave us a republic if we can keep it and a second amendment to defend it. Law abiding citizens cannot lose fundamental rights because of the acts of criminals.

Shall not be infringed.

If you want stricter gun control laws because of the recent mass shootings, the media has brainwashed you into voting for your oppressor. It will only lead to full on democrat fascism.

I've ALWAYS hated guns. not about politics. want to defend yourself? how about a sword. cut off the attackers arms and boom, no more threat.

A local citizen should NOT be able to own a automatic or semi automatic. not brain washing, just simple facts.

Coola Yagami

05-26-2022, 12:54 PM

I've ALWAYS hated guns. not about politics. want to defend yourself? how about a sword. cut off the attackers arms and boom, no more threat.

Dude... you'd be shot 5 times before you could even draw your sword.

Sumac

05-26-2022, 02:16 PM

Besides, you need to be strong like a ****ing gorilla to cut someone's limbs.

As for discussion about "evil" people, I don't think people are NOT born evil: they are molded into "evil" by culture, upbringing or traumas. Or combination of thereof.
The question is what to do with them.

I and some members of my family have a lot of experience with abusers. And it painfully obvious that no amount of therapy or convincing would make them into good people. They genuinely LOVE torment others. And while I am not OK with idea of killing them, I personally consider that the best way to get rid of those people is to cut them off from your life. Like completely. Otherwise they will destroy you.

Bahamut810

05-26-2022, 09:52 PM

Wow...so much from Vegita...

No other country has them, and no other country has this gun issue. THE PUBLIC SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO OWN SEMI OR FULL AUTOMATIC WEAPONS. Our For fathers never envisioned such things, let alone being easily available.

Many other countries have an armed public, with various levels of restrictions. Even Canada. In countries where there are more stringent gun controls people will find a way. Look at the Knife crime rate in London for instance.

You also suggest that our Forefathers were morons who could not anticipate that technology advances. Do you really think that a group of inventors and military generals, and educated peoples (with studies in history) could not foresee that technology advances and that one day we would be able to shoot multiple bullets quickly without having to reload? Sure, they may not have known how...but each of them knew that things had to be research and invented. I always find this "forefathers never envisioned' argument baffling.

The NRA relies on donations to get laws past. Why can't we simply find out which democratic AND republican senators accept such things and sanction them to hell..so they not only can't afford to accept them anymore, but no one else will either.

I think there are already laws to limit donations to politians. If you mean simply because they are pro-gun, then I would be willing to agree with you if you were willing to do that with everyone who accepted donations from any group deemed objectionable (pro-abortion groups, Pro-life groups, 'SJW' aligned groups, ect) because you are very specifically punishing people for their opinions.

I also feel the amendment also needs updating to reflect the technology of the times.

Yes, we should change it to Democrats from trying to chip away at our rights a step at a time. F*** that. Go buy what you want to defend yourself and your home.

I've ALWAYS hated guns. not about politics. want to defend yourself? how about a sword. cut off the attackers arms and boom, no more threat.

A local citizen should NOT be able to own a automatic or semi automatic. not brain washing, just simple facts.

You don't like guns? DONT BUY ONE. Dont try to tread on other peoples rights because you have an ick in your brain. Bring a knife to a gun fight and see how far you get. Guns are the great equalizer.

Leo656

05-26-2022, 11:09 PM

I am not OK with idea of killing them

I am. If you take misery in hurting people and making them suffer, you're a disease.

We don't coddle cancerous tumors, we remove them. Human beings should be no different.

1987

05-28-2022, 10:53 AM

not sure why but the mainstream media didn’t cover this story much and make it national news. there was a birthday/graduation party a few days ago in Charleston, WV and a white supremacist attempted a mass shooting but was quickly shot dead by a woman with a concealed pistol. you would think this is big news right? a would be mass shooting by an assault rifle stopped by a pistol? oh wait, the suspect, dennis butler, was a black man with extensive criminal history. my bad! guess it all makes sense now.

https://www.wowktv.com/news/local/charleston-police-shooting-victim-pulled-assault-rifle-on-party/amp/

Leo656

05-28-2022, 10:59 AM

They do love to bury the story whenever it's a black person doing the shooting (or committing crimes in general). Hard to ignore the consistency of that, not gonna lie. Even back like 15 years ago when I was reading the newspaper every day, if the shooter was white it'd be Page One but if they were black it'd be somewhere in the middle of the paper. And then you'd go on the internet and there'd be nothing about it hardly. Or like, a lot of times I'd read multiple papers and they'd report it differently; if it was a more "liberal" paper, they'd only comment on the criminal's race if they were white (and they would make sure to mention they were in fact white), otherwise they wouldn't mention it at all. But if it were a more centrist or conservative paper, they'd openly say it was a black person. It felt like the liberal papers would go to great lengths to try and hide those particular details.

I get that they feel like reporting on non-whites committing crimes is going to "make people racist", or some bullsh*t, but it's not the job of the media to editorialize or skew the narrative, it's their job to ONLY print facts and leave it to everyone else to hash out "what it means".

Sumac

05-28-2022, 11:15 AM

I get that they feel like reporting on non-whites committing crimes is going to "make people racist", or some bullsh*t, but it's not the job of the media to editorialize or skew the narrative, it's their job to ONLY print facts and leave it to everyone else to hash out "what it means".
Nowadays it is. Or at least media think they are entitled to do so, to get money from a Twatterinos and be in bed with woke crowd.

Leo656

05-28-2022, 11:28 AM

Yeah, I actually studied Journalism in high school so what passes for it in the Internet Era makes my blood f*cking boil.

I doubt you even need a degree to be a published "journalist" anymore. Pretty sure anyone with a blog and friends in the right places gets to be one, whether they studied the ethics of the craft or not. It's all JUST editorializing now. Disgusting.

Coola Yagami

05-28-2022, 01:47 PM

As someone who argues with the higher-ups at times over ethics, I never woulda made it as a journalist. I probably woulda been blacklisted by my peers just for actually doing my ****in job.

Sumac

05-29-2022, 01:26 AM

Journalism is dead. Or at least classic journalism is dead.
It is completely eclipsed by retards in Internet with their hot-take, who research things via Google.

And, because, in modern age, media prefer to hire this retards as their writers, because, modern people are too busy to read anything past the title, there is no place for the real journalism anymore.

Andrew NDB

05-29-2022, 02:06 AM

It's all about everyone trying to save the world, or their idea(ology) of it. Things like journalistic integrity are just more noble sacrifices along the way.

Sumac

05-29-2022, 04:04 AM

It's all about everyone trying to save the world, or their idea(ology) of it. Things like journalistic integrity are just more noble sacrifices along the way.
Journalistic integrity - was a rare beast even before Internet. Its just when biased news were presented by good-looking people in expensive costumes with a good speech, as opposed to self-entitled balding ****s, who dress at the dump and Hot Topic, you was less prone to dismiss lies.

Andrew NDB

05-29-2022, 04:45 AM

Journalistic integrity - was a rare beast even before Internet. Its just when biased news were presented by good-looking people in expensive costumes with a good speech, as opposed to self-entitled balding ****s, who dress at the dump and Hot Topic, you was less prone to dismiss lies.

I don't think I'm that jaded to think that. Though maybe things started to shift around the O.J. stuff. And then baby steps from there until social media. Like, even the LA riots... that was fairly balanced coverage. There was big pieces on the trucker getting hit with the brick and all. You'd never see that now.

Leo656

05-29-2022, 06:40 AM

Good read.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/really-consistent-pathway-society-stop-185445896.html

Two Professors Found What Creates a Mass Shooter. Will Politicians Pay Attention?

Three years ago, Jillian Peterson, an associate professor of criminology at Hamline University, and James Densley, a professor of criminal justice at Metro State University, decided to take a different approach. In their view, the failure to gain a more meaningful and evidence-based understanding of why mass shooters do what they do seemed a lost opportunity to stop the next one from happening. Funded by the National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the Department of Justice, their research constructed a database of every mass shooter since 1966 who shot and killed four or more people in a public place, and every shooting incident at schools, workplaces and places of worship since 1999.

Peterson and Densley also compiled detailed life histories on 180 shooters, speaking to their spouses, parents, siblings, childhood friends, work colleagues and teachers. As for the gunmen themselves, most don’t survive their carnage, but five who did talked to Peterson and Densely from prison, where they were serving life sentences. The researchers also found several people who planned a mass shooting but changed their mind.
-----------

POLITICO: So, what are the solutions?

Densley: There are things we can do right now as individuals, like safe storage of firearms or something as simple as checking in with your kid.

Peterson: Then we really need resources at institutions like schools. We need to build teams to investigate when kids are in crisis and then link those kids to mental health services. The problem is that in a lot of places, those services are not there. There’s no community mental health and no school-based mental health. Schools are the ideal setting because it doesn’t require a parent to take you there. A lot of perpetrators are from families where the parents are not particularly proactive about mental health appointments.

---------------------

POLITICO: In your book, you say that in an ideal world, 500,000 psychologists would be employed in schools around the country. If you assume a modest salary of $70,000 a year, that amounts to over $35 billion in funding. Are you seeing any national or state-level political momentum for even a sliver of these kind of mental health resources?

Densley: Every time these tragedies happen, you always ask yourself, “Is this the one that’s going to finally move the needle?” The Republican narrative is that we’re not going to touch guns because this is all about mental health. Well then, we need to ask the follow-up question of what’s the plan to fix that mental health problem. Nobody’s saying, “Let’s fund this, let’s do it, we’ll get the votes.” That’s the political piece that’s missing here.

POLITICO: Are Democrats talking about mental health?

Densley: Too often in politics it becomes an either-or proposition. Gun control or mental health. Our research says that none of these solutions is perfect on its own. We have to do multiple things at one time and put them together as a comprehensive package. People have to be comfortable with complexity and that’s not always easy.

Peterson: Post-Columbine there’s been this real focus on hardening schools — metal detectors, armed officers, teaching our kids to run and hide. The shift I’m starting to see, at least here in Minnesota, is that people are realizing hardening doesn’t work. Over 90 percent of the time, school shooters target their own school. These are insiders, not outsiders. We just had a bill in Minnesota that recognized public safety as training people in suicide prevention and funding counselors. I hope we keep moving in that direction.

Densley: In Uvalde, there was an army of good guys with guns in the parking lot. The hard approach doesn’t seem to be getting the job done.

----------------

POLITICO: I was struck by a detail in your book about one of the perpetrators you investigated. Minutes before he opened fire, you report that he called a behavior health facility. Is there always some form of reaching out or communication of intent before it happens?

Peterson: You don’t see it as often with older shooters who often go into their workplaces. But for young shooters, it’s almost every case. We have to view this “leakage” as a cry for help. If you’re saying, “I want to shoot the school tomorrow,” you are also saying, “I don’t care if I live or die.” You’re also saying, “I’m completely hopeless,” and you’re putting it out there for people to see because part of you wants to be stopped.

We have to listen because pushing people out intensifies their grievance and makes them angrier. The Parkland shooter had just been expelled from school and then came back. This is not a problem we can punish our way out of.

It's very noteworthy that while the subject of guns comes up a few times in the full article, at no point do these experts - who have obviously researched this issue in far greater detail than any politician or bleeding heart on social media - say that fewer guns or stricter laws will in any meaningful way solve this problem. In a section I didn't copy/paste, they mention how in Buffalo there were laws in place to prevent that situation and in the end it didn't matter.

This is a Root Cause issue. Only a combined and concentrated approach of providing mental health services for people who are obviously in crisis and preparing to lash out, as well as doing all we can on a reasonable level to keep such people away from firearms, will work.

But as the article points out, mental health services cost money and isn't a sexy hot-button issue for voters, so while that would ultimately do a world of good, it's never actually going to go anywhere past talk. This is another place where I take issue with the Republicans; in trying to deflect from guns, they SAY out loud "We recognize that this is a mental health issue", but THEN they consistently cut funding from mental health programs nationwide.

I've dealt with "the system", I know of which I speak. At one point, for example, when I was independently trying to continue my outpatient treatment, the best anyone could do was set me up with a therapist who wasn't incredibly experienced and was working out of a college campus about 30-40 minutes away from where I live, which is incredibly impractical. But it's "the best they can do" for people who don't have a lot of money.

Politicians on both sides of the aisle SAY that they are steadfastly and passionately invested in making sure these tragedies never happen again... and then botch the follow-through when it's time to stop talking. One side says "Lets take the guns", which is impractical and unconstitutional, and also does nothing to attack the Root Cause. The other side SAYS that they understand that it's a mental health issue, and then does nothing about it when it comes time to set up state and federal budgets; when it's crunch time, they will ALWAYS slash mental health funding, every single time.

The professors quoted in this article seem to have cracked the code; at least, every word of what they're saying makes crystal clear sense to ME. The question now becomes, will anyone actually LISTEN, or just continue to espouse empty rhetoric?

We all know the answer. Solutions cost money, while rhetoric and "activism" are free.

superstaff

05-29-2022, 07:05 AM

Densley: Too often in politics it becomes an either-or proposition. Gun control or mental health. Our research says that none of these solutions is perfect on its own. We have to do multiple things at one time and put them together as a comprehensive package. People have to be comfortable with complexity and that’s not always easy.

Smartest person on this panel, to be honest.

Anyway...

This is a Root Cause issue. Only a combined and concentrated approach of providing mental health services for people who are obviously in crisis and preparing to lash out, as well as doing all we can on a reasonable level to keep such people away from firearms, will work.

The problem with mental health as a 'solution' is that therapists suck. Many, I would even say a majority of them, are absolute trash. It's interesting that many Republicans/Conservatives champion given that an overwhelming amount of therapists and psychiatrists are Democrats/Leftists (more than 2/3, according to research done on the subject). Hmm. If more of them knew this, would they be screeching that "more therapy, less laws" be the answer?

Honestly, my experience with therapy has been awful. Psychology and psychiatry are treated like absolute, and 'based on science', but do some digging into it, and you'll see there's a lot less of that than it seems. Maybe I'll write more on this topic upon request, but...yeah.

Another thing is we'd need to trust people to immediately go to a mental health professional if they feel suicidal, homicidal, violent, etc. Or we'd need to live in a system with mandatory screenings, and trust that these medical professionals have our best interests in mind...which I don't really think many of them actually do. Another thing you guys should look into is medical malpractice and corruption in the medical system, aka "many doctors are evil and use their patients as guinea pigs or violate their rights, and the system, aka 'big pharma' enables this".

Leo656

05-29-2022, 08:13 AM

I've had good and bad experiences.

Outpatient treatment was a very mixed bag, and a lot of it has to do with resource management. Some of my therapists were well-meaning and very nice people, but either lacked experience and could do little except offer platitudes, or simply had no time to devote to individual patients because they were juggling a heavy caseload because they're getting paid so little they need to work a "crammed" client schedule with people back-to-back-to-back, which does nobody any good. Oftentimes, I'd be kept waiting because another client's appointment ran long, which not only cuts into my time but leaves the therapist in the position of not having any time to "decompress" and detach from the previous client to be able to devote full attention to the next one. I know what that's like from working as a personal trainer, where the same thing often happens. If you are crunched for appointments it becomes very hard to devote full and necessary attention to any specific individual no matter how great their need or how good your intentions.

Now, high-end therapists who make a lot of money - and in turn, serve a more wealthy clientele - don't have that problem and work a very flexible schedule. But 99% of the people who need mental health services the most are people like me, who don't have a lot of money and are probably getting therapy for free through the state. And you really do get what you pay for. So whether it's me, or some high school kid who's about to snap, if the best they can do is send someone to see a second- or third-year therapist who's juggling 15 clients a day... you're not going to see great results. Therapists are like public defenders; they might potentially be purely noble and have the best of intentions, but they don't have the resources and in many cases the experience necessary to serve the people who need them the most. It's not necessarily that they don't care on an individual level, but when someone is overworked and underpaid there's only so much they can effectively do.

Communication also becomes an issue. I showed up to some appointments expecting a full hour session, only to find out 20 minutes in that it was only a 30-minute session. Firstly, that should always be communicated upfront, and in those cases they "forgot" to tell me because they were frazzled from juggling so many things at once. But secondly, that goes back to resource management. In my experience, a 30-minute therapy session does very little. One- or two-hour sessions, you can get a lot done. 30 minutes, you're barely able to even get into everything that affected you emotionally that day, let alone in the week between your last appointment and this one. And these places only schedule 30-minute appointments at all because they simply don't have the time or doctors available to do better.

HOWEVER. Inpatient treatment was a whole other story. When I was ordered to go to Princeton House for two weeks via doctor and court order, it probably saved my life and that's no exaggeration. NEVER in my life, before or since, have so many people gone to such great lengths to make me feel understood, heard, and validated as a human being. To the point where they warned me before being discharged, "It's a lot harder outside, because people out there don't care as much, and that includes your family and friends," which is absolutely true. This was a $1000/day treatment facility, and since I "technically" wasn't working (I knew I'd be going back to work the second I was discharged, but for the duration of my stay I "technically" was not working and therefore eligible for Medicaid, the social workers took care of the Legal-ese of it all) everything was covered completely by the state. I paid for not a cent of it, and received incredible attention round the clock. There were a whole team of doctors, therapists, nutritionists, etc., making sure I wasn't just "doing okay", but actively getting better, and those same services were standard for everyone. Not everyone took advantage of the resources available to them, but the people who were proactive in their treatment got noticeably better. The ones who said "I don't think I need to be here" or "I don't think I have a problem" were the ones who got sent to other hospitals... or worse.

At no point during that time did I feel like just a number, as was sometimes the case with outpatient therapy. This facility treats thousands of people per day and yet strives to devote the utmost personal care and attention to everyone, and that, I feel, makes a world of difference.

Part of it is making people feel like the treatment is sincere. There's naturally a lot of distrust out there of doctors and therapists, and people not wanting to be honest because they either don't feel like it will do any good, OR that they'll be judged and blamed or treated poorly for being completely honest. At first, I was very nervous about opening up about some of the things I've said and done, or how dark some of my thoughts have been, because I am not a perfect person. When I saw other people opening up in group, it made me feel a lot more comfortable, because I saw people confess to far worse things than what I was afraid to talk about. And no matter what it was, whenever anyone said "I did _______ and I feel like a horrible person," the response was more of a shrug than anything judgmental. You EXPECT to see them recoil, you think they're going to look at you differently. When they don't... that can be huge. "Okay, that happened, but it doesn't make you a horrible person."

Like some people were in their for beating their wives or kids, for example, and while obviously it's not something that is celebrated, when you get to know these people intimately you find a lot of self-loathing about things they've done, which makes them not only likely to re-offend but also to keep things inside because they're afraid of being judged. When judgment is off the table, and it becomes clear that understanding and healing is the goal, not judging and punishing people... it's amazing how quickly you see people change for the better.

Inpatient treatment, for me, was a lot more productive than outpatient. Not only were there more resources in play and greater attention given to the individual, BUT at the same time it develops what a lot of damaged people are sorely lacking in, and that being a sense of community. Knowing that other people feel the exact same way or have gone through almost the exact same experiences can be HUGE. Especially when you see those people making progress. It gives you hope. It makes you want to try harder and not just give up. Especially when you're not just sitting around all day talking about your problems, but in-between doing fun things like painting or doing puzzles together or listening to music and talking about how it makes you feel and why.

Plus, the food was excellent; most people are malnourished and dehydrated without realizing it, and it's not something you notice until you're "forced" to eat a fully-balanced diet and drink enough water. But that right there has a HUGE effect on peoples' mental state without even knowing that's a factor.

I always made the joke that Princeton House was "like Summer Camp for loony-tunes". And it's very apt. People who know me well remarked how that two weeks made me an almost completely different person, after having struggled my entire life to make any progress whatsoever.

So I've seen the good and bad of "the system". My sincere advice to anyone struggling is to find a way to get into a program such as Princeton House; most states do have one, even though they are under-funded. You'll possibly be required to continue outpatient therapy upon discharge, and outpatient treatment is where people slip through the cracks more often than not, but a lot of that is on the individual advocating for themselves and doing their diligence.

Full disclosure, I ended up going to Princeton House after having a "stand-off" with a half-dozen cops in my backyard, screaming at them to shoot me, after my wife called 911 when I was making threats of self-harm. That's how my little "adventure" through the mental health system started. Two weeks later, I didn't even recognize that guy anymore. I still struggle, but it's never been THAT bad again.

So the system works, but you have to be in the right environment. I was "lucky", in that I was forced to get treatment I never, ever would have sought out otherwise. To this day, I swear to anyone who will listen that I wasn't grateful for the circumstances, but I am grateful for the experience. I most likely would not be here now, otherwise.

(Cont.)

Leo656

05-29-2022, 08:14 AM

People who exhibit the "red flags" of some of these mass shooters? Mandatory inpatient treatment at a similar facility. 100%. It will save lives. These places are specifically set up for people who either have, or have threatened to, hurt themselves or someone else. That's why they exist. Most people will NOT go willingly. I wouldn't have. But you'd be amazed how much people can change when you remind them they're not "monsters" and that it's not "hopeless". I saw people way worse than me come out the other side of their damage. There's a little bit of give-and-take - people who don't want to be helped are difficult - but I've seen people go very quickly from being violently uncooperative and getting locked in "the quiet room" three or four times a day, to basically brand new people once they get on the right meds and start connecting with the people around them again.

The only problem is a lack of available beds at any given time, the waiting list, and the red tape which makes seeking treatment there seem inconvenient. All of which could easily be alleviated, if the state(s) would simply allocate more funds to these facilities. The therapists shouldn't be vacuuming the rooms and hallways, for example. That illustrates how underfunded even the best of these places are.

I'm dead serious, this is a thing people need to be doing. And I do recommend it to people who are just struggling in general, as well. Some of the "worst" people I knew in there were voluntary. But they turned it around. They knew they couldn't just talk to someone and it would all go away, they needed to be a lot more proactive. Some of them were on their fourth or fifth "tour of duty". One guy got discharged on a Friday, immediately relapsed, got arrested, and told the cops to bring him right back in on Monday. "I'm not ready to be out there yet," he said. "I wasn't being honest with myself. I said I was better because I wanted to get out of here, but that was me being a liar. Nobody's gonna get any better until they're ready to do the work. I gotta be better, I can't keep doing this to myself." Hopefully, he's doing better now.

I highly recommend it. If I had the means I'd go back for another inpatient "vacation" any day over doing the revolving-door-of-therapists outpatient thing, any day of the week. If it's something a person hasn't tried, well... you should.

Leo656

05-29-2022, 08:19 AM

Honestly, my experience with therapy has been awful. Psychology and psychiatry are treated like absolute, and 'based on science', but do some digging into it, and you'll see there's a lot less of that than it seems. Maybe I'll write more on this topic upon request, but...yeah.

Another thing is we'd need to trust people to immediately go to a mental health professional if they feel suicidal, homicidal, violent, etc. Or we'd need to live in a system with mandatory screenings, and trust that these medical professionals have our best interests in mind...which I don't really think many of them actually do. Another thing you guys should look into is medical malpractice and corruption in the medical system, aka "many doctors are evil and use their patients as guinea pigs or violate their rights, and the system, aka 'big pharma' enables this".

This is where being your own advocate becomes essential. During outpatient treatment, I had one clinician who ONLY ever wanted to increase my Lithium, even after I told her the side effects were unbearable after she'd already upped the dose twice. At Princeton House, I was barely medicated, only enough to bring the Lithium levels up very slightly as I had a naturally low baseline.

When I was discharged and had to go outpatient, things got trickier. They can't give you the correct attention, so every time you have a bad day, "Let's up your meds" is pretty much all they know how to do. You need to be able to say "No, I'm not doing that. I need to talk to someone who actually wants to listen, and you are not listening." If that person isn't the one, it's time to find someone else.

A person needs to ask questions and speak up for themselves, and confront their doctors when they know they're not acting in their own best interests. I eventually stopped going to therapy entirely over these issues, which maybe wasn't the best idea but as I've mentioned, the outpatient system simply wasn't working for me. So instead I fall back on practicing the coping skills I developed at Princeton House, which can kind of supersede the need for external therapy. Sometimes.

superstaff

05-29-2022, 08:32 AM

A person needs to ask questions and speak up for themselves, and confront their doctors when they know they're not acting in their own best interests.

I have. I still do.

My doctors, basically all of them, just tell me to shrug off the side effects a lot of the time. I don't have a lot of time to devote to writing about this today, but my experiences have been very crappy, both for physical and mental problems. I've never really had any sort of positive experience with in or out patient programs. I guess I just have the worst luck in the world (and sometimes I really believe this). I've seen people swear to me that this or that mental health facility/program/medications/blahblahblah saved their lives. And sure, good for y'all.

Maybe I'm just beyond help for some reason. Over time, I've stopped trusting the system because it has failed me many times, and has been a waste of my time and my money. The one thing that helped, for about a year, was a steady exercise and diet plan I put myself on. I felt better...then 2020 happened, and all the progress was gone, and I am worse than ever. I'll spare the details, but I developed a second disability in addition to one I already had, and stress from the scamde-- I mean, pandemic is the likely culprit. I've always suspected that mental health/state plays a huge role in how our bodies are run physically as well, and some doctors kinda-sorta agree with me on this, though they still push pills on me every time.

Leo656

05-29-2022, 08:45 AM

superstaff

05-29-2022, 08:53 AM

So long as a person actively wants help, they're not beyond it. If I've learned anything, it's that.

We can talk more about it Somewhere Else if you'd like to. This forum isn't the best place to get into such things, understandably. Inevitably someone always pops in to say Exactly The Wrong Thing.

You know where I'm at, and that I'm not going anywhere.

Thanks, I know.

At this point, I'm not super shy about this stuff. I'm anticipating offending 98% of the people here with my ramblings. Even when it has nothing to do with politics. :lol: I bet saying that I prefer Leo to Raph has someone's panties in a bunch somewhere here.

superstaff

05-29-2022, 09:01 AM

Oh, I also wanted to add one more thing.

The thing about 'better mental help' being a solution is that...there's sociopaths and psychopaths out there. No amount of therapy can 'fix' them. Thus they'd either remain locked up, or there'd need to be...other ways to keep them away from the public. Would society really advocate for that? Would you trust the government/medical community to be able to sort the psychos from the rest of us? I mean, Dr. JerkAss could totally write you up as a 'irredeemable, violent sociopath' and throw you in a pen forever because you looked at him the wrong way. Just wanted to point this out.

Leo656

05-29-2022, 09:28 AM

Yeah, but again, as the people quoted in the article who've studied the mass shooting incidents going back almost 60 years have determined, in 90+% of cases, it's not a "real" psychopath/sociopath who does these things but a mentally disturbed person who secretly wants someone to stop them and are "acting out" because they feel hopeless and angry. As they've pointed out, what these incidents REALLY are, are suicides... suicides which have the unfortunate side effect of the person taking a lot of people with them so that their names will live in infamy, and "everyone will be sorry".

That's not consistent with actual sociopathy/psychopathy. A sociopath or psychopath would be acting in self-interest and trying to hurt people and get away with it so they can keep hurting more people because they find it amusing/entertaining. They would not be trying to force a "suicide by cop" situation, that isn't how psychopaths/sociopaths work.

The data overwhelmingly suggests - and always has - that sociopaths and psychopaths become serial killers, NOT mass shooters. Mass shooters are overwhelmingly people who've had a psychotic break after years of abuse and increasing isolation from their peers and the world around them. They needed help, nobody helped them, and they snapped. Which suggests it could have been avoided. Again, most of these people call some kind of outreach hotline, or tell someone online "I'm thinking of doing something bad", right before they go and do it, or within 24 hours of the incident. That's a cry for help. That's not "I actually want to hurt people."

Likewise, I didn't actually want the cops to shoot me. I just felt completely hopeless In That Moment and was acting out. In that moment, I could've potentially and theoretically done anything, up to and including hurting myself or someone else... but it wouldn't have been what I actually wanted. I was just really, really not in a good place.

Thankfully, they strapped me down and sent me to the hospital for my own good. But it could've gone a whole other way entirely. I cannot say with certainty that the house wouldn't have been a bloodbath had my wife NOT called 911 when I started talking about killing myself.

So no, you'll never eliminate sociopaths and psychotics. But less than 10% of those people are the ones doing the mass shootings, according to the data. Some people are born without empathy, and all you can do is lock those people up, unfortunately.

Other people can be helped, though.