Random Thoughts - Current Events edition
 

Why do people hate JK Rowling? All I can find is that she seems to think there are only two genders. and she's right.

Precisely, because of that.

She stated on several occasions that dicks is not a female body part and that women are actual human beings with their own unique problems and not a costumes psycho rapey men can appropriate and wear, and naturally "very peaceful and accepting" trans community and their psycho allies started acting like typical abusive men when they are told "no" by a woman.

Basically, abusive men who thought they can do anything, including dominating women by pretending to be women, were told "no" and reacted like typical abusive men. **** those freaks.

JK Rowling is a TERF (Trans Exclusiony Radical Feminist). In her case she claims to be supportive of transgender people to live the lifestyle they want up to the point that it encroaches on cis gender women's territory. Broadly this is usually about what public bathrooms or changing rooms that trans-women can go further that if someone says or does something sexist to a trans woman they shouldn't be defended on the basis of feminism because they havent lived their whole lives as women.

The above is largely not why most people take issue with JK Rowling. Even those who are fully supportive of transgender rights most tend to at have some sympathies with the above arguments.

The real reason why some people take issue with JK Rowling is she retweets and supports well known anti trans people, some of which openly advocate physical violence towards to trans people. At this point she knows what these people are but she will support them. This comes across as her being less concerned about the safety and lifestyles of cis women and more that she just wants to attack trans women.

During this people have taken the opportunity to point her homophobic past. Particularly that at one point in her life Rowling seemed to be very supportive of a guy who advocated for the torture of gay people to try and turn them straight. Now it seems that she has legitimately evolved on this issue to the point she retroactively decided Dumbledore was gay. It's more than possible she may evolve on the issue of trans people but in the meantime she's still doing harm to one of the most vulnerable communities in society.

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.

I wonder, how our local SJW gonna spin it? Is he gonna argue that dick is a female organ? Or that stating objective reality is a "violence"? How 'tis gonna work for someone who believes in "objective reality"?

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.

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

Oh, please, spare me your cowardly whining.

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!

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.

About...everything?
From Rowling supporting some "howwible twanzphobes" to "men can be women and totes not dangerous".

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 $#!(.

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?

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 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.

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 :).

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.

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:

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.

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.

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.

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?

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, which was running since 70s was closed, when its leaders refused to accept men in dresses and Boston LGB parade 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.

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.

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. 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...

Continuation...

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:

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.

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.

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
, 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:
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!

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.

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.

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.

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...

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.

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

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.

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...



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 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.

That doesn't happen. Sumac made it up.

Nonsense spread by grifters and believed by idiots.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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

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?

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).

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?

and the fact that you denied it so simply and factly makes me think there must be some truth to it.

That's why I feel like 'fact checkers' has since become weaponized in the last 3 years. it used to mean something. but now it's more 'making sure your following the proper narrative'.

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.