The Republican question of “what is a woman?”

[Rumpole]

Like the woke culture fucking bigots

Incompetent rebuttal; weasel words generally cannot be substantiated owing to vagueness and incoherence.

In case there are some in the peanut gallery (not saying it's you) who are unfamiliar with the term:

 

[Rumpole]

Men would not have played women's roles because it was illegal for a woman to be on the stage. Do you think that might have had something to do with it?

No doubt heterosexual men played women's roles, but it is due to the very fact that women were not allowed, which allowed trans and gay folk to gravitate towards and thus play those roles, because they especially enjoyed playing them, allowing them to be 'themselves' thereby cloaking their true natures under the rubric of following the law for actors. That being said, it was probably hard to fool heterosexual men as to who were or were not truly transexual/gay or heterosexual in the theatre, owing to rumor mills no doubt occuring at the time. I know of no academic treatises which specifically analyze this, though some touch upon it, given that the concept of 'transsexual' did not exist at the time, though homosexual did.

So, both are probably true per 'occam's razor'. As to what the precise proportions of gay/straight, that's anybody's guess.

 

[Rumpole]

In other words, rightly because they ARE?


There is no way of changing the chromosomal arrangement of your body which directs the development of your bones and muscles and hormones and psychological arrangement. That is set at conception.


If there is logic in point 1 then there cannot be any real transgender population, and is it really dehumanization or just fear of things like HIV + the fact that so many of them try to FORCE their views on others? I like telescopes, but do you see me trying to shove the buying attributes of an f/11 schmidt-cassegrain down your throat?


Really? View attachment 770215 If I dressed like this, I'd kinda EXPECT people to ridicule me! This is a cry for attention!


More like it just makes others uncomfortable and they don't want their minors exposed to such things. But you never stop to consider how these people impose and intrude upon the feelings of others, all you care about is THEIR feelings.


But it IS a mental disorder, by every rule in the book as it is an ABERRATION conflicting sharply with societal norms whose justification cannot be established in any external locus other than within the person's own imagination (meaning, it's all in your head)! Just that the psychological community has utterly FAILED at finding an effective way of treating it.


Oh there is GREAT harm going on here! Both to the person with it:

View attachment 770217

And to those around them made to feel uncomfortable.


All I need to do is think back upon my happy, balanced, normal childhood to admit that seeing such a freak as above would both frighten and confuse the hell out of most kids confused about how to interpret it, especially if treated as "normal" by other adults, not to mention the harm of such a person's intrusion upon a child's space. A parent DOES NOT WANT their kid put in that position, it is NOT your place to make that choice FOR the parent, if the parent WANTS that for their kid, it is up to THEM to make that decision, not you--- GET IT?

If only you had half as much respect for the space and rights of others as you try to claim for yourself, then you might half understand, and transgenders might endear far
greater sympathy.

Transgenderism is not a biological or scientific phenomenon, it's a cultural phenomenon the result of adult ultraliberal psychologists and ultraliberal social counselors influencing impressional young men and women, a phenomenon with growing influence, as Bill Maher's chart clearly reveals.

But your contention that homosexuality and transgenderism is an illness, per se, is incorrect, given that, if the psychiatric profession got anything right, it is the notion that they have reclassified such from the mental illness column to the normal column, a determination reached, no doubt, given the scientific studies affirming same-sex attraction of animals. Since they do not possess self awareness, anywhere near a level which could accommodate 'mental illness', the idea that same sex attraction is a mental illness is therefore not an objective fact, and as such, the concept has been discarded in academic and professional realms.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Incompetent rebuttal; weasel words generally cannot be substantiated owing to vagueness and incoherence.

In case there are some in the peanut gallery (not saying it's you) who are unfamiliar with the term:
View attachment 770341

Simp it wasn't I that came up with the word or meaning of woke it was simps like you fucking retard.

 

[Rumpole]

Simp it wasn't I that came up with the word or meaning of woke it was simps like you fucking retard.

Your sophomoric quip aside, you might have a point, but for the FACT that it originally had a specific meaning, and Republicans hijacked into a weasel term.

So, it has become a weasel word, courtesy of the unfortunate and intellectually diminished souls of your particular persuasion.

If that is not true, I invite you to define it per right wing common usage.

Checkmate.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Big Reb was born several pieces short and checkmated. Thus the big penis costume.

Yes that's right. The church forbade the appearance of women on the stage, although on the continent things were very different. It was only when King Charles II – a theatre-lover no less – granted a charter to Drury Lane and made it a requirement that all female parts should be played by women.

 

[toobfreak]

So, gays, trans, et al, are not normal? Thanks for confirming that you are a bigot.

NO, jackass. You need someone to TELL you that?! If they were normal, would they have separate names? If they were NORMAL, idiot, they would be the majority standard product created in nature--- what do you think would happen to mankind if suddenly 95% of everyone were homosexual, putz?

Homosexuality and sexual dysphoria are a DEVIATION from the norm, imbecile, that is why they are considered DEVIANTS. Any 2nd grader could tell you that much which is sad that you haven't the common sense of a 7 year old.

 

[toobfreak]

Trans folks have been around for centuries.

So has leprosy, murder and birth defects.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

So who, exactly, is teaching kids about the nuances of transgenderism?

If you can teach trans ideology, then Christianity should also be taught.

Or, neither should be taught in public school, and if you want it in your education, make your own school to teach it, like Christianity did.

 

[toobfreak]

Transgenderism is not a biological or scientific phenomenon

Asshole, EVERYTHING in the physical universe is a phenomena of science, everything happening to people is a function of biology. What kind of idiot, half-baked assquack degenerate, ignorant, Comedy College-educated CLOWN are you?

 

[Rumpole]

NO, jackass. You need someone to TELL you that?! If they were normal, would they have separate names? If they were NORMAL, idiot, they would be the majority standard product created in nature--- what do you think would happen to mankind if suddenly 95% of everyone were homosexual, putz?

Specious argument. What if 95% of men and women were infertile? Since it can't happen, nor will it ever, it's a moot point.

No doubt you will be unable to grasp the absurdity of your logic.

Fyi, ad homs are the province of novices, and/or, those with weak arguments.

Homosexuality and sexual dysphoria are a DEVIATION from the norm, imbecile, that is why they are considered DEVIANTS. Any 2nd grader could tell you that much which is sad that you haven't the common sense of a 7 year old.

'Norm' is a subjective fact, not an objective reality, and has little value as a biological fact.

Same goes for 'Deviant' a term of hate, used by bigots. If second graders, and such, are mindful of such things, it's only because of destructive parents, persons with harm in their heart towards children, would so teach them.

I offer the following, for your edification:

The terms "normal" and "deviant" are often used in everyday language to describe behaviors or characteristics that fall outside of what is considered typical or expected. However, in biology, (which, for me, is what really matters) these terms can be problematic because they imply a value judgment and may not accurately reflect the diversity of natural variation.

In biology, it is more common to use the terms "typical" or "atypical" to describe characteristics or behaviors that are more or less common within a population. This terminology avoids the implication of value judgment and acknowledges that variation is a natural and expected aspect of biological systems.

Additionally, what is considered "typical" or "atypical" can vary depending on the context. For example, what is typical for one species may be atypical for another, and what is typical in one environment may be atypical in another.

Therefore, while the terms "normal" and "deviant" may be used in some biological contexts, they are generally not preferred and are often replaced by more descriptive and neutral terminology.

On the subject of the ad hominem fallacy: (which you appear to traffic in, a lot).

Ad hominem arguments are attacks against a person's character or personal traits rather than addressing the substance of their argument. For example, if someone makes a valid argument, but their opponent responds by saying, "You're only saying that because you're an idiot," this is an ad hominem attack.

Ad hominem arguments are problematic in discussions and debates for several reasons:

1. They are fallacious: Ad hominem arguments are fallacious because they attack the person making the argument rather than addressing the argument itself. This means that the argument is not being evaluated based on its own merits, but rather based on the person who is making it.
2. They are unproductive: Ad hominem arguments do not contribute to productive discussions or debates because they do not address the issue at hand. Instead, they distract from the topic and can escalate into personal attacks that are not relevant to the discussion.
3. They create a hostile environment: Ad hominem arguments can create a hostile environment that discourages open and respectful communication. When people feel attacked, they may become defensive and less willing to engage in productive discussion.
4. They undermine credibility: When someone uses an ad hominem argument, they are essentially admitting that they do not have a strong argument to counter their opponent's points. This can undermine their credibility and make it less likely that others will take their arguments seriously.

Overall, ad hominem arguments are problematic in discussions and debates because they are fallacious, unproductive, create a hostile environment, and undermine credibility. It is important to focus on the substance of arguments rather than attacking the person making them in order to have productive and respectful discussions.

Regarding normality and homosexuality:

The question of whether homosexuality is considered "normal" is complex and can be influenced by various factors, including cultural and societal norms, as well as scientific understanding.

Historically, homosexuality was stigmatized and pathologized as a mental disorder in many societies, leading to discrimination and marginalization of LGBTQ+ individuals. However, in recent years, there has been increasing acceptance of homosexuality as a normal variation of human sexuality in many parts of the world.

This change in attitudes towards homosexuality has been influenced by several factors, including:

1. Increased visibility of LGBTQ+ individuals: LGBTQ+ individuals are now more visible in society and have greater representation in media, politics, and other areas. This increased visibility has helped to reduce stigma and promote acceptance.
2. Scientific understanding: Scientific research has shown that homosexuality is a natural variation of human sexuality and is not a mental disorder. This understanding has helped to reduce pathologization of homosexuality and promote acceptance.
3. Legalization of same-sex marriage: The legalization of same-sex marriage in many countries has been a significant milestone in the acceptance of homosexuality as a normal variation of human sexuality.
4. Social movements: Social movements, such as the LGBTQ+ rights movement, have played a significant role in promoting acceptance of homosexuality and advocating for equal rights and protections for LGBTQ+ individuals.

However, despite progress towards acceptance, discrimination and marginalization of LGBTQ+ individuals still exist in many parts of the world. It is important to continue to promote acceptance and work towards creating a society that values diversity and equality for all individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation.

 

[Rumpole]

Asshole, EVERYTHING in the physical universe is a phenomena of science, everything happening to people is a function of biology. What kind of idiot, half-baked assquack degenerate, ignorant, Comedy College-educated CLOWN are you?

The argument you presented is not a valid argument, but rather it is an ad hominem attack. It is a personal attack against the person to whom the argument is addressed, (yours truly, but, I digress) rather than addressing the substance of their argument.

Furthermore, the argument itself is problematic because it makes sweeping generalizations that are not necessarily true. While many things in the physical universe can be studied using scientific methods, there may be phenomena that are not yet understood or that cannot be explained by science. Additionally, while biology plays a role in many aspects of human experience, it is not the sole determinant of everything that happens to people. Other factors, such as culture, environment, and personal choice, can also have significant effects.

In conclusion, ad hominem attacks are not valid arguments, and sweeping generalizations that are not based on evidence are also not valid arguments. It is important to engage in respectful and evidence-based discussions when presenting arguments and considering alternative viewpoints.

 

[Rumpole]

So has leprosy, murder and birth defects.

Ahh, so transgenderism is equal to leprosy, and the like, as you have thus conflated them.

Don't be surprised if someone calls you a bigot.

 

[toobfreak]

Don't be surprised if someone calls you a bigot.

So long as you are not surprised when everyone calls you a braindead idiot who reads, thinks and reasons on the level of a child.

 

[Rumpole]

So long as you are not surprised when everyone calls you a braindead idiot who reads, thinks and reasons on the level of a child.

That's cute. toobfreak, did you learn that in high school, or undergrad?

If I were you, I'd ask for a refund.

 

[toobfreak]

If I were you, I'd ask for a refund.

Haha, Stiltskin, I see some renegade Tranny you like so much as just "one-of-the-guys" just shot up a christian school murdering a bunch of people!

 

[jknowgood]

I have to hand it to republicans on this one. Nothing else gets woke liberals studdering more. It’s a basic question and they have trouble answering it. Republicans milk that effect for all it’s worth, but sure, they rightfully feel “correct”.

Here’s the thing though:

1) Not every liberal agrees with the woke left on this narrative about gender. A lot of us agree that people are born as they are and biologically there is no changing it.

2) However, given the logic of point number 1, it doesn’t somehow excuse the dehumanization of the transgender population. They are still people and they deserve as much as respect as anyone else. Republicans often think it is “gross” or “weird” to them so they try to dehumanize them as much as possible. They can’t accept that what makes us human is often pretty complicated and they don’t need to have any natural empathy for it.

3) “Gender” has a varied definition that sets it apart from “sex”. While these terms can be used interchangeably, there is a variation of the word of the word “gender” that is defined purely psychologically. “Gender” can be defined as a social construct. Someone might naturally reject any psychological norms that often defines their sex. They may feel, for whatever reason, they are not the sex they are born with. One might argue with this position all day long, but the reality is that is how they feel regardless of whether or not you and I think it is based in biology. When it comes to mental disorders, it is no longer considered a mental disorder in the DSM. When it was, it was called “gender identity disorder”. Even when this was a considered a disorder, it was defined by the mental distress it caused in the person with it. It wasn’t defined by how others saw it. A mental disorder can only be defined as something that harms the person with it or causes harm to the people around them. If you think this causes psychological harm to people around them, you are willfully ignorant.

You're a man or a woman and your dna let's you which one you are. And there is the genitalia part of it.

 

[Rumpole]

Haha, Stiltskin, I see some renegade Tranny you like so much as just "one-of-the-guys" just shot up a christian school murdering a bunch of people!

What is your point, toobfreak?

 

[krichton]

This question is repetitively asked because the right has an obsession with transgenders, especially trans men. Just look at this forum. Every day right wingers are posting about trans men obsessively, looking for validation from other right wingers interested in trans men for one reason or another. It's not that the left refuses to answer, it's that we don't care enough about your obsession with trans men to find out an answer to your question.

 

[toobfreak]

What is your point, toobfreak?

This psycho in Tennessee has given us all a look ahead of what the tranny movement is really all about. First it was that camp in the park, then it was CHAZ/CHOP, then it was Floyd the counterfeiting druggie, then came BLM, Antifa, and now we are dealt the grooming activist trannies from hell, the next generation of head cases who now want to claim being born in the wrong body as their reason to justify continued crime, terror, and mayhem against innocent people.

Hey, you're really just a sock for Tommy Tainant, aren't you? Tell the truth.