Would you just register already so people can knowingly skip past your pro-trans perma-spam on these boards without thinking it's a new person; icicle, peckle, etc, etc. just pick one name and register.
Why don't ask the same for every unregistered poster, including the ones who are regurgitating the same anti-trans propaganda you agree with?
If that doesn't work, maybe you can ask brojos to make any trans-related thread registered-user only.
Your first point; because the other posters appear to be different people who post once or twice max, so I can't call something out that isn't an issue. The same user anonymously spamming the boards constantly with low/no content drivel like icicle/peckle does (latest post is just a literal repost of their previous post calling ragged a 'transphobe') with the sole aim of clogging up the boards so people can't debate this topic is completely transparent and it happens every single time the topic comes up. Their content is objectively worse than yours, and that's saying something.
Why don't ask the same for every unregistered poster, including the ones who are regurgitating the same anti-trans propaganda you agree with?
If that doesn't work, maybe you can ask brojos to make any trans-related thread registered-user only.
Oh and please, enlighten me as to what 'anti-trans propaganda' I supposedly agree with. I know you have a habit of never being able to answer direct questions, but go on. Be specific.
Why don't ask the same for every unregistered poster, including the ones who are regurgitating the same anti-trans propaganda you agree with?
If that doesn't work, maybe you can ask brojos to make any trans-related thread registered-user only.
Your first point; because the other posters appear to be different people who post once or twice max, so I can't call something out that isn't an issue. The same user anonymously spamming the boards constantly with low/no content drivel like icicle/peckle does (latest post is just a literal repost of their previous post calling ragged a 'transphobe') with the sole aim of clogging up the boards so people can't debate this topic is completely transparent and it happens every single time the topic comes up. Their content is objectively worse than yours, and that's saying something.
Your second point is valid.
Also work either on your reading comprehension or your writing precision or both, and figure out what “literally” means before you come in thinking you are indulging in fancy schmancy “debate”. My second post was one new sentence quoting my previous post. There are many many many posts doing that on this site: quoting other posts and adding a few more words, that is.
Why don't ask the same for every unregistered poster, including the ones who are regurgitating the same anti-trans propaganda you agree with?
If that doesn't work, maybe you can ask brojos to make any trans-related thread registered-user only.
Your first point; because the other posters appear to be different people who post once or twice max, so I can't call something out that isn't an issue. The same user anonymously spamming the boards constantly with low/no content drivel like icicle/peckle does (latest post is just a literal repost of their previous post calling ragged a 'transphobe') with the sole aim of clogging up the boards so people can't debate this topic is completely transparent and it happens every single time the topic comes up. Their content is objectively worse than yours, and that's saying something.
Your second point is valid.
I do appreciate your carefully avoiding pronouning me or using “they” for me. Attaboy on that! You have the potential to learn if only you tap into it.
I do appreciate your carefully avoiding pronouning me or using “they” for me. Attaboy on that! You have the potential to learn if only you tap into it.
I do appreciate your carefully avoiding pronouning me or using “they” for me. Attaboy on that! You have the potential to learn if only you tap into it.
Did you just assume my gender? Fail.
Yes, based on your own past admission, but anyhow, how would you like to be addressed, sweetie?
While at that, learn some English by literally looking up all the meanings of that word you bolded. Do you also think when a girl says “you guys” to her girlfriends, she is literally instantaneously sex-changing her friends with her words? You might have a problem with identifying literalness or lack thereof.
Yes, based on your own past admission, but anyhow, how would you like to be addressed, sweetie?
While at that, learn some English by literally looking up all the meanings of that word you bolded. Do you also think when a girl says “you guys” to her girlfriends, she is literally instantaneously sex-changing her friends with her words? You might have a problem with identifying literalness or lack thereof.
"Yes, based on your own past admission",- citation needed
Ah you're one of the 'male is default' lot so you'll happily say 'attaboy', 'hey guys', 'what's up dudes' but as soon as someone says 'mother' or 'woman', even on official pregnancy healthcare guidance, I bet the prickles go right up your back don't they?
Yes, based on your own past admission, but anyhow, how would you like to be addressed, sweetie?
While at that, learn some English by literally looking up all the meanings of that word you bolded. Do you also think when a girl says “you guys” to her girlfriends, she is literally instantaneously sex-changing her friends with her words? You might have a problem with identifying literalness or lack thereof.
"Yes, based on your own past admission",- citation needed
Ah you're one of the 'male is default' lot so you'll happily say 'attaboy', 'hey guys', 'what's up dudes' but as soon as someone says 'mother' or 'woman', even on official pregnancy healthcare guidance, I bet the prickles go right up your back don't they?
Reading comprehension deficit. Can’t care to correct the stupid. This is getting boring.
I asked you a simple clarification question in #124.
I'm not at your beck and call, buddy.
What is amply clear is not only that you don’t have any statistics showing what was originally asked for in this thread but also that you don’t even recognize that the numbers you are citing are not making the point you are so furiously bellowing out.
Oh and please, enlighten me as to what 'anti-trans propaganda' I supposedly agree with. I know you have a habit of never being able to answer direct questions, but go on. Be specific.
-- Trans people are mentally ill.
-- Transitioning would not solve their mental health issues.
-- It's a phase anyway and they will grow out of it.
-- If they transition, they will later regret.
-- Trans girls are gay boys in disguise who are pushed into transitioning by their homophobic parents.
-- But if they are allowed to enter girls' bathroom, they will sexually assault girls.
-- "Trans athletes" are failed male athletes who transitioned for the purpose of winning some athletic titles at the expense of girls / women.
-- Or they transitioned so that they could enter women's locker rooms.
Yes, based on your own past admission, but anyhow, how would you like to be addressed, sweetie?
While at that, learn some English by literally looking up all the meanings of that word you bolded. Do you also think when a girl says “you guys” to her girlfriends, she is literally instantaneously sex-changing her friends with her words? You might have a problem with identifying literalness or lack thereof.
"Yes, based on your own past admission",- citation needed
Citation request denied. More than deserved courtesy already offered above. Offer subject to periodic review of offeree’s respect for other people’s pronouns.
-- Transitioning would not solve their mental health issues.
-- It's a phase anyway and they will grow out of it.
-- If they transition, they will later regret.
-- Trans girls are gay boys in disguise who are pushed into transitioning by their homophobic parents.
-- But if they are allowed to enter girls' bathroom, they will sexually assault girls.
-- "Trans athletes" are failed male athletes who transitioned for the purpose of winning some athletic titles at the expense of girls / women.
-- Or they transitioned so that they could enter women's locker rooms.
Which one do you not agree with?
-- Trans people are mentally ill.
Not necessarily
-- Transitioning would not solve their mental health issues.
Hard agree
-- It's a phase anyway and they will grow out of it.
Most gender non-conforming youth, strongly agree. We're already seeing this in detransition rates
-- If they transition, they will later regret.
As above.
-- Trans girls are gay boys in disguise who are pushed into transitioning by their homophobic parents.
Don't actually agree with that one, I think most of them would have turned out gay though. Parents do it for social clout or out of fear of self harm, not because of homophobia
-- But if they are allowed to enter girls' bathroom, they will sexually assault girls.
Disagree. But undoubtedly males are more likely to sexually assault girls. Males include men who are dressed as women and so they shouldn't be *exempt* from safeguarding
-- "Trans athletes" are failed male athletes who transitioned for the purpose of winning some athletic titles at the expense of girls / women.
Disagree. But I still don't think they should compete with women.
-- Or they transitioned so that they could enter women's locker rooms.
Disagree but I still don't think they should be *exempt* from safeguarding against males.
Well you misrepresented my viewpoint only 5 times out of 8, that's progress I suppose.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
So transitioning does not solve non-existing mental health problems? No surprise there. You cannot solved a problem that does not exist.
And kids who were not trans do not grow up to become adults who are not trans. Another no brainer.
If someone who isn't trans decides to transition, they will later regret? That's because they had never been trans to begin with.
You really need to familiarise yourself with the 'no true Scotsman' logical fallacy, as you repeat it time and time again. Playing games about which victims of child abuse were *really* not the opposite sex (none of them were, are, or ever will be) doesn't solve the child abuse aspect of gender ideology. 'Ah well turns out we started little Jimmy on a lifelong path of medical issues and infertility incorrectly because he wasn't deluded enough or adequately misled by all the adults around him about reality."
"Yes, based on your own past admission",- citation needed
Citation request denied. More than deserved courtesy already offered above. Offer subject to periodic review of offeree’s respect for other people’s pronouns.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.