LGBT Poll

So it's an SGBA poll, not LGBT.

how is asexual a sexual orientation ? :D

On October 20 2017 08:20 Spitfiree wrote: how is asexual a sexual orientation ? :D

I wonder what is the % of asexual ppl

LGBT the loudest most useless group of people.

I always thought it was 10%

On October 20 2017 10:06 wobbly_au wrote: LGBT the loudest most useless group of people.

why would they care about being useful for you

LGBTQABC123

On October 20 2017 10:06 wobbly_au wrote: LGBT the loudest most useless group of people.

poker players are a far more useless group of people if your thinking of contribution to society.

On October 20 2017 10:06 wobbly_au wrote: LGBT the loudest most useless group of people.

Just curious, how do you define someone's usefulness to society? And why would someone with a different sexual orientation be less useful somehow?

Both rhetorical questions of course, no need to answer.

On October 20 2017 09:34 Baalim wrote: I wonder what is the % of asexual ppl

I refuse to believe this exists. I can accept some people have a really low libido but to me claiming asexuality without some kind of clear hormonal disorder or medications just seems like a cop-out or otherwise saying "I don't get laid and don't plan on going out of my way to try" - which is fine but I don't buy that it can be a default setting for anyone.

I've met a couple who claimed to be and I totally believe them. they both have in common that I think they score pretty damn highly on autism/asberger spectrum.

They whine a lot, cost a lot for the state due to mental issues and high suicide rates. They are destructive to the family unit and they can’t reproduce.

Definitely a minus to be lgbt as oppose to straight.

your views are pretty disturbing wobbly.

-gay out earn hetero people, so they pay more in taxes.
-we are over-populated.

-males have higher suicide rate than females.
>> is it minus to be a male?

I have a worse impression of all the wobbly's I've seen than I have of any other group of people

On October 20 2017 21:05 Liquid`Drone wrote: I have a worse impression of all the wobbly's I've seen than I have of any other group of people

this, thousandfold

On October 20 2017 19:24 wobbly_au wrote: They whine a lot, cost a lot for the state due to mental issues and high suicide rates. They are destructive to the family unit and they can’t reproduce. Definitely a minus to be lgbt as oppose to straight.

I mean I used to hate opinions like that, however I somewhat agree with wobbly here

LGBT's have made their claims heard, they're not being mistreated, however they keep whining and being loud asking for needless attention on matters that dont mean shit.

The reproduction part is super dumb though, thats actually better for society at this point.

Not being mistreated lol? It's true that they have high suicide rates. That's a direct consequence of bullying.. Yes they are far more accepted than they were even a decade ago, but this is far from universal. Average high schooler in a liberal coastal city, sure, they accept gays. Average 50 year old in rural midwest, nope. I also don't think gay people are whining and being loud asking for needless attention on matters that don't mean shit, I feel you making that claim is basically you mistreating them.

4-5% seems way way too high

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra...ual_orientation#Modern_survey_results

seems to vary a lot, but naw, 4-5% does not seem too high. Seems like the number of people who identify as gay has increased quite drastically as society has become more accepting, though, which obviously makes sense. Modern studies seem to give higher than 4-5% for gay+bisexual in most accepting countries. I'm inclined to believe that there isn't actually that big a difference between countries in how many people actually are gay, that while there can be regional differences (cities having more than rural areas because gay people move to the more accepting urban areas), most countries overall should have about the same %. And then it'd seem like the numbers from the more accepting countries would be more likely to give the right number. And at least if you add gay+bisexual together, it seems like recent studies generally give at least 4-5%.

I don’t like groups of people that overwhine.

I also don’t like groups that get more than the rest of society, I think they are privledged.

I also think feminists are privileged.

Same views toward refugees or economic migrants from ME countries.

It doesn’t mean I hate or even dislike all females Muslims and lgbts. I just don’t like certain traits about them. Fuck me for being a conservative, racist, sexist, homophobe right?

Gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry, gender pay gap is a myth, abortion is murder. Pizzagate is real.

Omfg wobbly is a nazi.

Stroggoz I think your views along with the vocal majority are disturbing. But that’s ok we are allowed to have different opinions I hope.

On October 20 2017 22:46 Liquid`Drone wrote: Not being mistreated lol? It's true that they have high suicide rates. That's a direct consequence of bullying.. Yes they are far more accepted than they were even a decade ago, but this is far from universal. Average high schooler in a liberal coastal city, sure, they accept gays. Average 50 year old in rural midwest, nope. I also don't think gay people are whining and being loud asking for needless attention on matters that don't mean shit, I feel you making that claim is basically you mistreating them.

Nope the LGBT has become the same shit as SJW movements, oversensitive people crying for attention. It's the same as right-wing feminism nowadays.

If you think there s any movement that will change the views of a 50yo + then you're mistaken. People that age won't change their views on anything, let alone sexual orientation.

I'm sick and tired of having homosexual stuff shoved in my face yet not being given the opportunity to say anything bad about it. I honestly couldn't care less what people prefer to do in their bedrooms and i don't care about who you wanna marry, however when you ask society to treat you as something special then I'm not gonna be fine with that.

Also, there's nobody "born like that" ... there have been plenty of genetic studies showing that nobody's born homosexual. Which means that its something abnormal, which means that there could be a solution. And my main issue is that people would instantly bash me for calling it "abnormal" or a "problem", considering its something unnatural. Now obviously the research funds distributed to such a cause which finds a solution would be nonexistent since the same SJW will bash on them.

People like to judge quickly and jump from one extreme to the other, as if it's illogical to treat it as a problem, accepting people who are homosexual as they are while finding a solution for future generations.

So yeah there's that

On October 21 2017 00:01 Spitfiree wrote: Show nested quote + On October 20 2017 22:46 Liquid`Drone wrote: Not being mistreated lol? It's true that they have high suicide rates. That's a direct consequence of bullying.. Yes they are far more accepted than they were even a decade ago, but this is far from universal. Average high schooler in a liberal coastal city, sure, they accept gays. Average 50 year old in rural midwest, nope. I also don't think gay people are whining and being loud asking for needless attention on matters that don't mean shit, I feel you making that claim is basically you mistreating them. Nope the LGBT has become the same shit as SJW movements, oversensitive people crying for attention. It's the same as right-wing feminism nowadays. If you think there s any movement that will change the views of a 50yo + then you're mistaken. People that age won't change their views on anything, let alone sexual orientation. I'm sick and tired of having homosexual stuff shoved in my face yet not being given the opportunity to say anything bad about it. I honestly couldn't care less what people prefer to do in their bedrooms and i don't care about who you wanna marry, however when you ask society to treat you as something special then I'm not gonna be fine with that. Also, there's nobody "born like that" ... there have been plenty of genetic studies showing that nobody's born homosexual. Which means that its something abnormal, which means that there could be a solution. And my main issue is that people would instantly bash me for calling it "abnormal" or a "problem", considering its something unnatural. Now obviously the research funds distributed to such a cause which finds a solution would be nonexistent since the same SJW will bash on them. People like to judge quickly and jump from one extreme to the other, as if it's illogical to treat it as a problem, accepting people who are homosexual as they are while finding a solution for future generations. So yeah there's that

QFT

On October 20 2017 23:52 wobbly_au wrote: I don’t like groups of people that overwhine. I also don’t like groups that get more than the rest of society, I think they are privledged. I also think feminists are privileged. Same views toward refugees or economic migrants from ME countries. It doesn’t mean I hate or even dislike all females Muslims and lgbts. I just don’t like certain traits about them. Fuck me for being a conservative, racist, sexist, homophobe right?

but you used to make whine posts about running below ev all the time, imo you were overwhining since you still made a million. Also that makes you part of a group in society that has significant financial privileged over everyone else. Given your assumptions you should dislike yourself.

It's much harder to live life as a serious feminist (not a person who argues over twitter), than to do nothing. it is not a privilege, no one want's to give you any privileges for challenging injustices. If you take the time to contact some actual feminists they will probably take the time to explain in a rational and empirical way why you are wrong.

On October 21 2017 00:17 Stroggoz wrote: Show nested quote + On October 20 2017 23:52 wobbly_au wrote: I don’t like groups of people that overwhine. I also don’t like groups that get more than the rest of society, I think they are privledged. I also think feminists are privileged. Same views toward refugees or economic migrants from ME countries. It doesn’t mean I hate or even dislike all females Muslims and lgbts. I just don’t like certain traits about them. Fuck me for being a conservative, racist, sexist, homophobe right? but you used to make whine posts about running below ev all the time, imo you were overwhining since you still made a million. Also that makes you part of a group in society that has significant financial privileged over everyone else. Given your assumptions you should dislike yourself. It's much harder to live life as a serious feminist (not a person who argues over twitter), than to do nothing. it is not a privilege, no one want's to give you any privileges for challenging injustices. If you take the time to contact some actual feminists they will probably take the time to explain in a rational and empirical way why you are wrong.

Nothing against real feminists, but they are definitely not representative of feminism today. I worked hard for every damn dollar I dont think you understand what "privilege is" you should google it.

agree with wobbles 100%

edit: surprised at how many SJW leftist in lp

On October 21 2017 00:01 Spitfiree wrote: Show nested quote + On October 20 2017 22:46 Liquid`Drone wrote: Not being mistreated lol? It's true that they have high suicide rates. That's a direct consequence of bullying.. Yes they are far more accepted than they were even a decade ago, but this is far from universal. Average high schooler in a liberal coastal city, sure, they accept gays. Average 50 year old in rural midwest, nope. I also don't think gay people are whining and being loud asking for needless attention on matters that don't mean shit, I feel you making that claim is basically you mistreating them. Also, there's nobody "born like that" ... there have been plenty of genetic studies showing that nobody's born homosexual. Which means that its something abnormal, which means that there could be a solution. And my main issue is that people would instantly bash me for calling it "abnormal" or a "problem", considering its something unnatural. Now obviously the research funds distributed to such a cause which finds a solution would be nonexistent since the same SJW will bash on them.

im curious what studies you are reading. it was my understanding that most of the recent literature favors a biological/genetic component in sexuality

i should also point out that the word abnormal, at least in psychology (since you are eschewing biological causes), tends to only be applied to behavior that is considered maladaptive. it feels to me like you are using "abnormal" to mean "different", and if thats so - i dont think arguing that point of view as something that needs to be fixed will get very far. if you meant "abnormal" to mean maladaptive, then i suppose you mean it only in the sense that it's maladaptive mostly because society isnt all that onboard with it yet (i didnt think you meant it this way since you talked about not caring what people do in their own bedroom which means it wouldnt be a problem socially for you which means it wouldnt need fixing). i think a look back at history makes this argument not go very far either.

i guess you could argue homosexuality being maladaptive for different reasons but i dont really see it.

Spitfire, how are homosexuals asking to be treated as something special? They're asking to be treated as if they are normal.

On October 21 2017 01:36 Liquid`Drone wrote: Spitfire, how are homosexuals asking to be treated as something special? They're asking to be treated as if they are normal.

For one the recent bill that passed in California that decriminalized spreading HIV
Asking public funding to spread same sex marriage
Using public money to PROMOTE same sex.

On October 20 2017 19:24 wobbly_au wrote: They whine a lot, cost a lot for the state due to mental issues and high suicide rates. They are destructive to the family unit and they can’t reproduce. Definitely a minus to be lgbt as oppose to straight.

My half sister is a lesbian and she had in vitro fertilization. She reproduced and started a family.
How exactly is she destructive to the family unit?

On October 21 2017 03:12 deathstar wrote: Show nested quote + On October 20 2017 19:24 wobbly_au wrote: They whine a lot, cost a lot for the state due to mental issues and high suicide rates. They are destructive to the family unit and they can’t reproduce. Definitely a minus to be lgbt as oppose to straight. My half sister is a lesbian and she had in vitro fertilization. She reproduced and started a family. How exactly is she destructive to the family unit?

Nothing personal but my view is that a traditional unit with a father and a mother is better than having two mothers or two fathers. When both parents arent genetically connected to their offspring there are negative consequences.

On October 21 2017 03:59 wobbly_au wrote: Show nested quote + On October 21 2017 03:12 deathstar wrote:   On October 20 2017 19:24 wobbly_au wrote: They whine a lot, cost a lot for the state due to mental issues and high suicide rates. They are destructive to the family unit and they can’t reproduce. Definitely a minus to be lgbt as oppose to straight. My half sister is a lesbian and she had in vitro fertilization. She reproduced and started a family. How exactly is she destructive to the family unit? Nothing personal but my view is that a traditional unit with a father and a mother is better than having two mothers or two fathers. When both parents arent genetically connected to their offspring there are negative consequences.

Adoption is a really good thing. I don't know why you would say that it has negative consequences.
I know of father mother families, that are abusive, physically, verbally, towards their children. Mothers who are overbearing, controlling, shaming, not allowing a child self expression. Is common place in the tradition family unit.
A two mother or two father family would be less likely to be abusive imo, more accepting of their children for who they are instead of trying to clay model their children into success robots for sake of family pride and vanity.
Gender abuse is common place among traditional family units. While not so much for same sex family units.

On October 21 2017 01:36 Liquid`Drone wrote: Spitfire, how are homosexuals asking to be treated as something special? They're asking to be treated as if they are normal.

Do you live 30 years in the past? In what world are gays not treated as normal? In fact, worst case scenario gays get treated as normal. Average gays are treated much better than your average straight person. Society just fucking panders to any minority group that screams about how oppressed they are these days.

On October 21 2017 05:59 deathstar wrote: Show nested quote + On October 21 2017 03:59 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 21 2017 03:12 deathstar wrote:   On October 20 2017 19:24 wobbly_au wrote: They whine a lot, cost a lot for the state due to mental issues and high suicide rates. They are destructive to the family unit and they can’t reproduce. Definitely a minus to be lgbt as oppose to straight. My half sister is a lesbian and she had in vitro fertilization. She reproduced and started a family. How exactly is she destructive to the family unit? Nothing personal but my view is that a traditional unit with a father and a mother is better than having two mothers or two fathers. When both parents arent genetically connected to their offspring there are negative consequences. Adoption is a really good thing. I don't know why you would say that it has negative consequences. I know of father mother families, that are abusive, physically, verbally, towards their children. Mothers who are overbearing, controlling, shaming, not allowing a child self expression. Is common place in the tradition family unit. A two mother or two father family would be less likely to be abusive imo, more accepting of their children for who they are instead of trying to clay model their children into success robots for sake of family pride and vanity. Gender abuse is common place among traditional family units. While not so much for same sex family units.

Statistics don’t agree with you.

I just want to clarify that adoption isnt always bad, just saying its not AS GOOD or worse than not adopting when LGBT groups do it.

On October 21 2017 06:26 Trav94 wrote: Show nested quote + On October 21 2017 01:36 Liquid`Drone wrote: Spitfire, how are homosexuals asking to be treated as something special? They're asking to be treated as if they are normal. Do you live 30 years in the past? In what world are gays not treated as normal? In fact, worst case scenario gays get treated as normal. Average gays are treated much better than your average straight person. Society just fucking panders to any minority group that screams about how oppressed they are these days.

The gays in first world countries that are always screaming, "people are throwing gays off the buildings" gets me THE MOST.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kids-of-...dy-finds-but-draws-fire-from-experts/

But hush we can't talk about it, they are being oppressed.

I think you guys are conflating LGTB with SJW... being gay doesnt mean you are an activist 3rd wave femninist progressive, so be sure to direct your anger apropiatly.


I'm with Eri that gays are treated equally in young modern cities, but for example here in Mexico certanly not

Wobbly even if they fare worse compared to straight adoptions dont you think its an improvement over some government facility? If so, single mothers do worse than gay couples, so we should take children away from single moms to institutions? (I wouldnt be surprised if you said yes lol)

On October 20 2017 17:32 nolan wrote: Show nested quote + On October 20 2017 09:34 Baalim wrote: I wonder what is the % of asexual ppl I refuse to believe this exists. I can accept some people have a really low libido but to me claiming asexuality without some kind of clear hormonal disorder or medications just seems like a cop-out or otherwise saying "I don't get laid and don't plan on going out of my way to try" - which is fine but I don't buy that it can be a default setting for anyone.

Why do you refuse I mean, what if you have such a low libido that you genuinelly have no interest for anybody not women nor men, I mean I dont know if its a thing or not and I think most who claim they are are just being edgy but theres a gap between that and it literally not being a psychological condition like homosexuality

On October 21 2017 06:43 wobbly_au wrote: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kids-of-...dy-finds-but-draws-fire-from-experts/ But hush we can't talk about it, they are being oppressed.

theres nothing wrong with talking about it. having read through the actual study a bit - it seems they are including children who were born into a biological family, had their parents divorce and had one of those parents remarry/join into a same-sex relationship later as children raised by same-sex couples (i think this actually constituted the majority of children included in this group). that seems like a pretty serious methodological oversight (one of a few i think actually)

link to 79 papers, yours included, on the subject nicely laid out (75/4 finding that children fare no worse being raised by same-sex parents [no study among them being perfect])
http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/to...children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/

its far from proof but i think the research is promising and given the longitudinal nature of these studies and society gradually becoming accepting of lgbt couples it seems likely the data will continue to move favorably in this direction as time goes on. i guess you could argue that there is some biological preference in children that would make a man and a woman parental unit stronger than male/male female/female but i dont think even the papers that say that children fare worse in same-sex couples are espousing that (not even a fraction of enough data to even try currently)

On October 21 2017 06:26 Trav94 wrote: Show nested quote + On October 21 2017 01:36 Liquid`Drone wrote: Spitfire, how are homosexuals asking to be treated as something special? They're asking to be treated as if they are normal. Do you live 30 years in the past? In what world are gays not treated as normal? In fact, worst case scenario gays get treated as normal. Average gays are treated much better than your average straight person. Society just fucking panders to any minority group that screams about how oppressed they are these days.

I live in a region where gays are 'completely accepted', a university town in liberal Norway. Even then, in Norway, 'homo' (Norwegian for 'gay') is the most frequently used insult among guys in junior high schools. I'd be surprised if 'gay' or 'fag' aren't up there in the US, although there might have been enough awareness efforts the past 5-10 years for it to have dropped. Stuff like this actually is consequential - guys growing up finding out that they are gay end up feeling like they are hated because everyone keeps using them as an insult. It's kinda like if I started calling out stupidity on this forum by saying 'man, you're such a fucking trav94 right now', you'd actually be right to feel insulted by that.

Also, this very thread imo counts as evidence that gays are not treated normally. A bunch of you guys saw a thread about homosexuality and immediately took the chance to complain about how gay people are whining and screaming about how oppressed they are. Personally, that's something I don't see at all.

Holy shit at the amount of ignorance in here. It hurts to read. Site was better when it was dead with 5 people posting.

On October 21 2017 09:33 Loco wrote: Holy shit at the amount of ignorance in here. It hurts to read. Site was better when it was dead with 5 people posting.

Totally agree with you.

On October 21 2017 03:59 wobbly_au wrote: Nothing personal but my view is that a traditional unit with a father and a mother is better than having two mothers or two fathers. When both parents arent genetically connected to their offspring there are negative consequences.

How about abused adopted children growing up with loving parents? Btw, are you religious?

I agree that two gay parents are better than one, I was personally raised by a single mom. That said taking away a child from a parent and adopting a new child into the family is completely different.

I’m atheist. Not religious at all, but I think family unit is critical to society.

Site is better when it’s echo chamber?

Was agreeing more to the "Holy shit at the amount of ignorance in here. It hurts to read" aspect.

I don't know what sort of lgbt heaven you people live in but here in greece things are not at all so shiny
lol @ the guy talking about lp SJW leftists. I bet that it's so relaxing to preemptively put everyone that disagrees with you in the same "evil" group of people. Later of course you'll QQ when someone calls you a nazi

I also didn't expect Spitfire to make the standard ignorant "unnatural" comment, I'm still waiting to see what he or anyone who agreed replies to PoorUser
While he commented on the use of the word "abnormal" I think the use of "unnatural" makes even less sense. Just check out what happens in nature man, not that it has any relevance whatsoever with what people should be doing

to be fair being a nazi is objectively worse than even the worst parodies of SJW leftists, and it takes a pretty damn shitty person to not see that. ;p

I'm not commenting at all on the qualities of nazis or SJWs tbh. It's the polarizing "us and them" mentality and the cheap trick of generalizing one's specific argument (so that they belong to a group that's trendy to hate) that tilts me. Shitty thing is that it's the bread and butter technique of most people actively involved with politics

Agreed. I think the use of the SJW term is ridiculous in general, and I think leftists who describe people as nazis for being (even extremely) opposed to immigration have a very flawed understanding of how bad the nazis actually were. Godwining is a good way to end a debate, little more.

On October 21 2017 01:18 PoorUser wrote: Show nested quote + On October 21 2017 00:01 Spitfiree wrote:   On October 20 2017 22:46 Liquid`Drone wrote: Not being mistreated lol? It's true that they have high suicide rates. That's a direct consequence of bullying.. Yes they are far more accepted than they were even a decade ago, but this is far from universal. Average high schooler in a liberal coastal city, sure, they accept gays. Average 50 year old in rural midwest, nope. I also don't think gay people are whining and being loud asking for needless attention on matters that don't mean shit, I feel you making that claim is basically you mistreating them. Also, there's nobody "born like that" ... there have been plenty of genetic studies showing that nobody's born homosexual. Which means that its something abnormal, which means that there could be a solution. And my main issue is that people would instantly bash me for calling it "abnormal" or a "problem", considering its something unnatural. Now obviously the research funds distributed to such a cause which finds a solution would be nonexistent since the same SJW will bash on them. im curious what studies you are reading. it was my understanding that most of the recent literature favors a biological/genetic component in sexuality i should also point out that the word abnormal, at least in psychology (since you are eschewing biological causes), tends to only be applied to behavior that is considered maladaptive. it feels to me like you are using "abnormal" to mean "different", and if thats so - i dont think arguing that point of view as something that needs to be fixed will get very far. if you meant "abnormal" to mean maladaptive, then i suppose you mean it only in the sense that it's maladaptive mostly because society isnt all that onboard with it yet (i didnt think you meant it this way since you talked about not caring what people do in their own bedroom which means it wouldnt be a problem socially for you which means it wouldnt need fixing). i think a look back at history makes this argument not go very far either. i guess you could argue homosexuality being maladaptive for different reasons but i dont really see it.

I'm kind of between the two "lines". Just because its not genetical, doesn't mean it cant be a biological problem e.g. hormone imbalances leading to it etc... Once its actually proven why are people homosexual then you could classify it either as a health problem/mental problem or something purely natural. At this point neither of those has enough data to prove it as a fact.

So what my problem is that the simple idea of homosexuality possibly being a "disease" would be completely unacceptable which is hilarious. As if it possibly being a disease, yet treating each homosexual as a normal fucking person is something completely unacceptable - this kind of mentality is why the whole LGBT movement is a joke as well. I like to think of myself as a rational person, yet the rationality behind their beliefs is simply non-existent.

You can't claim something which has not been proven. That doesn't mean that we should swing between extremes.

On October 21 2017 11:51 lebowski wrote: I also didn't expect Spitfire to make the standard ignorant "unnatural" comment, I'm still waiting to see what he or anyone who agreed replies to PoorUser While he commented on the use of the word "abnormal" I think the use of "unnatural" makes even less sense. Just check out what happens in nature man, not that it has any relevance whatsoever with what people should be doing

The thing is, I've got as much right calling it unnatural as people calling it natural. There's no evidence proving either. I'm all for actually finding out what the source is. That doesn't mean we should mistreat people though.

@ Baal

I agree, there s plenty of countries that the homosexuals arent accepted. Eastern Europe is a good example, football fans were beating people in the parades until like 3-4 years ago, obviously thats unacceptable, however the LGBT movement tries to "standardize" their methods into seeking acceptance. You won't get acceptance of idiots by publicly demonstrating yourself. What you will do is piss them off even more. What you should be aiming for instead is purely legal and political actions - raise awareness in youth bla bla. All of the shit that has been proven to work with other topics.

And on another note:



I don't like being censored either. It's completely unacceptable to not be able to use certain words because a group of people is not okay with that. Fuck that shit. And believe me I don't only think about the LGBT demands here, they're probably at the bottom of the list of "importance", but still there.


edit:

I actually think I contradict myself a bit, as heterosexuals are taken as a "standard" for normality. Obviously that whole idea/view could be changed on an empirical level.

I never forget a person who uses the "f" word.

On October 21 2017 15:42 Spitfiree wrote: The thing is, I've got as much right calling it unnatural as people calling it natural. There's no evidence proving either. I'm all for actually finding out what the source is. That doesn't mean we should mistreat people though.

obviously we're not debating if you are free to use the words you like. With what definition of "natural" is homosexuality is unnatural though and how is it relevant? Because this smells like naturalistic fallacy to me.
If homosexuality was in some way to be considered a disease, it would only be because it really sucks to be a homosexual in terms of society accepting you (which was worse in the past admittedly). If it causes no harm to a person otherwise, why would you choose calling it that?

LGBT poles

+ Show Spoiler +

On October 21 2017 18:06 lebowski wrote: Show nested quote + On October 21 2017 15:42 Spitfiree wrote: The thing is, I've got as much right calling it unnatural as people calling it natural. There's no evidence proving either. I'm all for actually finding out what the source is. That doesn't mean we should mistreat people though. obviously we're not debating if you are free to use the words you like. With what definition of "natural" is homosexuality is unnatural though and how is it relevant? Because this smells like naturalistic fallacy to me. If homosexuality was in some way to be considered a disease, it would only be because it really sucks to be a homosexual in terms of society accepting you (which was worse in the past admittedly). If it causes no harm to a person otherwise, why would you choose calling it that?

First, yeah you and me both live on the Balkans and political correctness doesn't really exist here, at least not on that level as in Western EU/ USA/Canada etc. - so we're able to express ourselves freely without looking like bigots - thats not the case in the countries that I've listed.

In terms of social acceptance, I believe people that don't accept homosexuals to be simply ignorant or dumb for reasons I don't believe necessary to explain here. However what IF .. just IF homosexuality is actually a disease cause by something? The political correctness simply limits society to explore that possibility to begin with.

^ You went from saying that it's "illogical to [not] treat it as a problem" to saying "what IF.. IF it's a disease?". As if you had only merely suggested from the beginning that we can't ever rule something out 100%. You were much more explicit than that.

In any sensible discussion, what you're saying here is completely ungrounded and irrelevant. It's like if I said, what if.. just WHAT IF we are all actually mentally ill, living in a simulation that has us think we are not mentally ill!? The only difference between my hypothesis and yours is that I'm very unlikely to hurt someone by presenting mine (maybe just the rare person with severe OCD who freaks out because he can't get the simulation idea out of his head). If you think what you've said here is grounded in anything it's a really dodgy Darwinism and you're not just at the fringe of anti-PC outrage, you've fallen off.

Let me point out the obviously relevant here, the position of the APA on homosexuality:

No credible evidence exists that any mental health intervention can reliably and safely change sexual orientation; nor, from a mental health perspective does sexual orientation need to be changed.

"Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent." - Ludwig Wittgenstein

It's exactly your type of mentality that bothers me on this topic. Allowing the possibility of it being a disease doesn't mean you treat it as a disease/problem until its actually proven.

Science s built upon logical beliefs and theoretically allowing them to be possible, they are only taken as a fact after enough evidence is given though. It's the exact same situation. I'm completely ignoring the social side of the question at this point... If I have to think about hurting someone's feelings everytime I propose an idea then we get to the same situation that came with the SJW in the USA.

Being homosexual is not something that can be cured, even though many over the ages claimed as such and tried to do so. Therefore it's not a disease. Really not that hard to understand, unless you don't want to, tbh.

On October 22 2017 14:15 Naib wrote: Being homosexual is not something that can be cured, even though many over the ages claimed as such and tried to do so. Therefore it's not a disease. Really not that hard to understand, unless you don't want to, tbh.

similarly multiple sclerosis can't be cured so it's not a disease

No, the attempted "cures" you are referring to are absurd. Just because someone tried to attempt to "cure" it doesn't mean it made any sense. People were walking in shit in France for decades and that's why the high heels were invented. Yet the much simpler solution was to improve the fucking infrastructure.

Homosexuality isn't understood how the fuck would you have any steps afterward. The propaganda went from "hate the gays" to "love the gays" in the past hundred years yet nobody actually managed to understand it. That's the absurd part. It's the same with depression, for example, even though there's much more data on how to handle that, yet its still ignored ( obviously thats a whole other topic and not an example to be taken literally as it is a mental problem)

On October 22 2017 17:23 Spitfiree wrote: People were walking in shit in France for decades and that's why the high heels were invented. Yet the much simpler solution was to improve the fucking infrastructure.

how is it simpler though? i think almost anyone who's capable of walking could learn to walk in high heels. but how many people are capable of improving an entire country's infrastructure? that sounds pretty complicated tbh.

What are you even getting at Spitfiree? It isn't "understood" therefore...? Are you proposing something? Spend a bunch of resources to understand and possibly "fix" those "abnormal" people? Surely not.

You know what else isn't understood? The fact that you exist, the fact that all of this exists and how it came to be. And pretty much everything afterward. So what you meant to say is, "the Big Bang and abiogenesis isn't understood therefore how the fuck would you have any steps afterward. Or again, "We don't understand consciousness so therefore you might be thinking you are not mentally ill when in fact you are a diseased and deluded brain in a vat!"

The question is not about openmindedness but about relevance. Is it a relevant question to ask in the first place? We can ask silly, irrelevant questions all day. Why is it relevant to consider homosexuality as a possible illness? I'd argue that it's relevant only if you have some evidence that it's a problem, and you're planning to act upon it. Is it fair to you to say that those who have acted upon it, rather than accepted it for what it is, have not done a lot of good? And what is the evidence that suggests it might be a problem?
Why should we take the idea seriously that homosexuality is a problem? Why should we take it more seriously than the simulation idea I presented?

On October 23 2017 09:06 Loco wrote: What are you even getting at Spitfiree? It isn't "understood" therefore...? Are you proposing something? Spend a bunch of resources to understand and possibly "fix" those "abnormal" people? Surely not. You know what else isn't understood? The fact that you exist, the fact that all of this exists and how it came to be. And pretty much everything afterward. So what you meant to say is, "the Big Bang and abiogenesis isn't understood therefore how the fuck would you have any steps afterward. Or again, "We don't understand consciousness so therefore you might be thinking you are not mentally ill when in fact you are a diseased and deluded brain in a vat!" The question is not about openmindedness but about relevance. Is it a relevant question to ask in the first place? We can ask silly, irrelevant questions all day. Why is it relevant to consider homosexuality as a possible illness? I'd argue that it's relevant only if you have some evidence that it's a problem, and you're planning to act upon it. Is it fair to you to say that those who have acted upon it, rather than accepted it for what it is, have not done a lot of good? And what is the evidence that suggests it might be a problem? Why should we take the idea seriously that homosexuality is a problem? Why should we take it more seriously than the simulation idea I presented?

Because the promotion of the LGBT agenda is costing tax payers money.

I don't know if the LGBT agenda is costing people money, as there would be too many passive factors to evaluate e.g. unrealized profits due to employees not accepting homosexual workforce etc. and it would be an unrealistic and irrelevant opinion without those. What I do know is that you can't also measure the relevance on a topic, which we don't even understand.

And on another note society doesn't really work on relevance, that s a utopia, I agree with you Loco but who is it to say that a certain topic is irrelevant exactly? Considering this is a major topic for decades now, it surely doesn't really strike me as irrelevant either.

I didn't claim that the topic was irrelevant. I specifically asked how you believe it's relevant to consider homosexuality a possible problem ipso facto. It's not the same thing at all. It just seems clear to me like there's no cause for concern (unless they are being harmed, of course).

On October 23 2017 09:19 wobbly_au wrote: Show nested quote + On October 23 2017 09:06 Loco wrote: What are you even getting at Spitfiree? It isn't "understood" therefore...? Are you proposing something? Spend a bunch of resources to understand and possibly "fix" those "abnormal" people? Surely not. You know what else isn't understood? The fact that you exist, the fact that all of this exists and how it came to be. And pretty much everything afterward. So what you meant to say is, "the Big Bang and abiogenesis isn't understood therefore how the fuck would you have any steps afterward. Or again, "We don't understand consciousness so therefore you might be thinking you are not mentally ill when in fact you are a diseased and deluded brain in a vat!" The question is not about openmindedness but about relevance. Is it a relevant question to ask in the first place? We can ask silly, irrelevant questions all day. Why is it relevant to consider homosexuality as a possible illness? I'd argue that it's relevant only if you have some evidence that it's a problem, and you're planning to act upon it. Is it fair to you to say that those who have acted upon it, rather than accepted it for what it is, have not done a lot of good? And what is the evidence that suggests it might be a problem? Why should we take the idea seriously that homosexuality is a problem? Why should we take it more seriously than the simulation idea I presented? Because the promotion of the LGBT agenda is costing tax payers money.

Is that supposed to be an argument? It's just a descriptive statement. What do you suggest? So what if they do? Anti-bullying campaigns cost tax payers money too, do you want them gone everywhere including the schools you'll be sending your children to? I mean, they probably won't need it right? Because their dad is such a tough guy and they're going to be just like daddy. No chance your kids might be LGBT either, you got it all under control I bet.

trying not to get dragged into this thread because it's such a waste of time heh.

I think it is a good thing that tax money is spent on any sort of LGBT agenda. The money is minimal, and they make up something like 4-5% of the population, i guess. 30 years ago homosexuality was decriminalised in my country. if a tiny % of tax money is spent so that 4% of people (who are taxpayers themselves) can freely pursue a significant part of their life, with criminal charges or harassment, or discrimination, then i think that is a very efficient way to spend money. I thought that homosexuals had basically achieved their rights at this point, but if there are still wobblies and spitfires, then i guess i there is still some progress to be made.

ideally we should try to live in a society that maximizes liberty. (not going to get into a political philosophy discussion questioning assumptions on this), and tax money being spent on that is a good thing, and it seems like a very efficient uses of resources because the money spent is insignificant compared to the liberty gained.

Its funny how you managed to insult me and confirm my exact point of view both in the same post.

On October 23 2017 14:29 Loco wrote: I didn't claim that the topic was irrelevant. I specifically asked how you believe it's relevant to consider homosexuality a possible problem ipso facto. It's not the same thing at all. It just seems clear to me like there's no cause for concern (unless they are being harmed, of course). Show nested quote + On October 23 2017 09:19 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 23 2017 09:06 Loco wrote: What are you even getting at Spitfiree? It isn't "understood" therefore...? Are you proposing something? Spend a bunch of resources to understand and possibly "fix" those "abnormal" people? Surely not. You know what else isn't understood? The fact that you exist, the fact that all of this exists and how it came to be. And pretty much everything afterward. So what you meant to say is, "the Big Bang and abiogenesis isn't understood therefore how the fuck would you have any steps afterward. Or again, "We don't understand consciousness so therefore you might be thinking you are not mentally ill when in fact you are a diseased and deluded brain in a vat!" The question is not about openmindedness but about relevance. Is it a relevant question to ask in the first place? We can ask silly, irrelevant questions all day. Why is it relevant to consider homosexuality as a possible illness? I'd argue that it's relevant only if you have some evidence that it's a problem, and you're planning to act upon it. Is it fair to you to say that those who have acted upon it, rather than accepted it for what it is, have not done a lot of good? And what is the evidence that suggests it might be a problem? Why should we take the idea seriously that homosexuality is a problem? Why should we take it more seriously than the simulation idea I presented? Because the promotion of the LGBT agenda is costing tax payers money. Is that supposed to be an argument? It's just a descriptive statement. What do you suggest? So what if they do? Anti-bullying campaigns cost tax payers money too, do you want them gone everywhere including the schools you'll be sending your children to? I mean, they probably won't need it right? Because their dad is such a tough guy and they're going to be just like daddy. No chance your kids might be LGBT either, you got it all under control I bet.

Lol what’s my kids got to do with this? I don’t want my tax money going to trans toilets or gay rights marches or gay parades. So now you are comparing that to basic need such as schooling?

Hard to take your views seriously after this one

On October 23 2017 18:32 Stroggoz wrote: trying not to get dragged into this thread because it's such a waste of time heh. I think it is a good thing that tax money is spent on any sort of LGBT agenda. The money is minimal, and they make up something like 4-5% of the population, i guess. 30 years ago homosexuality was decriminalised in my country. if a tiny % of tax money is spent so that 4% of people (who are taxpayers themselves) can freely pursue a significant part of their life, with criminal charges or harassment, or discrimination, then i think that is a very efficient way to spend money. I thought that homosexuals had basically achieved their rights at this point, but if there are still wobblies and spitfires, then i guess i there is still some progress to be made. ideally we should try to live in a society that maximizes liberty. (not going to get into a political philosophy discussion questioning assumptions on this), and tax money being spent on that is a good thing, and it seems like a very efficient uses of resources because the money spent is insignificant compared to the liberty gained.

I’m all for libertys. Governments should stay out of my life and stop slamming me with lgbt and stop promoting their way of life. Everyone can do as they please if it doesn’t hurt each other but don’t pretend being lgbt is the superior or even normal way to live.

Also just because we were headed in the right direct for the last 30 years doesn’t mean we haven’t done all we can and now gone way too extreme. Proposing trans toilets or decriminalizing the intentional spreading of hiv. Same issue as modern feminists as compared to the much needed movement of the first wave feminists.

You are making this issue personal, my views are so disgusting and different to yours that you feel compelled to insult it. Just because I don’t want my tax money spent on lgbt or female rights or refugees doesn’t mean I don’t like all gays women or Muslims. I’m fine with you not wanting to spend more tax money on things I think are more important.

I especially don’t want lgbt bullshit genders taught in public school which they currently are.

The left are using the cover of being progressive to normalize degenerate and harmful views.

On October 24 2017 00:55 wobbly_au wrote: I especially don’t want lgbt bullshit genders taught in public school which they currently are. The left are using the cover f progressive views to normalize degenerate and harmful views.

Being gay or transgender is not harmful or degenerate.
What bullshit genders are you talking about?

I say it is you say it isn't. (Infinite loop, but I'm okay with that)

Im talking about the nonsense with gender fluidity and how it is being taught in sexed classes. Im talking about Bill Nye representing science education to kids teaching it on netflix. Im talking about parents giving their child and teens hormone therapy. Im talking about the public promotion and normalizing of LGBT.

You all seem to think you're so fucking smart and enlightened.

None of you will sway your views.

What's the fucking point of you guys discussing?

Sounds like a bunch of fucking pots banging against each other to be honest.

On October 21 2017 12:11 Liquid`Drone wrote: to be fair being a nazi is objectively worse than even the worst parodies of SJW leftists, and it takes a pretty damn shitty person to not see that. ;p

we are discussing shit here but I've seen many SJW openly support hard communism, gulags and stuff like that and its arguably an even worse ideology

I'm curious wobbly why do you think gays shouldnt marry?

I mean I disagree but understand the argument about adoption, but mariage? I simply cannot fathom a logical argument that isnt based in crooked morality.

Homosexuality is so facinating from the evolutionary point of view, I've seen Richard Dawkins saying that the theory comes from usually manlier men going hunting and stuff like that while the less masculine men kept more around women and in this way they kept spreading a gene that theoreticallly should dissapear, but that doesnt sound like a solid theory and the incidence is soooo high, it puzzles me.

On October 24 2017 05:15 Baalim wrote: I'm curious wobbly why do you think gays shouldnt marry? I mean I disagree but understand the argument about adoption, but mariage? I simply cannot fathom a logical argument that isnt based in crooked morality.

I think state shouldnt have a say as to who should marry or who shouldn't its the private decision between two consenting people. That said I was connecting marriage with family, if gays marry and dont adopt or do IVF then im all fine for that.

On October 24 2017 02:25 wobbly_au wrote: I say it is you say it isn't. (Infinite loop, but I'm okay with that) Im talking about the nonsense with gender fluidity and how it is being taught in sexed classes. Im talking about Bill Nye representing science education to kids teaching it on netflix. Im talking about parents giving their child and teens hormone therapy. Im talking about the public promotion and normalizing of LGBT.

are you a troll?
"Im talking about parents giving their child and teens hormone therapy."
Have you ever talked to a transperson about what the wrong puberty is like? I'm transgender. It was torture. I had 100s of suicidal thoughts everyday during puberty with no awareness of a self. I wish I could go back in time and just tell my foster parents that I'm a girl that I need the correct hormones in my body. But it was an all boys home. All girl things were forbidden. Androgyny was forbidden. Homosexuality was forbidden. Even long hair was forbidden.
I left that school when my father got out of prison. He encouraged me to play poker and so I did. I was rank 1 on pokerstars in 2010 for mtt after playing for 3 months. But my feelings of nothingness, misery and suicidal depression continued all the way from age 12 to age 30 when I found out I have a self and that I'm female.
Now I'm playing poker again after a 7 year hiatus saving money to have surgery. I'm a redhead so laser hair removal doesn't work for me. I have to do electrolysis. having hairs removed from my face 1 at a time. Its about 50% as painful as a bee sting. I cry and pray to god for strength to get through 30 minutes of electrolysis. And there are some 10,000 hairs to remove. This is the result of being born with the wrong reproductive organs and not having hormone treatment during my teens.
A lot of untold misery and suffering in adulthood would of been avoided if I was just allowed to be myself as a child and a teen.
I can't wait to have my adam's apple shaved. I think I'll finally pass and be able to wear skirts in public without having to worry about being physically assaulted by men I don't even know. I hate wearing pants.
My hair has grown the longest its ever been. I want to grow it longer.

I think normalizing LGBT is healthy for society because it will reduce suicide/homicide rates.

On October 24 2017 06:47 deathstar wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 02:25 wobbly_au wrote: I say it is you say it isn't. (Infinite loop, but I'm okay with that) Im talking about the nonsense with gender fluidity and how it is being taught in sexed classes. Im talking about Bill Nye representing science education to kids teaching it on netflix. Im talking about parents giving their child and teens hormone therapy. Im talking about the public promotion and normalizing of LGBT. are you a troll? "Im talking about parents giving their child and teens hormone therapy." Have you ever talked to a transperson about what the wrong puberty is like? I'm transgender. It was torture. I had 100s of suicidal thoughts everyday during puberty with no awareness of a self. I wish I could go back in time and just tell my foster parents that I'm a girl that I need the correct hormones in my body. But it was an all boys home. All girl things were forbidden. Androgyny was forbidden. Homosexuality was forbidden. Even long hair was forbidden. I left that school when my father got out of prison. He encouraged me to play poker and so I did. I was rank 1 on pokerstars in 2010 for mtt after playing for 3 months. But my feelings of nothingness, misery and suicidal depression continued all the way from age 12 to age 30 when I found out I have a self and that I'm female. Now I'm playing poker again after a 7 year hiatus saving money to have surgery. I'm a redhead so laser hair removal doesn't work for me. I have to do electrolysis. having hairs removed from my face 1 at a time. Its about 50% as painful as a bee sting. I often cry and pray to god for strength to get through 30 minutes of electrolysis. And there are some 10,000 hairs to remove. A lot of untold misery and suffering in adulthood would of been avoided if I was just allowed to be myself as a child and a teen but that was forbidden. I can't wait to have my adam's apple shaved. I think I'll finally pass and be able to wear skirts in public without having to worry about being physically assaulted by men I don't even know. I hate wearing pants. My hair has grown the longest its ever been. I think normalizing LGBT is healthy for society because it will reduce suicide/homicide rates.

That’s a sad story, but no amount of surgery or therapy will turn you into a women. Life played a cruel trick on you, you got dealt.a shit hand I hope you overcome it. But I do not hope being trans is promoted or normalized nor do I wish kids to get hormone treatment or taught about transgender or other sexual orientations.

On October 24 2017 07:08 wobbly_au wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 06:47 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 02:25 wobbly_au wrote: I say it is you say it isn't. (Infinite loop, but I'm okay with that) Im talking about the nonsense with gender fluidity and how it is being taught in sexed classes. Im talking about Bill Nye representing science education to kids teaching it on netflix. Im talking about parents giving their child and teens hormone therapy. Im talking about the public promotion and normalizing of LGBT. are you a troll? "Im talking about parents giving their child and teens hormone therapy." Have you ever talked to a transperson about what the wrong puberty is like? I'm transgender. It was torture. I had 100s of suicidal thoughts everyday during puberty with no awareness of a self. I wish I could go back in time and just tell my foster parents that I'm a girl that I need the correct hormones in my body. But it was an all boys home. All girl things were forbidden. Androgyny was forbidden. Homosexuality was forbidden. Even long hair was forbidden. I left that school when my father got out of prison. He encouraged me to play poker and so I did. I was rank 1 on pokerstars in 2010 for mtt after playing for 3 months. But my feelings of nothingness, misery and suicidal depression continued all the way from age 12 to age 30 when I found out I have a self and that I'm female. Now I'm playing poker again after a 7 year hiatus saving money to have surgery. I'm a redhead so laser hair removal doesn't work for me. I have to do electrolysis. having hairs removed from my face 1 at a time. Its about 50% as painful as a bee sting. I often cry and pray to god for strength to get through 30 minutes of electrolysis. And there are some 10,000 hairs to remove. A lot of untold misery and suffering in adulthood would of been avoided if I was just allowed to be myself as a child and a teen but that was forbidden. I can't wait to have my adam's apple shaved. I think I'll finally pass and be able to wear skirts in public without having to worry about being physically assaulted by men I don't even know. I hate wearing pants. My hair has grown the longest its ever been. I think normalizing LGBT is healthy for society because it will reduce suicide/homicide rates. That’s a sad story, but no amount of surgery or therapy will turn you into a women. Life played a cruel trick on you, you got dealt.a shit hand I hope you overcome it. But I do not hope being trans is promoted or normalized nor do I wish kids to get hormone treatment or taught about transgender or other sexual orientations.

Because I lack a uterus?

Plus you got issues outside of sexual alignment, you are living with foster parents with a dad in prison. In a better family with better role models maybe you would have been a better man and not so confused.

On October 24 2017 07:10 deathstar wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 07:08 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 06:47 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 02:25 wobbly_au wrote: I say it is you say it isn't. (Infinite loop, but I'm okay with that) Im talking about the nonsense with gender fluidity and how it is being taught in sexed classes. Im talking about Bill Nye representing science education to kids teaching it on netflix. Im talking about parents giving their child and teens hormone therapy. Im talking about the public promotion and normalizing of LGBT. are you a troll? "Im talking about parents giving their child and teens hormone therapy." Have you ever talked to a transperson about what the wrong puberty is like? I'm transgender. It was torture. I had 100s of suicidal thoughts everyday during puberty with no awareness of a self. I wish I could go back in time and just tell my foster parents that I'm a girl that I need the correct hormones in my body. But it was an all boys home. All girl things were forbidden. Androgyny was forbidden. Homosexuality was forbidden. Even long hair was forbidden. I left that school when my father got out of prison. He encouraged me to play poker and so I did. I was rank 1 on pokerstars in 2010 for mtt after playing for 3 months. But my feelings of nothingness, misery and suicidal depression continued all the way from age 12 to age 30 when I found out I have a self and that I'm female. Now I'm playing poker again after a 7 year hiatus saving money to have surgery. I'm a redhead so laser hair removal doesn't work for me. I have to do electrolysis. having hairs removed from my face 1 at a time. Its about 50% as painful as a bee sting. I often cry and pray to god for strength to get through 30 minutes of electrolysis. And there are some 10,000 hairs to remove. A lot of untold misery and suffering in adulthood would of been avoided if I was just allowed to be myself as a child and a teen but that was forbidden. I can't wait to have my adam's apple shaved. I think I'll finally pass and be able to wear skirts in public without having to worry about being physically assaulted by men I don't even know. I hate wearing pants. My hair has grown the longest its ever been. I think normalizing LGBT is healthy for society because it will reduce suicide/homicide rates. That’s a sad story, but no amount of surgery or therapy will turn you into a women. Life played a cruel trick on you, you got dealt.a shit hand I hope you overcome it. But I do not hope being trans is promoted or normalized nor do I wish kids to get hormone treatment or taught about transgender or other sexual orientations. Because I lack a uterus?

Because of your DNA structure.

On October 24 2017 07:11 wobbly_au wrote: Plus you got issues outside of sexual alignment, you are living with foster parents with a dad in prison. In a better family with better role models maybe you would have been a better man and not so confused.

Ok you made me laugh.

On October 24 2017 07:13 deathstar wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 07:11 wobbly_au wrote: Plus you got issues outside of sexual alignment, you are living with foster parents with a dad in prison. In a better family with better role models maybe you would have been a better man and not so confused. Ok you made me laugh.

It’s the truth. Tell me about your mum, where is she? Did she die or did she abandon you? Why was your dad locked up? These seem like contributing factors to your illness.

If you would rather goto PMs since this is very personal for you I won’t mind but I am curious to hear from a trans person.

On October 24 2017 07:12 wobbly_au wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 07:10 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 07:08 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 06:47 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 02:25 wobbly_au wrote: I say it is you say it isn't. (Infinite loop, but I'm okay with that) Im talking about the nonsense with gender fluidity and how it is being taught in sexed classes. Im talking about Bill Nye representing science education to kids teaching it on netflix. Im talking about parents giving their child and teens hormone therapy. Im talking about the public promotion and normalizing of LGBT. are you a troll? "Im talking about parents giving their child and teens hormone therapy." Have you ever talked to a transperson about what the wrong puberty is like? I'm transgender. It was torture. I had 100s of suicidal thoughts everyday during puberty with no awareness of a self. I wish I could go back in time and just tell my foster parents that I'm a girl that I need the correct hormones in my body. But it was an all boys home. All girl things were forbidden. Androgyny was forbidden. Homosexuality was forbidden. Even long hair was forbidden. I left that school when my father got out of prison. He encouraged me to play poker and so I did. I was rank 1 on pokerstars in 2010 for mtt after playing for 3 months. But my feelings of nothingness, misery and suicidal depression continued all the way from age 12 to age 30 when I found out I have a self and that I'm female. Now I'm playing poker again after a 7 year hiatus saving money to have surgery. I'm a redhead so laser hair removal doesn't work for me. I have to do electrolysis. having hairs removed from my face 1 at a time. Its about 50% as painful as a bee sting. I often cry and pray to god for strength to get through 30 minutes of electrolysis. And there are some 10,000 hairs to remove. A lot of untold misery and suffering in adulthood would of been avoided if I was just allowed to be myself as a child and a teen but that was forbidden. I can't wait to have my adam's apple shaved. I think I'll finally pass and be able to wear skirts in public without having to worry about being physically assaulted by men I don't even know. I hate wearing pants. My hair has grown the longest its ever been. I think normalizing LGBT is healthy for society because it will reduce suicide/homicide rates. That’s a sad story, but no amount of surgery or therapy will turn you into a women. Life played a cruel trick on you, you got dealt.a shit hand I hope you overcome it. But I do not hope being trans is promoted or normalized nor do I wish kids to get hormone treatment or taught about transgender or other sexual orientations. Because I lack a uterus? Because of your DNA structure.

DNA determines sex, sex can be changed surgically.
Whats your problem with acceptance of LGBT people?
Its important that gender be explored for kids. There's a 1/200 chance the kid is transgender. Gender exploration increases self awareness.
I wish I had gender exploration and hormone treatment. You wish I didn't have hormone treatment?

On October 24 2017 07:30 deathstar wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 07:12 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 07:10 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 07:08 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 06:47 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 02:25 wobbly_au wrote: I say it is you say it isn't. (Infinite loop, but I'm okay with that) Im talking about the nonsense with gender fluidity and how it is being taught in sexed classes. Im talking about Bill Nye representing science education to kids teaching it on netflix. Im talking about parents giving their child and teens hormone therapy. Im talking about the public promotion and normalizing of LGBT. are you a troll? "Im talking about parents giving their child and teens hormone therapy." Have you ever talked to a transperson about what the wrong puberty is like? I'm transgender. It was torture. I had 100s of suicidal thoughts everyday during puberty with no awareness of a self. I wish I could go back in time and just tell my foster parents that I'm a girl that I need the correct hormones in my body. But it was an all boys home. All girl things were forbidden. Androgyny was forbidden. Homosexuality was forbidden. Even long hair was forbidden. I left that school when my father got out of prison. He encouraged me to play poker and so I did. I was rank 1 on pokerstars in 2010 for mtt after playing for 3 months. But my feelings of nothingness, misery and suicidal depression continued all the way from age 12 to age 30 when I found out I have a self and that I'm female. Now I'm playing poker again after a 7 year hiatus saving money to have surgery. I'm a redhead so laser hair removal doesn't work for me. I have to do electrolysis. having hairs removed from my face 1 at a time. Its about 50% as painful as a bee sting. I often cry and pray to god for strength to get through 30 minutes of electrolysis. And there are some 10,000 hairs to remove. A lot of untold misery and suffering in adulthood would of been avoided if I was just allowed to be myself as a child and a teen but that was forbidden. I can't wait to have my adam's apple shaved. I think I'll finally pass and be able to wear skirts in public without having to worry about being physically assaulted by men I don't even know. I hate wearing pants. My hair has grown the longest its ever been. I think normalizing LGBT is healthy for society because it will reduce suicide/homicide rates. That’s a sad story, but no amount of surgery or therapy will turn you into a women. Life played a cruel trick on you, you got dealt.a shit hand I hope you overcome it. But I do not hope being trans is promoted or normalized nor do I wish kids to get hormone treatment or taught about transgender or other sexual orientations. Because I lack a uterus? Because of your DNA structure. DNA determines sex, sex can be changed surgically. Whats your problem with acceptance of LGBT people? Its important that gender be explored for kids. There's a 1/200 chance the kid is transgender. Gender exploration increases self awareness. I wish I had gender exploration and hormone treatment. You wish I didn't have hormone treatment?

I'll keep the personal details in the PM thread between you and I out of respect for privacy.

On the issue of kids and hormone treatment, I do wish kids not to be taught about gender alignment as kids mature sexually at different paces and studies are inconclusive on how much nature and nurture affect a person sexuality. I dont know this 0.5% figure but i'll take your word for it. It seems low enough that the issue should be explored on their own just like hetero kids explore sexuality on their own.

They will find issues finding peers to talk about their desires, but I think most people dont find it neccessisary to talk to their friends about their erections or attractions to the opposite sex.

It is up to your family not public schooling (Tax dollars) to teach you about sex and gender and reproduction or lack thereof. Just because I dont want LGBT agendas to be normalized doesnt mean I can't respect individual gay, lesbian or trans people. I already respect you for going through what you did and coming out of it a successful person. That doesnt mean I support all the views you hold though.

Didnt know this Ben Shapiro before but I was just youtubing out of curiousity and this guy sums up exactly my thoughts on the subject. He even mentions are study from Anderson UCLA regarding the fact that even if society normalizes transgenders it doesnt reduce the 40% suicide rate.

After some 2x on youtube, I've realised this Ben Shapiro guy's views are very close to my own. The only difference is that I am not religious..



What is everyone's opinion on Ben's views?

Poor boy...

Ben Shapiro, really? What next, Philippe Rushton mirrors your own thoughts on issues of race?

You are a really good example of someone who has dedicated an inordinate amount of time striving for money and personal status at the expense of knowledge and compassion, wobbly. I think you were dealt a worse hand than deathstar in some important respects, and it was really shitty of you to treat her how you did.

I agree with Stroggoz on everything and don't have anything more to add here.

On October 24 2017 08:43 Loco wrote: Ben Shapiro, really? What next, Philippe Rushton mirrors your own thoughts on issues of race? You are a really good example of someone who has dedicated an inordinate amount of time striving for money and personal status at the expense of knowledge and compassion, wobbly. I think you were dealt a worse hand than deathstar in some important respects, and it was really shitty of you to treat them how you did.

I was dealt a pretty shit hand, but but by any measure it was still a lot easier than deathstar. Whats wrong with Ben Shapiro's views? Or Mine? Or do you only have arrogant personal attacks?

You are a good example of an ignorant asshole. (This can go forever) So please debate the views and points or stfu.

brb. Youtubing Philippe Rushton! Stop getting butt hurt and discuss things Loco.

Don't see how there would be any harm coming from a simple sexual education course which handles all sensitive topics as well tbh. I think you're mistaking education with propaganda here wobbly.

Philippe Rushton seems to think different races have different traits and IQs. Whats wrong with that? This is biological truth, stop letting feefees from letting science and discussion progress.

I dont have time to watch alot of his content but from a quick skim it seems like he is a professor of evolution, it is his job to study this shit.. As a decent poker player you should know numbers and science doesnt lie, doesnt matter how oppressed or underpowered 27o is, it will always be a shit hand in holdem NL.

Each race has their own unique traits, advantages and disadvantages what is exactly wrong with that? Isn't a bit racist to imply that IQ is the ultimate measure on how good a race is?

On October 24 2017 08:51 Spitfiree wrote: Don't see how there would be any harm coming from a simple sexual education course which handles all sensitive topics as well tbh. I think you're mistaking education with propaganda here wobbly.

nah, please leave the teaching of penises, vaginas, reproduction and the mentally ill to me the father.

On October 24 2017 08:24 wobbly_au wrote: Poor boy...

Why would you address her incorrectly?
That's a girl. Gender identity is independent of natal sex. You should address her as her.
Having a penis doesn't mean boy.

On October 24 2017 08:58 deathstar wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 08:24 wobbly_au wrote: Poor boy... Why would you address her incorrectly? That's a girl. Gender identity is independent of natal sex. You should address her as her. Having a penis doesn't mean boy.

I'll address him as he because he has a penis and his legal Identification says he is a boy.. He is very beautiful though, I hope he finds happiness..

On October 24 2017 08:46 wobbly_au wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 08:43 Loco wrote: Ben Shapiro, really? What next, Philippe Rushton mirrors your own thoughts on issues of race? You are a really good example of someone who has dedicated an inordinate amount of time striving for money and personal status at the expense of knowledge and compassion, wobbly. I think you were dealt a worse hand than deathstar in some important respects, and it was really shitty of you to treat them how you did. I was dealt a pretty shit hand, but but by any measure it was still a lot easier than deathstar. Whats wrong with Ben Shapiro's views? Or Mine? Or do you only have arrogant personal attacks? You are a good example of an ignorant asshole. (This can go forever) So please debate the views and points or stfu. brb. Youtubing Philippe Rushton! Stop getting butt hurt and discuss things Loco.

I don't debate people who get their education from YouTube between two League of Legends games. It's just not very productive. You can debate these things with others who have your own low standards, I'm sure they aren't hard to find.

On October 24 2017 09:17 Loco wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 08:46 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 08:43 Loco wrote: Ben Shapiro, really? What next, Philippe Rushton mirrors your own thoughts on issues of race? You are a really good example of someone who has dedicated an inordinate amount of time striving for money and personal status at the expense of knowledge and compassion, wobbly. I think you were dealt a worse hand than deathstar in some important respects, and it was really shitty of you to treat them how you did. I was dealt a pretty shit hand, but but by any measure it was still a lot easier than deathstar. Whats wrong with Ben Shapiro's views? Or Mine? Or do you only have arrogant personal attacks? You are a good example of an ignorant asshole. (This can go forever) So please debate the views and points or stfu. brb. Youtubing Philippe Rushton! Stop getting butt hurt and discuss things Loco. I don't debate people who get their education from YouTube between two League of Legends games. It's just not very productive. You can debate these things with others who have your own low standards, I'm sure they aren't hard to find.

Did I hurt your feefees? Why do you feel so compelled to reply and attack me with out ANY argument?

On October 24 2017 09:06 wobbly_au wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 08:58 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 08:24 wobbly_au wrote: Poor boy... Why would you address her incorrectly? That's a girl. Gender identity is independent of natal sex. You should address her as her. Having a penis doesn't mean boy. I'll address him as he because he has a penis and his legal Identification says he is a boy.. He is very beautiful though, I hope he finds happiness..

Whether someone is a he or she is independent of genitalia.

On October 24 2017 09:28 deathstar wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 09:06 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 08:58 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 08:24 wobbly_au wrote: Poor boy... Why would you address her incorrectly? That's a girl. Gender identity is independent of natal sex. You should address her as her. Having a penis doesn't mean boy. I'll address him as he because he has a penis and his legal Identification says he is a boy.. He is very beautiful though, I hope he finds happiness.. Whether someone is a he or she is independent of genitalia.

If a male athelete (by genitalia) decided one day to identify as a women should "she" be allowed to compete in the women's division of the sport?

You don't have any arguments worth discussing. You appeal to science without even knowing anything about the scientific consensus on transsexuality. The science disagrees with you. Instead of navigating YouTube with your confirmation bias, you could just go read up on what the American Psychological Association has to say about it. For example:

A psychological state is considered a mental disorder only if it causes significant distress or disability. Many transgender people do not experience their gender as distressing or disabling, which implies that identifying as transgender does not constitute a mental disorder.

Sex is assigned at birth, refers to one’s biological status as either male or female, and is associated primarily with physical attributes such as chromosomes, hormone prevalence, and external and internal anatomy. Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for boys and men or girls and women. These influence the ways that people act, interact, and feel about themselves. While aspects of biological sex are similar across different cultures, aspects of gender may differ.

Transgender persons have been documented in many indigenous, Western, and Eastern cultures and societies from antiquity until the present day. However, the meaning of gender nonconformity may vary from culture to culture.

Can you explain how it is that you come to different conclusions and your opinion is more credible than that of the largest scientific and professional organization of psychologists in the world?

On October 24 2017 09:31 Loco wrote: You don't have any arguments worth discussing. You appeal to science without even knowing anything about the scientific consensus on transsexuality. The science disagrees with you. Instead of navigating YouTube with your confirmation bias, you could just go read up on what the American Psychological Association has to say about it. For example: Show nested quote + A psychological state is considered a mental disorder only if it causes significant distress or disability. Many transgender people do not experience their gender as distressing or disabling, which implies that identifying as transgender does not constitute a mental disorder.   Sex is assigned at birth, refers to one’s biological status as either male or female, and is associated primarily with physical attributes such as chromosomes, hormone prevalence, and external and internal anatomy. Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for boys and men or girls and women. These influence the ways that people act, interact, and feel about themselves. While aspects of biological sex are similar across different cultures, aspects of gender may differ.   Transgender persons have been documented in many indigenous, Western, and Eastern cultures and societies from antiquity until the present day. However, the meaning of gender nonconformity may vary from culture to culture. Can you explain how it is that you come to different conclusions and your opinion is more credible than that of the largest scientific and professional organization of psychologists in the world?

thank you enlightened one for replying.

1. Trans people have a 30-40% likelihood to attempt suicide, that is why i think they are mentally ill. Do you think having suicidal thoughts is healthy to your mind?
2. Secondly what the APA thinks and defines as being mentally ill doesnt change how I view this issue politically or morally. Why do you let other people think for you? I look at the data and make up my own mind, show me new data and I may change my mind like I have plenty of times during my growth as a person.
3. The crux of the argument in the last 10 posts of mine has been Im fine with LGBT groups to do as they please on their own dime, what I don't want them to do is promote their agenda on tax payer money.

Specifically im against.
1. Transgender public bathrooms
2. LGBT sex ed in public schools (and to a lesser extent "normal" sex ed)
3. Adoption of children by same sex and especially trans people
4. Im against Gay marriage if it means the government will subsidize it.
5. Subsizied gay parades
6. LGBT awareness days in work and what not.

Why do you think my views on these specific points are so abhorrent?

P.S whats wrong with learning on youtube? If I told you I learn all my shit by going to the library and researching it there does that make me smarter? Look at the data not the messenger. You logic is embarrassing...

On October 24 2017 09:30 wobbly_au wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 09:28 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 09:06 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 08:58 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 08:24 wobbly_au wrote: Poor boy... Why would you address her incorrectly? That's a girl. Gender identity is independent of natal sex. You should address her as her. Having a penis doesn't mean boy. I'll address him as he because he has a penis and his legal Identification says he is a boy.. He is very beautiful though, I hope he finds happiness.. Whether someone is a he or she is independent of genitalia. If a male athelete (by genitalia) decided one day to identify as a women should "she" be allowed to compete in the women's division of the sport?

Your suicide stat is false. That 40% number is of attempted suicide not actual suicide.
I think it depends. If a transwoman starts hormone therapy at age 12 then yes because she hasn't gained any advantage from testosterone pumping through her body for years. If a transwoman starts hormone therapy at age 24 then no. Recreational sport I think so, but not professionally.

On October 24 2017 09:53 deathstar wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 09:30 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 09:28 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 09:06 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 08:58 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 08:24 wobbly_au wrote: Poor boy... Why would you address her incorrectly? That's a girl. Gender identity is independent of natal sex. You should address her as her. Having a penis doesn't mean boy. I'll address him as he because he has a penis and his legal Identification says he is a boy.. He is very beautiful though, I hope he finds happiness.. Whether someone is a he or she is independent of genitalia. If a male athelete (by genitalia) decided one day to identify as a women should "she" be allowed to compete in the women's division of the sport? Your suicide stat is false. That 40% number is of attempted suicide not actual suicide. I think it depends. If a transwoman starts hormone therapy at age 12 then yes because she hasn't gained any advantage from testosterone pumping through her body for years. If a transwoman starts hormone therapy at age 24 then no. Recreational sport I think so, but not professionally.

What about 13 or 14 then? If not at 24 does that mean you partially agree that sex change doesn’t change your sex past a certain age? And that trans people will always have hormones, body, bone structure of the birthsex?

I did mean attempted suicide btw.. Thanks for pointing that out I've edited my post.

My counter point to you.

Why can't we call a man turned women a man albeit sometimes a beautiful looking man? If you are female in your head and you look like a women why does it bother you what society addresses you as?

Why take offense if I call you a man? I call everyone else based on what their ID card and genitalia say why should I make special concession based on your feelings?

Taking this point to an extreme, if I identify as a Sultan of Egypt can I demand you address me that way?

On October 24 2017 09:37 wobbly_au wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 09:31 Loco wrote: You don't have any arguments worth discussing. You appeal to science without even knowing anything about the scientific consensus on transsexuality. The science disagrees with you. Instead of navigating YouTube with your confirmation bias, you could just go read up on what the American Psychological Association has to say about it. For example:   A psychological state is considered a mental disorder only if it causes significant distress or disability. Many transgender people do not experience their gender as distressing or disabling, which implies that identifying as transgender does not constitute a mental disorder.   Sex is assigned at birth, refers to one’s biological status as either male or female, and is associated primarily with physical attributes such as chromosomes, hormone prevalence, and external and internal anatomy. Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for boys and men or girls and women. These influence the ways that people act, interact, and feel about themselves. While aspects of biological sex are similar across different cultures, aspects of gender may differ.   Transgender persons have been documented in many indigenous, Western, and Eastern cultures and societies from antiquity until the present day. However, the meaning of gender nonconformity may vary from culture to culture. Can you explain how it is that you come to different conclusions and your opinion is more credible than that of the largest scientific and professional organization of psychologists in the world? thank you enlightened one for replying. 1. Trans people have a 30-40% likelihood to commit suicide, that is why i think they are mentally ill. Do you think having suicidal thoughts is healthy to your mind? 2. Secondly what the APA thinks and defines as being mentally ill doesnt change how I view this issue politically or morally. Why do you let other people think for you? I look at the data and make up my own mind, show me new data and I may change my mind like I have plenty of times during my growth as a person. 3. The crux of the argument in the last 10 posts of mine has been Im fine with LGBT groups to do as they please on their own dime, what I don't want them to do is promote their agenda on tax payer money. Specifically im against. 1. Transgender public bathrooms 2. LGBT sex ed in public schools (and to a lesser extent "normal" sex ed) 3. Adoption of children by same sex and especially trans people 4. Im against Gay marriage if it means the government will subsidize it. 5. Subsizied gay parades 6. LGBT awareness days in work and what not. Why do you think my views on these specific points are so abhorrent? P.S whats wrong with learning on youtube? If I told you I learn all my shit by going to the library and researching it there does that make me smarter? Look at the data not the messenger. You logic is embarrassing...

Are you a libertarian?
1. are you opposed to unisex bathrooms? its just people pissing and shitting..
3. wtf? What do you have against trans people adopting children? Whether someone is a good parent isn't determined by sexual orientation or if someone is transgender.
4. If gay people start a family children they deserve all the government subsidies that straight families get. whatever those may be. idk

Are you libertarian?

On October 24 2017 10:05 deathstar wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 09:37 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 09:31 Loco wrote: You don't have any arguments worth discussing. You appeal to science without even knowing anything about the scientific consensus on transsexuality. The science disagrees with you. Instead of navigating YouTube with your confirmation bias, you could just go read up on what the American Psychological Association has to say about it. For example:   A psychological state is considered a mental disorder only if it causes significant distress or disability. Many transgender people do not experience their gender as distressing or disabling, which implies that identifying as transgender does not constitute a mental disorder.   Sex is assigned at birth, refers to one’s biological status as either male or female, and is associated primarily with physical attributes such as chromosomes, hormone prevalence, and external and internal anatomy. Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for boys and men or girls and women. These influence the ways that people act, interact, and feel about themselves. While aspects of biological sex are similar across different cultures, aspects of gender may differ.   Transgender persons have been documented in many indigenous, Western, and Eastern cultures and societies from antiquity until the present day. However, the meaning of gender nonconformity may vary from culture to culture. Can you explain how it is that you come to different conclusions and your opinion is more credible than that of the largest scientific and professional organization of psychologists in the world? thank you enlightened one for replying. 1. Trans people have a 30-40% likelihood to commit suicide, that is why i think they are mentally ill. Do you think having suicidal thoughts is healthy to your mind? 2. Secondly what the APA thinks and defines as being mentally ill doesnt change how I view this issue politically or morally. Why do you let other people think for you? I look at the data and make up my own mind, show me new data and I may change my mind like I have plenty of times during my growth as a person. 3. The crux of the argument in the last 10 posts of mine has been Im fine with LGBT groups to do as they please on their own dime, what I don't want them to do is promote their agenda on tax payer money. Specifically im against. 1. Transgender public bathrooms 2. LGBT sex ed in public schools (and to a lesser extent "normal" sex ed) 3. Adoption of children by same sex and especially trans people 4. Im against Gay marriage if it means the government will subsidize it. 5. Subsizied gay parades 6. LGBT awareness days in work and what not. Why do you think my views on these specific points are so abhorrent? P.S whats wrong with learning on youtube? If I told you I learn all my shit by going to the library and researching it there does that make me smarter? Look at the data not the messenger. You logic is embarrassing... Are you a libertarian? 1. are you opposed to unisex bathrooms? its just people pissing and shitting.. 3. wtf? What do you have against trans people adopting children? Whether someone is a good parent isn't determined by sexual orientation or if someone is transgender. 4. If gay people start a family children they deserve all the government subsidies that straight families get. whatever those may be. idk Are you libertarian?

I’m close to libertarian.

1. If it’s singular bathrooms then yes sure i dont mind if we all share the same bathroom. If public then they should be separated to protect our children and women.
3. I think kids grow up best in an environment with a father figure and a mother figure. I also think kids grow up best when both parents are mentally sound and not have a high propensity to kill themselves. Finally I think kids grow up best when they are genetically linked to both parents.
4. Not really because governments subsidize marriages because they want their society and thus government to continue. Childless marriages should not be subsidized by the government.

LOCO i've got about 10min left today to soak in your enlightened wisdom. Please POST.

On October 24 2017 09:58 wobbly_au wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 09:53 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 09:30 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 09:28 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 09:06 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 08:58 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 08:24 wobbly_au wrote: Poor boy... Why would you address her incorrectly? That's a girl. Gender identity is independent of natal sex. You should address her as her. Having a penis doesn't mean boy. I'll address him as he because he has a penis and his legal Identification says he is a boy.. He is very beautiful though, I hope he finds happiness.. Whether someone is a he or she is independent of genitalia. If a male athelete (by genitalia) decided one day to identify as a women should "she" be allowed to compete in the women's division of the sport? Your suicide stat is false. That 40% number is of attempted suicide not actual suicide. I think it depends. If a transwoman starts hormone therapy at age 12 then yes because she hasn't gained any advantage from testosterone pumping through her body for years. If a transwoman starts hormone therapy at age 24 then no. Recreational sport I think so, but not professionally. What about 13 or 14 then? If not at 24 does that mean you partially agree that sex change doesn’t change your sex past a certain age? And that trans people will always have hormones, body, bone structure of the birthsex? I did mean attempted suicide btw.. Thanks for pointing that out I've edited my post. My counter point to you. Why can't we call a man turned women a man albeit sometimes a beautiful looking man? If you are female in your head and you look like a women why does it bother you what society addresses you as? Why take offense if I call you a man? I call everyone else based on what their ID card and genitalia say why should I make special concession based on your feelings? Taking this point to an extreme, if I identify as a Sultan of Egypt can I demand you address me that way?

I suffer people calling me a he only when I have to. A friend won't call me he. Because a friend cares about my feelings. I don't demand to be called she, I ask. I don't want to be around people who call me he either.

On October 24 2017 10:26 deathstar wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 09:58 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 09:53 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 09:30 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 09:28 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 09:06 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 08:58 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 08:24 wobbly_au wrote: Poor boy... Why would you address her incorrectly? That's a girl. Gender identity is independent of natal sex. You should address her as her. Having a penis doesn't mean boy. I'll address him as he because he has a penis and his legal Identification says he is a boy.. He is very beautiful though, I hope he finds happiness.. Whether someone is a he or she is independent of genitalia. If a male athelete (by genitalia) decided one day to identify as a women should "she" be allowed to compete in the women's division of the sport? Your suicide stat is false. That 40% number is of attempted suicide not actual suicide. I think it depends. If a transwoman starts hormone therapy at age 12 then yes because she hasn't gained any advantage from testosterone pumping through her body for years. If a transwoman starts hormone therapy at age 24 then no. Recreational sport I think so, but not professionally. What about 13 or 14 then? If not at 24 does that mean you partially agree that sex change doesn’t change your sex past a certain age? And that trans people will always have hormones, body, bone structure of the birthsex? I did mean attempted suicide btw.. Thanks for pointing that out I've edited my post. My counter point to you. Why can't we call a man turned women a man albeit sometimes a beautiful looking man? If you are female in your head and you look like a women why does it bother you what society addresses you as? Why take offense if I call you a man? I call everyone else based on what their ID card and genitalia say why should I make special concession based on your feelings? Taking this point to an extreme, if I identify as a Sultan of Egypt can I demand you address me that way? I suffer people calling me a he only when I have to. A friend won't call me he. Because a friend cares about my feelings. I don't demand to be called she, I ask. I don't want to be around people who call me he either.

Then you are absolutely reasonable and if we are friends and I grow to understand you I may just call you a she.

The problem I have is when legislation is passed (In Toronto Canada) where it is a violation of the discrimination act to not address a transgender by his or her chosen pronoun.

On October 24 2017 10:10 wobbly_au wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 10:05 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 09:37 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 09:31 Loco wrote: You don't have any arguments worth discussing. You appeal to science without even knowing anything about the scientific consensus on transsexuality. The science disagrees with you. Instead of navigating YouTube with your confirmation bias, you could just go read up on what the American Psychological Association has to say about it. For example:   A psychological state is considered a mental disorder only if it causes significant distress or disability. Many transgender people do not experience their gender as distressing or disabling, which implies that identifying as transgender does not constitute a mental disorder.   Sex is assigned at birth, refers to one’s biological status as either male or female, and is associated primarily with physical attributes such as chromosomes, hormone prevalence, and external and internal anatomy. Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for boys and men or girls and women. These influence the ways that people act, interact, and feel about themselves. While aspects of biological sex are similar across different cultures, aspects of gender may differ.   Transgender persons have been documented in many indigenous, Western, and Eastern cultures and societies from antiquity until the present day. However, the meaning of gender nonconformity may vary from culture to culture. Can you explain how it is that you come to different conclusions and your opinion is more credible than that of the largest scientific and professional organization of psychologists in the world? thank you enlightened one for replying. 1. Trans people have a 30-40% likelihood to commit suicide, that is why i think they are mentally ill. Do you think having suicidal thoughts is healthy to your mind? 2. Secondly what the APA thinks and defines as being mentally ill doesnt change how I view this issue politically or morally. Why do you let other people think for you? I look at the data and make up my own mind, show me new data and I may change my mind like I have plenty of times during my growth as a person. 3. The crux of the argument in the last 10 posts of mine has been Im fine with LGBT groups to do as they please on their own dime, what I don't want them to do is promote their agenda on tax payer money. Specifically im against. 1. Transgender public bathrooms 2. LGBT sex ed in public schools (and to a lesser extent "normal" sex ed) 3. Adoption of children by same sex and especially trans people 4. Im against Gay marriage if it means the government will subsidize it. 5. Subsizied gay parades 6. LGBT awareness days in work and what not. Why do you think my views on these specific points are so abhorrent? P.S whats wrong with learning on youtube? If I told you I learn all my shit by going to the library and researching it there does that make me smarter? Look at the data not the messenger. You logic is embarrassing... Are you a libertarian? 1. are you opposed to unisex bathrooms? its just people pissing and shitting.. 3. wtf? What do you have against trans people adopting children? Whether someone is a good parent isn't determined by sexual orientation or if someone is transgender. 4. If gay people start a family children they deserve all the government subsidies that straight families get. whatever those may be. idk Are you libertarian? I’m close to libertarian. 1. If it’s singular bathrooms then yes sure i dont mind if we all share the same bathroom. If public then they should be separated to protect our children and women. 3. I think kids grow up best in an environment with a father figure and a mother figure. I also think kids grow up best when both parents are mentally sound and not have a high propensity to kill themselves. Finally I think kids grow up best when they are genetically linked to both parents. 4. Not really because governments subsidize marriages because they want their society and thus government to continue. Childless marriages should not be subsidized by the government.

that attmpted suicide stat is mostly pre-op, not post op.
1. protect children and women from what?
3. I think kids best grow up in a village. I disagree that kids grow up best based on genetic linkage.
My case for example. I would of been 1 quadtrillion times better off if I grew up with a transgender parent. That alone outweighs your entire argument.
Trans suicide, from my personal experience, comes from hopelessness. Most trans suicides and attempts I would guess are like 95%+ pre bottom surgery.

On October 24 2017 10:46 deathstar wrote: Show nested quote + On October 24 2017 10:10 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 10:05 deathstar wrote:   On October 24 2017 09:37 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 24 2017 09:31 Loco wrote: You don't have any arguments worth discussing. You appeal to science without even knowing anything about the scientific consensus on transsexuality. The science disagrees with you. Instead of navigating YouTube with your confirmation bias, you could just go read up on what the American Psychological Association has to say about it. For example:   A psychological state is considered a mental disorder only if it causes significant distress or disability. Many transgender people do not experience their gender as distressing or disabling, which implies that identifying as transgender does not constitute a mental disorder.   Sex is assigned at birth, refers to one’s biological status as either male or female, and is associated primarily with physical attributes such as chromosomes, hormone prevalence, and external and internal anatomy. Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for boys and men or girls and women. These influence the ways that people act, interact, and feel about themselves. While aspects of biological sex are similar across different cultures, aspects of gender may differ.   Transgender persons have been documented in many indigenous, Western, and Eastern cultures and societies from antiquity until the present day. However, the meaning of gender nonconformity may vary from culture to culture. Can you explain how it is that you come to different conclusions and your opinion is more credible than that of the largest scientific and professional organization of psychologists in the world? thank you enlightened one for replying. 1. Trans people have a 30-40% likelihood to commit suicide, that is why i think they are mentally ill. Do you think having suicidal thoughts is healthy to your mind? 2. Secondly what the APA thinks and defines as being mentally ill doesnt change how I view this issue politically or morally. Why do you let other people think for you? I look at the data and make up my own mind, show me new data and I may change my mind like I have plenty of times during my growth as a person. 3. The crux of the argument in the last 10 posts of mine has been Im fine with LGBT groups to do as they please on their own dime, what I don't want them to do is promote their agenda on tax payer money. Specifically im against. 1. Transgender public bathrooms 2. LGBT sex ed in public schools (and to a lesser extent "normal" sex ed) 3. Adoption of children by same sex and especially trans people 4. Im against Gay marriage if it means the government will subsidize it. 5. Subsizied gay parades 6. LGBT awareness days in work and what not. Why do you think my views on these specific points are so abhorrent? P.S whats wrong with learning on youtube? If I told you I learn all my shit by going to the library and researching it there does that make me smarter? Look at the data not the messenger. You logic is embarrassing... Are you a libertarian? 1. are you opposed to unisex bathrooms? its just people pissing and shitting.. 3. wtf? What do you have against trans people adopting children? Whether someone is a good parent isn't determined by sexual orientation or if someone is transgender. 4. If gay people start a family children they deserve all the government subsidies that straight families get. whatever those may be. idk Are you libertarian? I’m close to libertarian. 1. If it’s singular bathrooms then yes sure i dont mind if we all share the same bathroom. If public then they should be separated to protect our children and women. 3. I think kids grow up best in an environment with a father figure and a mother figure. I also think kids grow up best when both parents are mentally sound and not have a high propensity to kill themselves. Finally I think kids grow up best when they are genetically linked to both parents. 4. Not really because governments subsidize marriages because they want their society and thus government to continue. Childless marriages should not be subsidized by the government. that attmpted suicide stat is mostly pre-op, not post op. 1. protect children and women from what? 3. I think kids best grow up in a village. I disagree that kids grow up best based on genetic linkage. My case for example. I would of been 1 quadtrillion times better off if I grew up with a transgender parent. That alone outweighs your entire argument. Trans suicide, from my personal experience, comes from hopelessness. Most trans suicides and attempts I would guess are like 95%+ pre bottom surgery.

1. protect kids from sexual assault and perversion
3. Stats agree with me

Also your case while very sad is completely anecdotal so it doesnt outweigh my entire argument. Can you link some trans suicide rates post op?

Had you had a good family, maybe you wouldnt need any hormone treatment, painful hair removal or bottom sugery. You may very well be normal and not suicidal. The science is not settled we dont know if its curable, we dont know how much of sexual orientation is nature versus nurture.